High energy explosvies and tertiary blast waves

[NoahFence]

You mean you're not hurt?

As unimaginable as it may seem, you are indeed correct.

Liberty putting me on ignore is slightly lower on the igiveacrapometer than Manchester United's backup goaltender.

 

[Reactor drone]

Punctuation is your friend.


Haft is not a word.

Well it is a word, it just isn't the right one to use in that context. If he was talking about the handle of a dagger on the other hand...

 

[Liberty]

Redtail wrote: This was a lot of word salad when all you had to do was say "because they would've disagreed with what I want to believe."

I dont think you understand how to study a subject like 911. It doesnt matter what any explosvie experts opinion is on the reports of explosions. Some will say that they dont think any explosives were involved, and some will say that explosvies could have been involved, they key word here is "think" and "opinion" witnesses alone is not necessarily evidence of explosives. And someones opinion doesn't interest me much, especially when it's basic stuff that i already know. Why would i for example ask someone if high energy explosives can cause windows far away to explode or cause shockwaves that rip through the building, i already know the answer to these questions...

Because all the evidence was destroyed, you haft to focus more on the politics of 911 then the collapse etc. When you look at the players involved, you get many motives to why they would plant explosvies, and then you look at the facts regaring military units in New york illegally before 911, the companies with ties to war elites and globalists that hired the mafia for the clean up etc, and put all the facts together, like the 9/11 Commission never did.

 

[bynmdsue]

I like how he says "not many people have studied 9/11". I think he'll find it's actually been and is being studied by magnitudes more than he imagines. They just don't agree with him.

...and then he'll start yelling about CIA death squads.

 

[Justin39640]

I wonder why.

Your engine is banging on all eight cylinders?

 

[NoahFence]

The first problem he faces and will not comment on, is how in the world did these explosives survive for an hour and an hour and a half in these buildings after getting hit by airliners and burning.

Truthers NEVER go there. It's like they'll turn to stone if they try to explain that. Because failing to do so eliminates ALL their retarded theories.

 

[plague311]

Of Course it was, if you say so!... The only thing you could mean by this is that the damage was done by falling debris, because the dust winds etc after the collapse did noting to the lobby as we can see on video. To think that debris hitting the building destroyed the lobby is just ridiculous, the plane impact did no damage to the lobby of the towers, besides the jet fuel explosion. You deny witnesses because they dont fit your belief system, witnesses saw and heard multiple explosions, shockwaves, flashes, windows exploding all around them on the street etc before the collapse...

This was my favorite part in the "liberty" theater.

Liberty, lie down and read what I am about to type carefully.

The reason that the lobby didn't get AS damaged in WTC 1 & 2 (they did get damaged) and WTC 7 had such extensive damage is because the planes didn't hit the lobby in WTC 1 & 2.

BUT

Given the fact that the collapses of 1 & 2 caused hundreds of thousands of tons of debris to fall TO THE GROUND which is where the lobby is in buildings, not sure if you knew that, then the damage to WTC 7 would be IN THE LOBBY.

The damage to WTC's 1 & 2 happened in the upper third of the buildings, because that's where the planes hit. Pretty easy to figure that out, there was nothing that went to the lobby, outside of the fireball and the debris that fell from the plane. However, the massive amount of debris that fell from the WTC 1 & 2 hit the ground, the ground, the ground, the ground, the ground. Which is conveniently where the lobby was for WTC 7.

Repetition is the key to learning. If you have any questions...keep them to yourself.

 

[LSSBB]

I dont think you understand how to study a subject like 911.

Yes we do, look for facts and follow legal evidentiary rules. For scientific conjectures, use rigorous scientific methods and statistical validation techniques.

Because all the evidence was destroyed

wrong, try again.

you haft to focus more on the politics of 911 then the collapse etc. When you look at the players involved, you get many motives to why they would plant explosvies, and then you look at the facts regaring military units in New york illegally before 911, the companies with ties to war elites and globalists that hired the mafia for the clean up etc, and put all the facts together, like the 9/11 Commission never did.

Wrong, your opinion of political motivations does not drive reality.

 

[twinstead]

Instead of questioning your own position like rational people.

Yup. If Liberty thinks he is right, every expert who disagrees with him is wrong. Sweet.

 

[Edx]

Couldnt resist replying to some more amazing Liberty points...

The witness that saw a shockwave ripping through WTC 7, busting out the windows, and a second later the bottom floor caved out and then the building followed after that, is another great example of a witness to what could be high energy explosives.

Since we have numerous videos of WTC7 collapsing which one shows such things?

nobody inspected the steal,

Actually yes they did, even independent experts such as Dr. Astaneh-Asl.

reporters on the site reported on how there was an ongoing operation to destroy all the steel before any inspection

Since people did inspect the steel, this point is evidently incorrect.

I dont care that much about anybodys opinion, not many people have studied 911,

I think you'll find 911 is probably one of most studied events in recent history, in every conceivable way possible. From the engineering to the air quality to the foreign policy.

 

[Liberty]

Yup. If Liberty thinks he is right, every expert who disagrees with him is wrong. Sweet.

You see what you did there?, very cheap, and so very JREF-style...

I was asked why i didnt ask their opinion on 911 regarding the explosions, and it is obvious why i didnt ask for a quote on every witness, because i am correct, no matter what any expert says, this is crystal clear examples we are talking about, as you should know after reading my posts.... If you ask an explosvie expert if it is common that you see shockwaves ripping through the building in a demolition or if explosvies can explode windows far away etc and they answer you "no" what would that mean? that every blast effect known to man suddenly doesn't exist anymore?. Its bacis stuff, there exit no bigger expert then me, i got the same knowledge as anyone else who has a basic understanding of explosives, no one can make the laws of physics disappear just because they say so.

plague311 wrote: Given the fact that the collapses of 1 & 2 caused hundreds of thousands of tons of debris to fall TO THE GROUNDwhich is where the lobby is in buildings, not sure if you knew that, then the damage to WTC 7 would IN THE LOBBY.

If you read my post you would know that there was no destruction in the lobby of WTC 7 after the first tower collapsed, falling debris would not in any way cause the destruction described, and the police was worried about reports of more explosions after both towers collapsed. You havent in any way like you fellow debunkers tried to show how such a thing would be possible, and you ignore the evidence of powerful explosions in the lobby.

 

[Edx]

Its bacis stuff, there exit no bigger expert then me, i got the same knowledge as anyone else who has a basic understanding of explosives,

Wow?

 

[Liberty]

Wow?

Insane truthers,

 

[332nd]

I dont think you understand how to study a subject like 911. It doesnt matter what any explosvie experts opinion is on the reports of explosions. Some will say that they dont think any explosives were involved, and some will say that explosvies could have been involved, they key word here is "think" and "opinion" witnesses alone is not necessarily evidence of explosives. And someones opinion doesn't interest me much, especially when it's basic stuff that i already know. Why would i for example ask someone if high energy explosives can cause windows far away to explode or cause shockwaves that rip through the building, i already know the answer to these questions...

Because all the evidence was destroyed, you haft to focus more on the politics of 911 then the collapse etc. When you look at the players involved, you get many motives to why they would plant explosvies, and then you look at the facts regaring military units in New york illegally before 911, the companies with ties to war elites and globalists that hired the mafia for the clean up etc, and put all the facts together, like the 9/11 Commission never did.

With the bolded you've shown you simply don't know how to research.

For example, I'm an expert in the field of theatre in general & African American Theatre in particular. If i were working on a theory that compared the works of Lloyd Richards to Tadashi Suzuki, I would ask my friend Eric about Suzuki because even though I spent 3years in grad school studying his style, Eric studied with Suzuki directly for 10 years, and based his style on him.

You're trying to blow it off as just an opinion while desperately ignoring the fact that it would be a very well educated, experienced opinion. Also, you're doing this in a thread you created trying to use the same people's opinion as proof you were correct about something insisting that WE respect their opinion!

All in all its no wonder you're so wrong about 9/11.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Its bacis stuff, there exit no bigger expert then me, i got the same knowledge as anyone else who has a basic understanding of explosives,

Wow?

To be fair, Liberty explained why we should believe him:

because i am correct, no matter what any expert says,

 

[Liberty]

All in all its no wonder you're so wrong about 9/11.

And you are wrong about Al-qaida. Its a intelligence asset for the CIA and has been suported by the Saudis, NATO, and other countries intelligence agencies for decades, even long after 911. What this network did leading up to 911 and all the details of the actions of the CIA etc, you apparently know nothing about, since it appears as if you think everything is explained already... That you dont accept my logical explanation, shows why you trust the official story while ignoring so many facts. I said "Why would i for example ask someone if high energy explosives can cause windows far away to explode or cause shockwaves that rip through the building, i already know the answer to these questions..." You cant argue against this, i am correct, there is no need to ask any experts if this is a sign of explosvies or not, it is..

Go and get your rest now buddy, thanks....

 

[plague311]

If you read my post you would know that there was no destruction in the lobby of WTC 7 after the first tower collapsed, falling debris would not in any way cause the destruction described, and the police was worried about reports of more explosions after both towers collapsed. You havent in any way like you fellow debunkers tried to show how such a thing would be possible, and you ignore the evidence of powerful explosions in the lobby.

I...I don't know what to say.

There was no destruction of the lobby in WTC 7?

 

[Edx]

That you dont accept my logical explanation, shows why you trust the official story while ignoring so many facts. I said "Why would i for example ask someone if high energy explosives can cause windows far away to explode or cause shockwaves that rip through the building, i already know the answer to these questions..." You cant argue against this, i am correct, there is no need to ask any experts if this is a sign of explosvies or not, it is...

You think that happened on 911 and yet where are all the people with primary blast injuries, the most common explosive related injury?
Oh, and I did show you that in a confined space, like a building, you're even more likely to find primary blast injuries

You ignored my entire post on all that, why did you do that again? http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7999233&postcount=94

Im also still waiting for you to provide a video of this happening to WTC7:

a shockwave ripping through WTC 7, busting out the windows, and a second later the bottom floor caved out and then the building followed after that, is another great example of a witness to what could be high energy explosives.

Plenty of video from various angles and distances, so which one captured any of that?

 

[Liberty]

I...I don't know what to say.

There was no destruction of the lobby in WTC 7?

This is what i am dealing with.... No there was MASSIVE destruction just like in the video i posted, did you see all that dust on the floor? talk about MASSIVE destruction!. The first tower did NO damage, the second tower wouldn't do any damage either, the lobby cant get totaly destroyed by something falling on the building. As i said before, the plane impact did no damge to the lobby in the towers besides the jet fuel, and multiple posters in the thread pointed out that the lobby in WTC 1-2 got destroyed when the building collapsed, am i talking to ten year olds or what?, just incredible. Obisouly my point is that when something hit the building on the outside, it will not cause any destruction so far below and inside the lobby, you have no credible explanation of how this would happen. And you ignore the reports of explosvies.

Im out, goodbye...

 

[plague311]

This is what i am dealing with.... No there was MASSIVE destruction just like in the video i posted, did you see all that dust on the floor? talk about MASSIVE destruction!. The first tower did NO damage, the second tower wouldn't do any damage either, the lobby cant get totaly destroyed by something falling on the building. As i said before, the plane impact did no damge to the lobby in the towers besides the jet fuel, and multiple posters in the thread pointed out that the lobby in WTC 1-2 got destroyed when the building collapsed, am i talking to ten year olds or what?, just incredible. Obisouly my point is that when something hit the building on the outside, it will not cause any destruction so far below and inside the lobby, you have no credible explanation of how this would happen. And you ignore the reports of explosvies.

Im out, goodbye...

That is the best thing you've ever said. The fact that you are too dumb to understand how gravity works makes your departure even more sweet.

Thank you Liberty, for leaving.