• 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.

Anti-semitism and 911 truth - "like two pees in a pod"

twinstead said:
2 hours? Wow. I didn't realize Alex made that expert determination so soon after the collapses.
Click to expand...

there are only two ways someone can claim to know how and why the wtc buildings collapsed, after 2 hours:

a. pure unscientific opinion, unrelated to any analysis of the evidence and consultation with the experts in the related fields.

b. they has inside information.
 
parky76 said:
no, please.....do tell us what you were going to say.

i am sure it was polite and civil. I am sure it was mature and held to the highest standards of debate.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't matter, honestly. It is a waste of time trying to get a high standard of debate in this thread. I am a bit busy with pm's at the moment anyway....
 
parky76 said:
there are only two ways someone can claim to know how and why the wtc buildings collapsed, after 2 hours:

a. pure unscientific opinion, unrelated to any analysis of the evidence and consultation with the experts in the related fields.

b. they has inside information.
Click to expand...

Yet people seemed to know 7 would collapse BEFORE it did!

And then for the next 7 years, debunkers claimed to know what had caused the collapse even though NIST hadn't released their report yet.
 
RedIbis said:
Other than Gravy, who still asserts this ridiculous hypothesis?
Click to expand...

Noone. In fact NIST had rejected the diesel fuel hypothesis over a year before the final report came out. Yet people here stuck to it because it sounded sciencey and stuff.

I assume you have seen the 10 storey hole thread. Pure entertainment.
 
vinniem said:
Noone. In fact NIST had rejected the diesel fuel hypothesis over a year before the final report came out. Yet people here stuck to it because it sounded sciencey and stuff.

I assume you have seen the 10 storey hole thread. Pure entertainment.
Click to expand...

It was definitely more plausible than a covert controlled demolition.
 
Pardalis said:
Doesn't that give you a hint of how unstable the building was?
Click to expand...

Unstable does not mean imminent collapse. An unstable building could take days before an eventual collapse. The people on the scene were totally convinced of an imminent major collapse. That is at odds with the fact that NIST years to come to the conclusion that expansion had caused column 79 to fail.
 
vinniem said:
Unstable does not mean imminent collapse. An unstable building could take days before an eventual collapse. The people on the scene were totally convinced of an imminent major collapse.
Click to expand...

Well they just had witnessed two of the world's largest skyscrapers do the same, allow them some benefit of the doubt.

That is at odds with the fact that NIST years to come to the conclusion that expansion had caused column 79 to fail.
Click to expand...
No it's not, the fact that it took a long time to analyze the collapse has nothing to do with the initial reports of its imminent collapse.

It took years because most of the resources and time was spent on the collapse of the two towers, and the rest of the investigations. The collapse of WTC 7 was a relatively unimportant event.
 
Pardalis said:
Then we'll have to agree to disagree. We seem to be living in two completely different realities.
Click to expand...

Why the hyperbole? Disagreement does not mean different realities. You really do seem to believe that people like me are irrational and "woo woos". It couldn't be further from the truth. I have no belief in anything paranormal, supernatural or religious. I have a very good education in science and I am very much grounded in reality. Of course, you won't believe that.

It takes a major leap of faith to believe that 3 huge buildings collapsed completely on the same day due to fire. Especially when one of those buildings was not hit by a plane and had a completely different construction to the other 2.
 
vinniem said:
It takes a major leap of faith to believe that 3 huge buildings collapsed completely on the same day due to fire.
Click to expand...

It wasn't just fire. The two towers had their fireproofing disloged by the impact, and the WTC7 fires were unfought.

Especially when one of those buildings was not hit by a plane and had a completely different construction to the other 2.
Click to expand...
WTC 7was a working office building, with hundreds of tenants. On 9/11, it was engulfed in flames.

Tell me at what time could "they" have had the time to plant explosives?
 
vinniem said:
I have a very good education in science and I am very much grounded in reality. Of course, you won't believe that.
Click to expand...
If the above were actually true, you would never have said this...
vinniem said:
It takes a major leap of faith to believe that 3 huge buildings collapsed completely on the same day due to fire. Especially when one of those buildings was not hit by a plane and had a completely different construction to the other 2.
Click to expand...
Since you brought up your education...

Please provide specific details regarding your education and/or experience which enables you to make the comments in the 2nd quote above.
 
Pardalis said:
It wasn't just fire. The two towers had their fireproofing disloged by the impact, and the WTC7 fires were unfought.
Click to expand...

You know the fireproofing was dislodged, how? Because nist fired some shotgun pellets at some squares of fireproofing? It is just a hypothesis, completely unproven. Even if all the fireproofing was missing, we know that the temperatures were not enough to cause what we saw. The floor assemblies in the NIST tests only deformed by 3 inches.

WTC 7was a working office building, with hundreds of tenants. On 9/11, it was engulfed in flames.

Tell me at what time could "they" have had the time to plant explosives?
Click to expand...

Engulfed is a bit of an exaggeration. There were modest fires on a total of 15 floors, not all at the same time.

When, or if, "they" planted explosives is not the point. The official story needs to prove that thermal expansion causing column 79's failure could explain what we saw.
 
vinniem said:
You know the fireproofing was dislodged, how?
Click to expand...

Read the NIST reports.

Engulfed is a bit of an exaggeration. There were modest fires on a total of 15 floors, not all at the same time.
Click to expand...

Doesn't answer my question.

When, or if, "they" planted explosives is not the point. The official story needs to prove that thermal expansion causing column 79's failure could explain what we saw.
Click to expand...

Doesn't answer my question. You're off to a bad start.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom