• 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.

Witness describes explosions at North Tower

ergo said:
That bee dunkers seem so intent on discrediting witnesses while providing no evidence for their own claims ("no reports of explosions!") shows that they're not interested in the actual evidence but in reinforcing a false story.
Click to expand...

Will you please get it straight? Take things in context. (You dso know what "context is, I hope)

Who am I kidding?

We have never said that there were no explosions, or sounds similar to explosions, or that could be mistaken for explosions.

An airliner's worth of jet fuel deflagrating all at once is an explosion. a backdraft is an explosion and can be an impressive one in a basement with no windows to blow out and relieve the over-pressurization.

Do learn what other than HE "explodes."
 
Lefty, your comments are way beyond the pale, here. Who are you to judge what someone who was actually there is saying?

And he wasn't in the ******* building.
 
ergo said:
Lefty, your comments are way beyond the pale, here. Who are you to judge what someone who was actually there is saying?

And he wasn't in the ******* building.
Click to expand...

So anything anyone says is true?

Guess that settles 9/11 though, because Osama confessed to the whole thing.
 
ergo said:
Lefty, your comments are way beyond the pale, here. Who are you to judge what someone who was actually there is saying?

And he wasn't in the ******* building.
Click to expand...
I'm a veteran fire fighter with training in fire investigations. I have worked construction and had to break up concrete. I've gotten dirtier than this nutbar is just breaking up ten feet of sidewalk. He was nowhere near a collapsing building prior to this interview.
 
1337m4n said:
So anything anyone says is true?
Click to expand...

No, but when hundreds of people are saying the same thing, then you have to take that as evidence that something of that nature was occurring, and you investigate. Or you at the very least include that testimony in your reports.
 
ergo said:
No, but when hundreds of people are saying the same thing, then you have to take that as evidence that something of that nature was occurring, and you investigate. Or you at the very least include that testimony in your reports.
Click to expand...

So what if they do? So what if they decided to include their testimonies or even investigate for explosives even though explosions in a catastrophe of that magnitude are expected just to satisfy your cult, yet still there was no evidence of explosives.

You'd then bow out of the debate and become a "bee dunker"? HA! No, you'd just find some other "anomaly" and continue on your merry cult way, even though the preponderance of evidence, when taken as a whole, is against you and always will be.
 
ergo said:
Lefty, your comments are way beyond the pale, here. Who are you to judge what someone who was actually there is saying?

And he wasn't in the ******* building.
Click to expand...
Show any video which supports his testimony that CD explosions were going off twenty stories below the fires in sequence at the corner of either of the towers. Of course you have no such video. All you have is a shocked witness with poor depth perception who was looking up from the street and imagined the pancaking from a distant corner was occurring below the corner nearest him.

Debunked and Dismissed
 
If hundreds of people say they heard an explosion, that doesn't mean there was an explosion, it means something sounded like an explosion. Lots of things sound like explosions.
 
twinstead said:
No, you'd just find some other "anomaly" and continue on your merry cult way, even though the preponderance of evidence, when taken as a whole, is against you and always will be.
Click to expand...

We are omniscient now are we twinstead?
 
ergo said:
No, but when hundreds of people are saying the same thing, then you have to take that as evidence that something of that nature was occurring, and you investigate. Or you at the very least include that testimony in your reports.
Click to expand...

There isn't a single member on this forum who believes that no one heard explosions that day. There are tons of eyewitness accounts who heard explosions. As has been pointed out to you, many things explode in office fires. Also, many people said things like "It sounded LIKE a bomb exploded". Does that mean that a bomb did indeed explode? Of course not. Just like how some witnesses described the collapses as sounding "Like a train". Does that mean a train took down the towers? No, it doesn't.
 
Quiproquo said:
We are omniscient now are we twinstead?
Click to expand...


in the respect that in nine years you truthers have shown no evidence whatsoever for an inside job conspiracy. Nor can you even formulate a plausible chain of events supporting such a conspiracy. We are seeing an ever widening divergence between the physical evidence supporting the common narrative, And basically what amounts to incredulity of the common narrative supported by nothing more than the theoretical plausibility of an inside job conspiracy.

Its not omniscience, Its a trend which shows no change or chance of support at all for inside job conspiracy theorists.
 
Quad4_72 said:
There isn't a single member on this forum who believes that no one heard explosions that day. There are tons of eyewitness accounts who heard explosions. As has been pointed out to you, many things explode in office fires. Also, many people said things like "It sounded LIKE a bomb exploded". Does that mean that a bomb did indeed explode? Of course not. Just like how some witnesses described the collapses as sounding "Like a train". Does that mean a train took down the towers? No, it doesn't.
Click to expand...

In the first few years surrounding the 9/11 controversy, the reaction to reports that there had been explosions before and during the destruction of the towers was that there absoloutely were no explosions.

Now everybody agrees that "of course there were explosions."

So if you are wrong once, how can you be sure you are right?
 
Quiproquo said:
In the first few years surrounding the 9/11 controversy, the reaction to reports that there had been explosions before and during the destruction of the towers was that there absoloutely were no explosions.

Now everybody agrees that "of course there were explosions."

So if you are wrong once, how can you be sure you are right?
Click to expand...

I've never seen anybody say that there were no explosions or sounds that sounded like explosions. It has always been that there was nothing indicitive of explosives. And there wasn't.

Fail.
 
Quiproquo said:
In the first few years surrounding the 9/11 controversy, the reaction to reports that there had been explosions before and during the destruction of the towers was that there absoloutely were no explosions.

Now everybody agrees that "of course there were explosions."

So if you are wrong once, how can you be sure you are right?
Click to expand...

Explosions don't necessarily mean planted explosives, you understand?
 
Quiproquo said:
In the first few years surrounding the 9/11 controversy, the reaction to reports that there had been explosions before and during the destruction of the towers was that there absoloutely were no explosions.

Now everybody agrees that "of course there were explosions."

So if you are wrong once, how can you be sure you are right?
Click to expand...

Present your evidence of anyone ever proclaiming that there were no explosions. I can guarantee you that no debunker on this forum ever said that they didn't believe the witnesses who heard explosions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom