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

[Edx]

So what did instantly remove 8 stories of the building?

What did cause the freefall acknowledged by NIST?

Elements buckled, some elements were dragged down.

There is no need to claim impossible Star Trek style weapons vaporised 8 floors each the size of a city block instantly vanishing into thin air.

 

[Animal]

They must have been rigged with explosives 'in secret' because the events themselves are not in question.

Wishing something to be true does not make it a fact.

WTC1&2 were turned into this in 15 second each after burning for just 56 & 102 mins.
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_349174abd5befe8ed2.jpg[/qimg]

powdered concrete and building contents covered the Island from 'river to river'
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_349174abc7158489f6.jpg[/qimg]

But mostly drywall dust, insulation, paint, but troofers like to claim it was all concrete dust.

and the 47 story wtc7 into this in 6 or 7 seconds:
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_349174e63a75540e72.jpg[/qimg]

A lie often repeated by troofers.

The cores in the Towers could only be accessed through the elevator shafts/

Another lie. A quick glance of a typical floor plan proves you wrong.

There happen to be a 'large elevator modernization project' going in the months before 9/11 and, (I read at ae911truth.org) the cores had their own floor system of some sort that people could move around in with no one in the offices being able to detect their presence.

You don't know much about building management and union labor in NYC do you?

We cannot pretend to know every aspect of how these events were carried out and executed only that observed events clearly confirm the use of preplanted explosive.

Troofers cannot pretend to know the first thing as to how such a conspiracy could be carried out, but it doesn't stop them from making stupid claims.

I know how difficult it is to believe. I responded the same way when this idea was first presented to me. But remember, just because something seems even very unlikely to us, that is not a good reason to dismiss it. (personal incredulity is a logical fallacy) We have to use the available evidence and follow it to the most likely conclusion. In this case it's explosives.

<snicker> the only way to conclude that explosives were used would be to IGNORE all available evidence

NIST btw, after accurately stating that freefall is categorically impossible in any supported structure went on to change their final report and admit that freefall did occur at WTC7- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA Freefall = explosives.

Feel free to provide proof that ONLY freefall= explosives.
Until then, continue to believe you delusions and fantasies.

 

[twinstead]

So what did instantly remove 8 stories of the building?

What did cause the freefall acknowledged by NIST?

Well, we know explosives can't do it, but seriously, you have no idea what the competing theory is to yours? Jesus. Read the NIST report.

 

[bill smith]

Yes, you do. That's rather the whole point. You're making a claim that:



But if you don't refer to any papers that do address this "fact", it remains simply an assertion. So please give a source that claims that thermitic materials can be engineered to have high explosive properties.

Of course, it's irrelevant, for reasons I've already given, but it would do you - and indeed all truthers - a lot of good to get into the habit of supporting your claims.

Dave

As I understand it Dave some advanced polymers can be added to nanothermite to make it explosive. Ordinary nanothermite only burns ferociously without giving off the gas you would need in an explosive. The polymers are designed to propogate vast amounts of gas very quickly turning the NT into a (high) explosive. Versatile stuff.

 

[Edx]

As I understand it Dave some advanced polymers can be added to nanothermite to make it explosive. Ordinary nanothermite only burns ferociously without giving off the gas you would need in an explosive. The polymers are designed to propogate vast amounts of gas very quickly turning the NT into a (high) explosive. Versatile stuff.

I dont know why you are quibbling over whether nano thermite can be explosive when you're suggesting Star Trek weapons were used on WTC7.

 

[bill smith]

I dont know why you are quibbling over whether nano thermite can be explosive when you're suggesting Star Trek weapons were used on WTC7.

Well I don't suggest that actually but I am prepared to consider it if a good enough case can be made EDX. I assume you have the same approach.

 

[Edx]

Well I don't suggest that actually but I am prepared to consider it if a good enough case can be made EDX. I assume you have the same approach.

I know that no explosives on earth can generate an invisible silent shockwave, which is something else you claim happened.

I know that Star Trek weapons do not exist. It is impossible to instantly remove 8 floors each the size of a city block, so essentially removing 8 blocks in NYC into NOTHING. Which you must believe if you claim 8 floors in WTC7 didnt offer any resistance because it was blown to smithereens. If normal explosives did it it would still have resitance. The material doesnt just disappear.

Half the time I wonder whether truthers are just trying to troll on purpose or whether they really believe this stuff.

 

[dafydd]

I know that no explosives on earth can generate a, invisible silent shockwave, which is something else you claim happened.

I know that Star Trek weapons do not exist. It is impossible to instantly remove 8 floors each the size opf a city block, so essentially removing 8 blocks into NOTHING

Half the time I wonder whether truthers are just trying to troll on purpose or whether they really believe this stuff.

Bill doesn't.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

As I understand it Dave some advanced polymers can be added to nanothermite to make it explosive. Ordinary nanothermite only burns ferociously without giving off the gas you would need in an explosive. The polymers are designed to propogate vast amounts of gas very quickly turning the NT into a (high) explosive. Versatile stuff.

Citation please.

 

[bill smith]

So what did instantly remove 8 stories of the building?

What did cause the freefall acknowledged by NIST?

Nothing can freefall if it is being supported from below. Therefore if it freefalls there is nothing supporting it. Given that we know that there was 40,000 tons of supporting steel in WTC7 we can safely conclude that the steel had been removed allowing at least the eight floors to freefall.

 

[bill smith]

Citation please.

Are you denying what I say ? Just for the record.

 

[Edx]

Nothing can freefall if it is being supported from below. Therefore if it freefalls there is noting supporting it. Given that we know that there was 40,000 tons of supporting steel in WTC7 we can safely conclude that the steel had been removed allowing at least the eight floors to freefall.

Therefore you believe something like a phaser was used to entirely vaporise the entire 8 stories instantly into nothing.

I dare you to explain how you think thermite could do that, better yet explain how any explosive known to man could do it, even in theory.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Are you denying what I say ? Just for the record.

I'm asking for a citation so I can investigate it myself.

Common courtesy on this forum and should be expected.

Do you have a problem with my request?

 

[bill smith]

Therefore you believe something like a phaser was used to entirely vaporise the entire 8 stories instantly into nothing.

I dare you to explain how you think thermite could do that, better yet explain how any explosive known to man could do it, even in theory.

[qimg]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_0iqOBOS9gIw/TKkC-kohDjI/AAAAAAAAAJQ/GlNtfa3KW5g/s1600/phaser.jpg[/qimg]

Goodness me EDX, you sure are keen on the star trek stuff aren't you ? It would be easy to melt or explosively cut a bunch of columns simultaneously and cause at least an eight floor freefall. Just as we saw in fact.

See my sig. about WTC7

 

[Edx]

Goodness me EDX, you sure are keen on the star trek stuff aren't you ? It would be easy to melt or explosively cut a bunch of columns simultaneously and cause at least an eigrht floor freefall. Just as we saw in fact.

See my sig. about WTC7

Sorry, still doesnt work. If you destroyed all the supports at the same time by some means you'd still have 8 floors crushing into each other providing the resistance. The matter doesnt just vanish, you must therefore claim exactly that happened. It all just vanished into thin air.

 

[bill smith]

I'm asking for a citation so I can investigate it myself.

Common courtesy on this forum and should be expected.

Do you have a problem with my request?

Well I must confess that I can't put my hand on the link right now. But I have read it and if I find the link again I may post it. If you find it I would be obliged iof you would do the same.

 

[cyclonic]

See my sig. about WTC7

Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together.

What about if you put a small plastic table in a big oven, put some bricks on it and turn the oven to 220c what do you think would happen bill?

 

[bill smith]

Sorry, still doesnt work. If you destroyed all the supports at the same time by some means you'd still have 8 floors crushing into each other providing the resistance. The matter doesnt just vanish, you must therefore claim exactly that happened. It all just vanished into thin air.

What a silly boy you are EDX. The whole building was in freefall for the 2.25 seconds. Otherwise how could the eight floors that were measured go into freefall ? Therefore given that NIST admit to the freefall for the eight floors they are in fact admitting to the freefall of the whole building for that length of time. Didn't you understand that ?

 

[000063]

So you can't actually back your claim up. Quelle surprise.

What a silly boy you are EDX. The whole building was in freefall for the 2.25 seconds. Otherwise how could the eight floors that were measured go into freefall ? Therefore given that NIST admit to the freefall for the eight floors they are in fact admitting to the freefall of the whole building for that length of time. Didn't you understand that ?

Sigh.

NIST measured the facade. Part of the building.

I'm not sure why you're strawmanning it into several floors, and then strawmanning that into the entire building. For one thing, it's impossible; the E. Penthouse had already collapse by that point.

Are you trollin'?

 

[twinstead]

What a silly boy you are EDX. The whole building was in freefall for the 2.25 seconds. Otherwise how could the eight floors that were measured go into freefall ? Therefore given that NIST admit to the freefall for the eight floors they are in fact admitting to the freefall of the whole building for that length of time. Didn't you understand that ?

This is incorrect. You can do better bill.