-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Then Gravy should have compared his demolitions to a pre-collapsed wtc instead of the trinity church video of the collapse. Does he not grasp it? Because that's what I am disputing here.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
That is a lie. In every video you posted, there were audible demo charges.
You have been caught lying over and over here LC, do you do this because you're a pathological liar, you have no evidence to back up your half-assed theories, or both?
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
Dodge noted.
tsig
a carbon based life-form
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2005
- Messages
- 39,049
Would a pre-collapsed wtc be the same as one still standing?
No you lie. It's obvious if the demolition charges were not even louder then the people in the foreground then there is little to no likelihood they would have been picked up from inside a 110 story collapsing building by a similar recording device.
1337m4n
Alphanumeric Anonymous Stick Man
- Joined
- May 10, 2007
- Messages
- 3,510
He still doesn't seem to get it.
YOU say that the charges wouldn't have been heard over the collapsing building. WE point out that the charges go off BEFORE the building collapses.
Gravy's video has nothing to do with this concept. I wasn't talking about Gravy's video. I was talking about your assertion that the charges wouldn't have been heard over the collapse of the building.
Do you understand now?
YOU say that the charges wouldn't have been heard over the collapsing building. WE point out that the charges go off BEFORE the building collapses.
Gravy's video has nothing to do with this concept. I wasn't talking about Gravy's video. I was talking about your assertion that the charges wouldn't have been heard over the collapse of the building.
Do you understand now?
Is that what Gravy is comparing it to? And is that what a conspiracy theorist is pointing at when they claim squibs? A standing WTC or collapsing video of the wtc? Besides I have already pointed out that most conspiracy theories of demolition revolve around the use of thermate in conjunction with explosive devices. In that case why would it have to be an explosion to initiate the collapse? Not that one would have necessarily have been clearly picked-up 70 stories up inside the tower.
You are the pretending not to get it because you have nothing else.
Gravy is trying to debunk conspiracy theorist who point to squibs that blow out during the collapse not before. Do you not know this?
They wouldn't necessarily have been heard and I proved it.
Do you understand it is Gravy's video I am disputing not your spin and dodge dance?
Last edited:
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
This is one of the most stupid things you've said to date LC.
The demo charges were heard, they were picked up by the microphone(s).
You still have not shown a video of a CD where the demo charges were inaudible.
Can you do that?
Last edited:
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
So you have no evidence to support your statement. Why don't you just man up and say so?
This is one of the most stupid things you've said to date LC.
The demo charges were heard, they were picked up by the microphone(s).
You still have not shown a video of a CD where the demo charges were inaudible.
Can you do that?
I don't have to. Just one were the demolition charges aren't as loud as the collapse of a skyscraper. And I did that. Remember? Wasn't it you who claimed the sound was muffled? What was the reason you gave? That was you wasn't it?
nicepants
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2007
- Messages
- 1,723
I'm still trying to understand....
Since CD charges go off prior to collapse...how could their sound be obscured by the sound of the collapse?
Last edited:
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
I can't fail because I refuse to sink to your attempt to dodge the original question.
Nice try at redirecting the argument.
Now, How do you justify your statement that the collapse would have drowned out the explosions? So far it's all dodging and opinion.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
As usual, you lie.
You claimed that the sounds of demo charges would have been inaudible due to the other noises on 9/11, despite the fact that demo charges go off prior to a buildings collapse in a CD.
You made a laughably pathetic attempt to "prove' your point by posting videos of CD's... that clearly had very audible demo charges going off.
Your case lies in tatters, your attempts to resuscitate it have gone from amusing to laughable to pathetic to borderline symptomatic of mental illness.
Did you watch gravys movie or any of the ones I posted? Because in some of them there are clearly demolition charges going off while the buildings are collapsing. And are squibs not a conspiracy theory debunkers have claimed to put to bed by the pancake excuse or the zipper effect? Are any the squibs prior to the collapse initiation?
nicepants
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2007
- Messages
- 1,723
The building doesn't start collapsing until AFTER at least some CD charges have gone off. Those charges could NOT be obscured by the collapse, since they precede it.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
What's that again? Audible demo charges while the building is collapsing is proof that... collapsing buildings mask the sounds of demo charges?
