Danny Jowenko - Manipulated by 9/11 Deniers

[GlennB]

Until you can prove differently, all your penthouse theorizing is just that.

Are you denying the penthouse collapse preceded the collapse of the N and W walls by several seconds, MM ?

That would be truly remarkable.

 

[The Big Dog]

Are you denying the penthouse collapse preceded the collapse of the N and W walls by several seconds, MM ?

That would be truly remarkable.

Dude's a No-Roofer, man.

 

[Miragememories]

Are you denying the penthouse collapse preceded the collapse of the N and W walls by several seconds, MM ?

That would be truly remarkable.

Never said that.

Everyone is blowing smoke but no one is attempting to address the argument.

Frustration will do that I guess.

MM

 

[uke2se]

NVM, not worth it.

 

[The Big Dog]

Never said that.

Everyone is blowing smoke but no one is attempting to address the argument.

Frustration will do that I guess.

MM

Oh, you mean the argument where you referred to the collapse of the Eastern penthouse as "theorizing"?

Or the part where you referred to a building with a collapsed mechanical penthouse and roof as being "unblemished"?

Those arguments, sport?

hee hee! Welcome back, MM, GREAT FREAKING THREAD!!

/Seriously, "frustrated"?? This is as far from frustrated as I can be. Damn, son, we've been handing you shovels over the last eight hours and you just keep digging yourself deeper and deeper. Hilarious!!

 

[alienentity]

By making a non-argument the truther cannot be contradicted.

He's just going to keep making irrelevant, obtuse statements. At no time will he bring forth actual evidence of something.

That's how weak the truther position really is folks.

 

[alienentity]

Question to the genius truthers: where did the PH go?

Why did windows randomly fall out all the way down the building directly under the PH, with no explosions heard?

Where are your explosions, truthers? M.I.A.

Better find them or your CD theory is dead. 9 years is an awful lot of fail for you to hang your hat on.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

They need none of that. Just make something resemble something else on the surface and then like *magic* it becomes the other!

Man... in a world like that... if I visualize a milkshake in my steak I could magically substitute a steak with my milkshake. Mmmm, I'm hungry now....

 

[alienentity]

This clip shows the windows broken many floors down directly below the PH. They broke just around the time it collapsed into the building.

The prevailing and accepted theory is that the internal collapse was underway, evidenced by these artifacts.

Would truthers like to offer a competing hypothesis which better describes the evidence here? Notice that there were NO EXPLOSIVE SQUIBS of any kind seen in any of those windows - so why did they break at that time?

 

[A W Smith]

No bullets from this "smoking gun"

What you are claiming as a symmetrical global collapse is not. It is mainly the exterior moment frame shell of the building. You can see even in photos of the debris pile with the shell draped over it that many of these connections were still intact.

Time line

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm

Some people have said that a failure at one column should not have produced a symmetrical fall like this one. What's your answer to those assertions?

WTC 7's collapse, viewed from the exterior (most videos were taken from the north), did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit. This occurred because the interior failures that took place did not cause the exterior framing to fail until the final stages of the building collapse. The interior floor framing and columns collapsed downward and pulled away from the exterior frame. There were clues that internal damage was taking place, prior to the downward movement of the exterior frame, such as when the east penthouse fell downward into the building and windows broke out on the north face at the ends of the building core. The symmetric appearance of the downward fall of the WTC 7 was primarily due to the greater stiffness and strength of its exterior frame relative to the interior framing.

 

[alienentity]

Is this consistent with the other historic demolitions using thermite? Oh, wait a minute, thermite has never been used for a controlled demolition of a steelframe building!

 

[The Big Dog]

Time line

Sorry, MM has made clear that the real collapse started at 8.2 seconds.

Everything before that is invalid.

And it appears that using facts makes one a "Sheeple."

Ain't that right MM?

 

[triforcharity]

You were saying?

[qimg]http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/1149/normalcbsb7montno3.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9872/set3sccompositeua1.png[/qimg]

Not in unison [simultaneous performance of action]?

I see the complete building (in unison) collapsing symmetrically.

Your goalposts have not been moved.

MM

Really? From grainey YouTuube videos? Explain Fitterman Hall. Thanks.

 

[triforcharity]

As you well know;

WTC 2, WTC 1, and WTC 7 all fell completely.

Wow, for once, MM posts a fact. Well, for the most part. Except for the part that still remained amid the rubble that was cut down later.

WTC 2, WTC 1, and WTC 7 all fell at high speed.

Compared to?

WTC 2 and WTC 1 were both; quite symmetrical, and fountain-like in their cascading, top-down, imploding collapses.

Really? How is this http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/7WTC/sat_photo_911.jpg symmectrical? I see NOTHING that is symmectrical in this photo.

WTC 7 had a quite symmetrical, lower floor (for those who quibble about the height), imploding collapse.

Fitterman Hall. http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/WTC Attack/414px-Fiterman_hall_damage.jpg

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/WTC Attack/414px-Fiterman_hall_damage-1.jpg

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/WTC Attack/911_HighQualityPhotos7784.jpg

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/WTC Attack/911_HighQualityPhotos7782.jpg

I think you might need to google for the meaning of the word symmetrical.

here, let me Google that for you. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=def:+symmetrical

The fires were never fought at their source inside WTC 1 and WTC 2.

We know that. He was talking about the collapses that I posted. Contect my friend, context.

Failed controlled demolitions can result in partial, or off balance collapses.

Successful controlled demolitions do not.

Look again;

WTC 7

[qimg]http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/1149/normalcbsb7montno3.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9872/set3sccompositeua1.png[/qimg]

Classic Controlled Demolition
[qimg]http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/3889/samplecdcomposite1cj3.png[/qimg]

Yeah, so....your point is?

No one has shown a comparison example of a concrete and steel highrise that had a total, high speed collapse as a result of fire!

MM

Wait, now it's a highrise building? I thought you said

It isn't just a matter of; could fire cause a concrete and steel building such as WTC7 to collapse?

But, could any fire make such a building suffer a complete collapse with the same symmetry as is achieved in a successfully executed controlled demolition?

Plain and simple, the answer is no.

So, now it's a highrise? I mean, not to mention that the concrete in 7WTC had no use in supporting the structure whatsoever....but hey, who cares really. Right MM?

 

[triforcharity]

Somehow you don't think 3 times in the same day, and not under similar circumstances is statistically impossible?

Don't answer that.

I know the knee-jerk response.

You can't argue against a person's religion, especially when you are inside their church.

Hopefully my efforts will make the visiting potential converts think twice,
or at least think.

MM

Show me those statistics. Thanks.

 

[Scott Sommers]

Somehow you don't think 3 times in the same day, and not under similar circumstances is statistically impossible?

I don't normally make these kinds of arguments, but do you know what the term 'statistics' and it's adverb 'statistically' mean? The term is quite unlike other words for which this kind of argument has been made. Words like 'delusion', 'hallucination' and 'mental illness' existed a long time before they became controlled by modern professional organizations and continue to have standard and meaningful useage quite different from their professional form. The words related to 'statistic' are quite different. There is no other standard or meaning useage outside of their use by mathematicans.

So I have to ask you, do you know anything about statistics? Tell me, tell us, what understanding of statistics do you bring to this discussion?

 

[GlennB]

http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9872/set3sccompositeua1.png

I see the complete building (in unison) collapsing symmetrically.

Never said that.

Everyone is blowing smoke but no one is attempting to address the argument.

Everyone but you is addressing the argument.

You, though, are merely persisting with your claim that WTC7 was a classical, synchronised CD and that the building fell in unison and into its own footprint, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Your only point of "evidence" is that you "see" the building coming down symmetrically.

 

[TSR]

Your only point of "evidence" is that you "see" the building coming down symmetrically.

.
... by ignoring the first several seconds of the collapse, and the damage done to two different buildings across two different streets from WCT7...
.

 

[GlennB]

.
... by ignoring the first several seconds of the collapse, and the damage done to two different buildings across two different streets from WCT7...
.

... and the lack of a tightly synchronised series of explosions and flashes. And the lack of flying glass from the unprepped building ...

 

[The Big Dog]

... and the lack of a tightly synchronised series of explosions and flashes. And the lack of flying glass from the unprepped building ...

... and by claiming that a building with a collapsed mechanical penthouse and roof is "unblemished"....