• 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.

Merged New video! Architects and Engineers - Solving the Mystery of Building 7

The Achilles heel of the Goliath is the Obvious Controlled demolition of WTC Building Seven, we must HIT the Achilles heel because is the weakest point of the US government Lies about what happened on 911 .


.
 
walkyrie said:
The Achilles heel of the Goliath is the Obvious Controlled demolition of WTC Building Seven, we must HIT the Achilles heel because is the weakest point of the US government Lies about what happened on 911 .


.
Click to expand...

Evidence?
 
walkyrie said:
The Achilles heel of the Goliath is the Obvious Controlled demolition of WTC Building Seven, we must HIT the Achilles heel because is the weakest point of the US government Lies about what happened on 911 .


.
Click to expand...

Circular logic is stupid. Also, you are so biased, it can only be prudent to completely ignore anything you have to say in this debate. Good luck with your delusions.
 
walkyrie said:
The Achilles heel of the Goliath is the Obvious Controlled demolition of WTC Building Seven, we must HIT the Achilles heel because is the weakest point of the US government Lies about what happened on 911 .
Click to expand...

No.
 
laca said:
Learning to spell would go a long way in not coming off as a raving lunatic.
Click to expand...

Nah, it's like giving a drunk some coffee, and he becomes simply a wide-awake drunk. A raving lunatic who spells correctly is simply a raving lunatic with spell check.
 
bill smith said:
The collapse of the Penthouse was just an example of local damage within a much larger system. Nist said that structural damage played little or no role in the collapse of the building so WTC7 collapsed totally in 7 seconds.

The 400 Truther Professors are absolutely correct.
Click to expand...

Arguement from ignorance noted.
 
twinstead said:
Nah, it's like giving a drunk some coffee, and he becomes simply a wide-awake drunk. A raving lunatic who spells correctly is simply a raving lunatic with spell check.
Click to expand...

True, but at least we may remark, "My, what a thoughtful and well-educated lunatic."
 
twinstead said:
Nah, it's like giving a drunk some coffee, and he becomes simply a wide-awake drunk. A raving lunatic who spells correctly is simply a raving lunatic with spell check.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but he'd be a couple more posts in before being flagged.
 
walkyrie said:
A new newer shower before video of the Controlled Demolition of WTC Building Seven, at 1:05/3:04 of this video show clearly the IMPLOSION of WTC Building Seven which fell in just a few seconds ,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI3wZM47LxU&feature=share



.
Click to expand...

Yes, you can definitely see the penthouse collapse into the building several seconds before the rest of the building collapses, proof positive that the internal structure of the building collapsed several seconds before the rest followed showing that the total collapse time was greater than seven seconds.

Thanks for debunking the 400 plus professors.
 
walkyrie said:
A new newer shower before video of the Controlled Demolition of WTC Building Seven, at 1:05/3:04 of this video show clearly the IMPLOSION of WTC Building Seven which fell in just a few seconds ,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI3wZM47LxU&feature=share



.
Click to expand...
Thanks!

From the video...
WTC Building #7, a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane, exhibited all the characteristics of classic controlled demolition with explosives:

1. Rapid onset of collapse

2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor -- a second before the building's destruction

3. Symmetrical "structural failure" -- through the path of greatest resistance -- at free-fall acceleration

4. Imploded, collapsing completely, and landed in its own footprint

5. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds

6. Expert corroboration from the top European controlled demolition professional

7. Foreknowledge of "collapse" by media, NYPD, FDNY

In the the aftermath of WTC7's destruction, strong evidence of demolition using incendiary devices was discovered:

8. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples

9. Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly qualified witnesses

10. Chemical signature of the incendiary thermite found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples

WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:


1. Slow onset with large visible deformations

2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)

3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel

4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never collapsed.

Poll: 48% of New Yorkers Support Building 7 Investigation
Click to expand...

From the comments...
whats that sound at 00:02?
--necessaryevil101 1 month ago

@necessaryevil101 The explosion that caused the penthouse to collapse into the building. That is the actual audio released last year under a NIST FOIA September 2010 .... CBS Net Dub 5 Clip 9, I believe
--IranContraScumDid911 1 month ago 2
Click to expand...

Preponderance of evidence??

No, that sound clearly comes BEFORE the penthouse collapses, because sound can be delayed over distances... OH WAIT!!! Before, After, Before, After.... If the sound comes before, then that means... EXPLOSIVES!!!

What type of evidence were you "skeptics" looking for, again?? Fingerprints? How about the Hoboken Eyewitness video... http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4563604978641682920 (ignoring the fact that the audio was altered, and altered CLEARLY with a good pair of headphones, does the TIMING of the audio/video not bear any weight of evidence? sure they bumped up the volume when they "zoomed" into the graph, but the "zoom" effect doesn't completely erase the validity of the rest of the eyewitness video, now, does it??)
 
Last edited:
walkyrie said:
The Controlled Demolition detonation of WTC building 7 is irrevocable proof that it WAS AN INSIDE JOB !! As if all the other **** that day wasn't immediate proof enough!



.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Another proof is that the standard bearers for the government's tale of what happened are National Geographic and Popular Mechanics. The rest of the MSM lay mute.
 
grndslm said:
From the video...
Quote:
WTC Building #7, a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane, exhibited all the characteristics of classic controlled demolition with explosives:

1. Rapid onset of collapse

2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor -- a second before the building's destruction

3. Symmetrical "structural failure" -- through the path of greatest resistance -- at free-fall acceleration

4. Imploded, collapsing completely, and landed in its own footprint

5. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds

6. Expert corroboration from the top European controlled demolition professional

7. Foreknowledge of "collapse" by media, NYPD, FDNY

In the the aftermath of WTC7's destruction, strong evidence of demolition using incendiary devices was discovered:

8. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples

9. Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly qualified witnesses

10. Chemical signature of the incendiary thermite found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples

WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:


1. Slow onset with large visible deformations

2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)

3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel

4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never collapsed.

Poll: 48% of New Yorkers Support Building 7 Investigation
Click to expand...

expressions.jpg


So your only evidence is evidence that you had to fabricate through practices such as quote mining, lousy research skills, and invented (or bastardizing of) vocabulary? grndslm, we've had this thrown at our faces for ten years, if it didn't give you the investigation you wanted 5 years ago, and it hasn't given it to you 5 years later, then that may be a signal that your fabricated evidence is unconvincing.
 
The only mystery of building 7 is why, if the evidence of CD is SO compelling, do so few experts have an issue with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom