• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Here is one rescue worker who was "in on it"

R.Mackey said:
Yes, sounds of the collapse itself. Not sounds consistent with explosives.

I explained the answer to your question in the very post you quoted. Your conduct is quite puzzling.
Click to expand...

How did you differentiate the sound of collapse from the sound of explosion?
 
MarkyX said:
Again, what is the name of the person? What street? Why was there so many cuts during the video? A real news report doesn't have 20 different camera angles within a minute.
Click to expand...

The headlines scrolling by appear to indicate that this is part of some anniversary program. One of them says "50% of Americans blame Bush for 9/11". We didn't reach that point for several years.
 
Russ_Dalton said:
How did you differentiate the sound of collapse from the sound of explosion?
Click to expand...

Again, I explained this in the post you quoted. You must have seen it. Nevertheless, I will explain again.

Explosives used in demolition make one of two sounds. Either a firecracker string of explosions, or very large explosions, that occur before any structural motion.

This does not happen. There are many videos to choose from. Had this happened, it would have been heard in most if not all of them. There are none.
 
theauthor said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9CXQY-bZn4

"We are walking back because the building is about to blow up"

How did he know building 7 was about to "blow up"?
Click to expand...

Can you point to evidence that he did indeed "know"? He didn't say "I know the building is about to blow up."
He used terminology familiar to him while under extreme pressure, without consideration for accuracy. He didn't have to moment to choose his words with care. He needed to get a point across quickly. He blurted out what came natural for him to say at that moment. But where is it that shows he "knew"? It's just not there. You are reading too much into just one sentence to pin the whole collapse on conspiracy.

I think it's time to add reading comprehension and basic grammar tests to the sign up requirements here.
 
R.Mackey said:
Again, I explained this in the post you quoted. You must have seen it. Nevertheless, I will explain again.

Explosives used in demolition make one of two sounds. Either a firecracker string of explosions, or very large explosions, that occur before any structural motion.

This does not happen. There are many videos to choose from. Had this happened, it would have been heard in most if not all of them. There are none.
Click to expand...

Go to implosionworld.com, click "cinema explosif" . Watch all the videos.

Most of your statements are debunked.

There are varying types of explosive sounds, which are not immediately followed by structural motion.

In other words- Structural motion is not necessarily preceded by an explosive sound.
 
BirdyBuddy said:
Can you point to evidence that he did indeed "know"? He didn't say "I know the building is about to blow up."
He used terminology familiar to him while under extreme pressure, without consideration for accuracy. He didn't have to moment to choose his words with care. He needed to get a point across quickly. He blurted out what came natural for him to say at that moment. But where is it that shows he "knew"? It's just not there. You are reading too much into just one sentence to pin the whole collapse on conspiracy.

I think it's time to add reading comprehension and basic grammar tests to the sign up requirements here.
Click to expand...


How about just some basic, human honesty?
 
As a "logical" conclusion to this "gotcha" quote insanity, I guess we can conclusively state that at least 20,000 people died in the twin towers collapse, because I heard MANY people say that the in the hours and days after the attack.

Because ALL statements made in the heat of the moment are accurate, right?
 
[thread title]Here is one rescue worker[/thread title]

theauthor said:
One described it as like a clap of thunder
Click to expand...

Bolding mine. One.... out of how many people, that were there, that day???
 
Last edited:
Russ_Dalton said:
In other words- Structural motion is not necessarily preceded by an explosive sound.
Click to expand...

No, sometimes it is preceded by an earthquake, or a tornado, or a hurricane, or by planes flying into the building in question, or by fire, or by large chunks of another building falling on it, or several of those elements in combination or in succession.

How can so many people be so sap-skulled and thick-headed at the same time?
 
Russ_Dalton said:
There are varying types of explosive sounds, which are not immediately followed by structural motion.

In other words- Structural motion is not necessarily preceded by an explosive sound.
Click to expand...

Neither are explosives required to generate sounds... what kind of noise do you think an acre of concrete floor makes when it slams down onto another concrete floor with 200,000+ (dynamic load) tons of pressure?

Do you purposefully ignore other sources of sound?
 
theauthor said:
Why did he say it was about to blow up?
Click to expand...

Main Entry:
ex·plo·sion
Pronunciation:
\ik-ˈsplō-zhən\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Latin explosion-, explosio act of driving off by clapping, from explodere
Date:
1667
1 : the act or an instance of exploding <injured in a laboratory explosion>
2 : a large-scale, rapid, or spectacular expansion or bursting out or forth <the explosion of suburbia> <an explosion of red hair>
3 : the release of occluded breath that occurs in one kind of articulation of stop consonants
Click to expand...

Link.
 
theauthor said:
Stop grasping at straws. He said that, amongst other things, on the CNN video. Nobody has spliced anything. If you want to claim they have then provide proof.
Click to expand...



You started a pointless thread just to make a horse's ass of yourself again? How slow is the pace of life in Manchester these days?
 
Russ_Dalton said:
The video clearly shows sounds when the workers walk away from WTC7. Watch the video again.

How did you rule out the possibility that there were no explosives?
Click to expand...


The demolition professionals ruled out the posssibility of explosives when they failed to discover physical evidence--detonator caps, bits of wiring, chemical signatures, etc.

Of course, uneducated conspiracy liars know so much more than professionals in all relevant fields.
 
Russ_Dalton said:
You could clearly (1) hear a explosion type sound (2) see the worker look back and say to effect of - "its blowing". You'd like to comment on that part?
Click to expand...
That's an easy one Russ. According to the Fire Department of New York the building had been completely engulfed by fire for several hours. It was leaning, there was a large kink in the roofline indicating structural failure, and one of the penthouses collapses completely into the building before the rest of the building came down completely.

I bolded those parts where "truthers" like to substitute "Bush" and "small isolated fires" as the case demands.

That part doesn't have any cuts. Are you saying the video is fake?
Click to expand...
The editing of who knows what or how many videos into one video of "truth" do make it suspect, don't you think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom