Truthers...what is your best piece of evidence ?

funk de fino said:
No, I never missed it or forgot it. Where is the missing 12,000 gallons from the underground tanks then?

ETA - also you never answered earlier. What do you class as upper floors in a 47 storey building?
Click to expand...
everything above the ground floor apparently
 
Mark Carter said:
One of the best videos that I have found is the one where the BBC is caught reporting that building No7 collapsed 20 minutes before it even happened. How did they know this was going to happen?
Click to expand...

You mean other than the fact that everyone on site had been saying all afternoon it was in danger of collapsing?

That is a compelling mystery.

Thank you for bringing this new and interesting piece of evidence to light. Now that we have determined a news network mistakenly reported the collapse of dangerously unstable building before it actually collapsed, we can safely conclude 9/11 was an inside job.

Thread closed.
 
Mark Carter said:
One of the best videos that I have found is the one where the BBC is caught reporting that building No7 collapsed 20 minutes before it even happened. How did they know this was going to happen?
Click to expand...

I love this one. It was described to me as a "smoking gun" by my nutty conspiracists friend.

Tell me Mark, how do you think that all went down ? Was there some incompetent government agent that hit the send button too early putting out the news that 7 had collapsed. Use common sense here. Talk yourself through it and explain how that went down.

I think you will come to the conclusion that it was nothing but a reporting mistake.
 
funk de fino said:
No, I never missed it or forgot it. Where is the missing 12,000 gallons from the underground tanks then?
Click to expand...


The 12,000 gallons from the damaged tanks leaked into the ground.

As stated the 20,00 gallons that was recovered shows no fires on the ground floor.

As far as what is considered upper floors is anything above the 10th floor, where the damage was done. From the 10th to the 18th floor according to firemen on the scene.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
The 12,000 gallons from the damaged tanks leaked into the ground.

As stated the 20,00 gallons that was recovered shows no fires on the ground floor.

As far as what is considered upper floors is anything above the 10th floor, where the damage was done. From the 10th to the 18th floor according to firemen on the scene.
Click to expand...

Please learn to read.

Too bad you don't have the facts and evidence to debate my facts and evidence.
 
Last edited:
Mince said:
Please learn to read.

Too bad you don't have the facts and evidence to debate my facts and evidence.
Click to expand...

Here is evidence for the 20,000 recovered.
http://www.wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
To date, the NY State Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and DEC have recovered approximately 20,000 gallons from the other two intact 11,600-gallon underground fuel oil storage tanks at WTC 7.
It is worth emphasizing that 20,000 gallons (of a maximum of 23,200 gallons) where recovered intact from the two 12,000-gallon Silverstein tanks. So, it is probable that the 20,000 gallons recovered was all of the oil in the tanks at that time. Since the oil in the Silverstein tanks survived, we can surmise that there was no fire on the ground floor.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Here is evidence for the 20,000 recovered.
http://www.wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
To date, the NY State Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and DEC have recovered approximately 20,000 gallons from the other two intact 11,600-gallon underground fuel oil storage tanks at WTC 7.
It is worth emphasizing that 20,000 gallons (of a maximum of 23,200 gallons) where recovered intact from the two 12,000-gallon Silverstein tanks. So, it is probable that the 20,000 gallons recovered was all of the oil in the tanks at that time. Since the oil in the Silverstein tanks survived, we can surmise that there was no fire on the ground floor.
Click to expand...

Thanks for proving you have no facts and evidence to debate my facts and evidence.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Here is evidence for the 20,000 recovered.
http://www.wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
To date, the NY State Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and DEC have recovered approximately 20,000 gallons from the other two intact 11,600-gallon underground fuel oil storage tanks at WTC 7.
It is worth emphasizing that 20,000 gallons (of a maximum of 23,200 gallons) where recovered intact from the two 12,000-gallon Silverstein tanks. So, it is probable that the 20,000 gallons recovered was all of the oil in the tanks at that time. Since the oil in the Silverstein tanks survived, we can surmise that there was no fire on the ground floor.
Click to expand...

What about the two 6,000 gallom tanks for Salomon Smith Barney that were also under the loading dock?

What about the 6,000 gallon tank for the OEM that was between the 2nd and 3rd floor?

This was never recovered.

Nor was there any soil contamination.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
And your sources are?

I mean if i have to post sources, so do you.
Click to expand...

Please do some research before you ask questions.

I am not here to educate you.

The tanks are mentioned in your own link.

Do you know how to read? Or are you too immature to admit that as usual, you're ignorant of the facts that you yourself present in a failed effort to show....... something of significance.

Like I've told you before, you add nothing of value to any discussion. If you're gonna respond to my posts, please grow up and post in a mature manner. Answer the question. Don't ask more questions. It's a waste of bandwidth.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
I mean if i have to post sources, so do you.
Click to expand...

Except that you don't provide sources or any kind of substantiation. You repeatedly make hilariously stupid claims and then tuck tail and runaway from the questions we ask you about them.

Like for instance, this one:
Why did the FDNY secretly demolish WTC7 and then lie about it to the entire world?

I anxiously await you to once again ignore this question like a coward.
 
johnny karate said:
You mean other than the fact that everyone on site had been saying all afternoon it was in danger of collapsing?

That is a compelling mystery.

Thank you for bringing this new and interesting piece of evidence to light. Now that we have determined a news network mistakenly reported the collapse of dangerously unstable building before it actually collapsed, we can safely conclude 9/11 was an inside job.

Thread closed.
Click to expand...


No, your answer won't do. It is disagreeably sane and unquestionably correct.

Here's the answer they want:

Minions of the Impossibly Vast Conspiracy approached representatives of the network deemed most implacably hostile to their goals and handed them a smoking gun in the form of a script announcing the collapse of WTC 7. When the astonished BBC rep asked what was the purpose of the script, the super-villain replied that he didn't know. He went on to say to say that, try as he might, he couldn't even conceive of a plausible purpose. The BBC rep pointed out, somewhat unhelpfully, that the building collapses or it doesn't. A script serves no purpose in either case.

When asked why the IVC was blowing up the building, the evildoer replied that again he didn't know. There didn't appear to be any reason for it.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Funny, who said anythign about them blowing it up ?

The fire commander and incident commad decided to bring down the building to keep from causing any more damage and fire spreading.

PLease read Chief Haydens statements for this source.
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html
Click to expand...


You've been caught lying again. WTC 7 was not "brought down": it collapsed as a result of extensive fires. Only agenda-driven conspiracy liars make this absurd claim that is contradicted by all available evidence.

You were exposed as a fraud when you falsely pretended that the FDNY talked about "pulling" a 47-story building. It cannot be done and the FDNY certainly never claimed otherwise.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Funny, who said anythign about them blowing it up ?

The fire commander and incident commad decided to bring down the building to keep from causing any more damage and fire spreading.

PLease read Chief Haydens statements for this source.
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html
Click to expand...



There are several embarrassingly silly conspiracy liars posting here, but you take the cake. Can you read? Seriously? Here is Hayden's description of the collapse of WTC 7, taken from the source you linked to:

"Yeah, we had to pull everybody back. It was very difficult. We had to be very forceful in getting the guys out. They didn't want to come out. There were guys going into areas that I wasn't even really comfortable with, because of the possibility of secondary collapses. We didn't know how stable any of this area was. We pulled everybody back probably by 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon. We said, this building is going to come down, get back. It came down about 5 o'clock or so, but we had everybody backed away by then. At that point in time, it seemed like a somewhat smaller event, but under any normal circumstances, that's a major event, a 47-story building collapsing."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom