A Question For Truthers Regarding the CD Theory

sabretooth47 said:
As long as this question goes even partially unanswered, the CD/Pull theory is dead. As is the Twoof Movement.
Click to expand...

Since the truthers seems to be stuck on this little insignificant portion of my OP, please disregard it.

How about a truther actually answering the OP without the usual duck and dodge?
 
Miragememories said:
The 9/11 Truth Movement's purpose is to raise public awareness to the point that they well apply enough pressure on the government to bring about a full and proper 9/11 investigation.
Click to expand...

If only that were true. Sadly, it's been abundantly clear for many years that the 9/11 truth movement will reject out of hand any investigation that does not conclude US government complicity in the 9/11 attacks. It's rather telling that the furthest MM is prepared to compromise this view is to say:

Miragememories said:
Hopefully an investigation will reveal the inside nature of 9/11 wasn't as sinister as it appears to be.
Click to expand...

The possibility that there was no inside nature to 9/11 is one the truth movement quite openly refuses to consider.

Dave

ETA: But getting back to the OP: a hacksaw?
 
Dave Rogers said:
But getting back to the OP: a hacksaw?
Click to expand...

This guy?

duggan_hacksaw.jpg
 
Miragememories said:
Your ignorance is telling.

The 9/11 Truth Movement's purpose is to raise public awareness to the point that they well apply enough pressure
on the government to bring about a full and proper 9/11 investigation.

It is a fool's game to speculate about 'how to' theories and the real narrative behind 9/11.

The NIST Reports are essentially speculation which is why they are so easy to attack.

MM
Click to expand...

And this folks is why the "Truth Movement" has acheived nothing in 9 years.
 
I could say the same thing about the official story: what type of steel suddenly loses 100% of its strength without being severed by explosives?

Now let's compare the two questions: which is 'more impossible' so to speak?
 
tempesta29 said:
I could say the same thing about the official story: what type of steel suddenly loses 100% of its strength without being severed by explosives?

Now let's compare the two questions: which is 'more impossible' so to speak?
Click to expand...


Maybe they're BOTH equally impossible. Then what? ;)

It has been explained to you that there was no "suddenly" about it, and you appear to not understand it only because you don't want to. Yea, yea, I know. The fact that the world's engineering and structural communities don't have a problem with it means that they are incompetent. Or in on it! (cue spooky music)

What is most impossible is that you will ever say to yourself, "hey, you know what? maybe I really don't have the education or experience to understand this issue, and maybe there's a little chance I might just be wrong"
 
Last edited:
tempesta29 said:
I could say the same thing about the official story: what type of steel suddenly loses 100% of its strength without being severed by explosives?

Now let's compare the two questions: which is 'more impossible' so to speak?
Click to expand...

Strawman. The "official story" says no such thing. In fact, your claim "loses 100% of its strength" makes no sense. You obviously don't understand the basics of material science. The strength properties of steel (stress-strain relationship) vary with temperature, which forms the basis of the failure mode.

Explosives?! Visit your local engineering college; they test the yield and ultimate stress of steel all the time without explosives.
 
tempesta29 said:
I could say the same thing about the official story: what type of steel suddenly loses 100% of its strength without being severed by explosives?

Now let's compare the two questions: which is 'more impossible' so to speak?
Click to expand...

You talk a lot of nonsense. Please stop doing that.

You haven't even begun to show evidence of controlled demolition. All you're doing is making strawman arguments, arguments from ignorance etc...

Find us one piece of hard evidence, such as a piece of steel which has signs of a cutter charge (necessary to explain your theory). You don't have it, because it never existed.

Honestly, the signal to noise ratio is bad with you.
 
Miragememories said:
Your ignorance is telling.

The 9/11 Truth Movement's cult's purpose is to raise public awareness to the point that they well apply enough pressure
on the government to bring about a full and proper 9/11 investigation.

MM
Click to expand...

No, the 9/11 "truth" cult's purpose is to shove their laughably preposterous government conspiracy theories down our throats. No investigation would ever satisfy them.
 
ergo said:
doesn't follow. The "truth" "movement", if that's what it must be called,
Click to expand...

It must be called the "truth" cult, for that is what it is.


is obviously seeking the truth about the WTC collapses (among other things), since the two investigations that have been done so far do not provide adequate explanations, and the NIST seems explicitly to be hiding information.
Click to expand...

How many possible truths are there behind the collapses? The buildings either collapsed due to fires and damage (the obvious answer); or they were brought down in a CD (the laughably preposterous answer).

Presenting hypotheses about the collapses is part of that truth-seeking effort. Whether the hypotheses fit or not does not decide the effort "dead". There could be other explanations not yet fully conceived.
Click to expand...

Not really, can you name one other possibility? You don't have to endorse it, just use that infamous truther imagination.
 
alienentity said:
You talk a lot of nonsense. Please stop doing that.

You haven't even begun to show evidence of controlled demolition. All you're doing is making strawman arguments, arguments from ignorance etc...

Find us one piece of hard evidence, such as a piece of steel which has signs of a cutter charge (necessary to explain your theory). You don't have it, because it never existed.

Honestly, the signal to noise ratio is bad with you.
Click to expand...

Do you even know what a straw man is? Where in this thread have I made a straw man?
 
tempesta29 said:
I could say the same thing about the official story: what type of steel suddenly loses 100% of its strength without being severed by explosives?

Now let's compare the two questions: which is 'more impossible' so to speak?
Click to expand...

oops, Straw Man
 
How is that a straw man? In what way did I misrepresent the OP's argument (was there even an argument? Looks like a question to me)?
 
Now give him the benefit of the doubt; I'm sure he can show us where anybody here ever said the "steel suddenly loses 100% of its strength", and show us it isn't a straw man.
 
Monza said:
Strawman. The "official story" says no such thing. In fact, your claim "loses 100% of its strength" makes no sense. You obviously don't understand the basics of material science. The strength properties of steel (stress-strain relationship) vary with temperature, which forms the basis of the failure mode.

Explosives?! Visit your local engineering college; they test the yield and ultimate stress of steel all the time without explosives.
Click to expand...

The NIST report admits that WTC 7 fell at free fall. That is an admission that its columns lost 100% of their load bearing capacity over roughly 8 floors, possibly more.
 
tempesta29 said:
I could say the same thing about the official story: what type of steel suddenly loses 100% of its strength without being severed by explosives?

Now let's compare the two questions: which is 'more impossible' so to speak?
Click to expand...

Did I let the cat out of the bag by saying that?











Well, no, as a matter of fact... I didn't. And neither did anyone else that I know of. So, where did you get this info from?
 
Sabretooth said:
What medium, item, or process can cut structural steel, in multiple places, with precision, that not only is very quiet, but also does not produce a blinding flash of light, is fire-proof, and can be applied without being detected either before, during, or after it's use?
Click to expand...

...and is stable enough to use in a building that will be subjected to unpredictable forces?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom