• 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

You know, it really irritates me that we (OCT adherents? ) are left to try to guess which building demolition this is that MM has decided is pertinent. If he truly thinks it's comparable to WTC 7, then he shouldn't be afraid to tell us where it is. We can only conclude that he knows what he's posting is yet another crock of poo.
 
sylvan8798 said:
You know, it really irritates me that we (OCT adherents? ) are left to try to guess which building demolition this is that MM has decided is pertinent. If he truly thinks it's comparable to WTC 7, then he shouldn't be afraid to tell us where it is. We can only conclude that he knows what he's posting is yet another crock of poo.
Click to expand...

He probably found the demolition footage ( 2:00) while watching this idiotic truther video and is too embarrassed to post it. The entire video is one giant farce but the real fun begins at 3:00:

 
Because if your video contains Carmina Burana, then it is by default a representation of the truth :rolleyes:

Clunkety Clunk!
 
Drs_Res said:
That's the one. And as I speculated above, the "penthouse" was NOT a penthouse.
I'd still like to know what building it was and see the the demo by itself with audio.
Click to expand...
The Hudson Department Store. Biggest steel-framed structure CDI ever shot.

It was *********** loud and there are visible explosive ejecta out the windows before anything on the roof moved.

No parallel with WTC7.
 
leftysergeant said:
The Hudson Department Store. Biggest steel-framed structure CDI ever shot.

It was *********** loud and there are visible explosive ejecta out the windows before anything on the roof moved.

No parallel with WTC7.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but the Hudson Department Store building was actually several connected buildings, not one structure.
 
leftysergeant said:
The Hudson Department Store. Biggest steel-framed structure CDI ever shot.

It was *********** loud and there are visible explosive ejecta out the windows before anything on the roof moved.

No parallel with WTC7.
Click to expand...

Don't think it's The Hudson, lefty.



Or at 6:15 from a different view:



But yes, that is stunningly loud sequence of 100's of explosions.
 
Last edited:
leftysergeant said:
The Hudson Department Store. Biggest steel-framed structure CDI ever shot.

It was *********** loud and there are visible explosive ejecta out the windows before anything on the roof moved.

No parallel with WTC7.
Click to expand...

I've been at grain silo demolitions. Damn those things are solid.

You would have no problem hearing and identifying the detonations at a distance of several miles.
 
Where was Rupert Murdoch when 9/11 happened? He looks suspiciously like Larry Silverstein with a bit of makeup on to me.
 
sylvan8798 said:
You know, it really irritates me that we (OCT adherents? ) are left to try to guess which building demolition this is that MM has decided is pertinent. If he truly thinks it's comparable to WTC 7, then he shouldn't be afraid to tell us where it is. We can only conclude that he knows what he's posting is yet another crock of poo.
Click to expand...

DUH every demoltion is comparable to WTC7 because, like, all buildings collapsed downwards in all demolitions therefore its comparable. You bunkars are st00pid
 
It is basically impossible for a building of any size to fail in any other way than to fall straight down. The exceptions are rigid cast concrete buildings which sometimes have the excess strength needed to tip over rather than disintegrate and fall down.
 
Notice how Miragememories has avoided this thread since the video he posted as a comparison to WTC7 was shown to, in no way, resemble the collapse of WTC7.
 
GlennB said:
Or at 6:15 from a different view:



But yes, that is stunningly loud sequence of 100's of explosions.
Click to expand...

What's nice about that video is you can see two exposed columns rigged to blow, and at 6:34 you can see them blow. The amount of smoke and dust they create is very small, making any claims that the massive cloud of dust created from explosives 'dustifying' a building during demolition ludicrous.
 
patchbunny said:
What's nice about that video is you can see two exposed columns rigged to blow, and at 6:34 you can see them blow. The amount of smoke and dust they create is very small, making any claims that the massive cloud of dust created from explosives 'dustifying' a building during demolition ludicrous.
Click to expand...

For a group that regularly claims "never in the history of..." they seem to lack a grasp of what has actually happened in history. CD does not turn buildings into dust.
 
patchbunny said:
What's nice about that video is you can see two exposed columns rigged to blow, and at 6:34 you can see them blow. The amount of smoke and dust they create is very small, making any claims that the massive cloud of dust created from explosives 'dustifying' a building during demolition ludicrous.
Click to expand...

Not just large dust cloud, "pyroclastic dust cloud". Whatever that is!
 
Drs_Res said:
Notice how Miragememories has avoided this thread since the video he posted as a comparison to WTC7 was shown to, in no way, resemble the collapse of WTC7.
Click to expand...

Alas I am but one individual and can only cover so many bases.

I have been quite busy in the Molten Steel thread.

In no way am I avoiding this thread, and I do not accept your opinion as fact, regarding my WTC7 collapse image-comparison.

Carry on.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
In no way am I avoiding this thread, and I do not accept your opinion as fact, regarding my WTC7 collapse image-comparison.
Click to expand...

We all are well aware that the only reason you claim that WTC7 looks like a demolition is because WTC7 collapsed downwards.

I can literally find a kind of demolition for every circumstance, where no matter how the building could have collapsed you could compare it to a demolition in the same way. If you say it should fall over like a tree if it wasnt a demolition there's a demolition where that happened too. There's no way you can lose with your simplistic way of looking at everything, but when you can always win with your logic no matter what facts are shown you also have no way to prove you are right either. For example: how should have WTC7 collapsed if it wasnt a demolition? Your only possible answer that isnt immediately ilogically invalid because of this fact is "It is impossible for WTC7 without demolition" and "there is NO WAY it could have collapsed that would not require a demolition". There is no point comparing it to demolition videos if there is no way it could have collapsed that cant be compared in the same simplistic way you are doing to a real demolition.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom