Brand New CT sub-group: No-Sounders

[Jonnyclueless]

That is a lie. In every video you posted, there were audible demo charges.

You have been caught lying over and over here LC, do you do this because you're a pathological liar, you have no evidence to back up your half-assed theories, or both?

He's never going to get it. The lights are on but there's nobody home. And even forgetting the nonsense he keeps claiming here, he still forgets that there were many of us actually there, and there were absolutely no demolition charges. And even still, he forgets the fact that it would have been impossible to place demolition charges at the point of impact, where the collapse initiated.

I mean we have all seen some people who are truly out there logically, but this guy takes the cake.

 

[SDC]

LC brings up "squibs," now? What is this, "Groundhog Day"?

ETA: that is, he seems to be using "squibs" as evidence for CD. On the other hand, wasn't he advocating demolition by therm*te? Wouldn't that be contradictory?

Sigh. Consistency may be the hobgoblins of little minds, but the reader appreciates it when the author keeps his farshlagginer story straight.

 

[LastChild]

As usual, you lie.

You claimed that the sounds of demo charges would have been inaudible due to the other noises on 9/11, despite the fact that demo charges go off prior to a buildings collapse in a CD.

You made a laughably pathetic attempt to "prove' your point by posting videos of CD's... that clearly had very audible demo charges going off.

Your case lies in tatters, your attempts to resuscitate it have gone from amusing to laughable to pathetic to borderline symptomatic of mental illness.

My bad it was A W Smith who claimed this…

in this you fail badly. In your video example above the windows are far from the explosives and at that distance they only have to muffle widely dispersed sound and pressure waves hitting a small target. Demolition explosives in a closed finished building with intact glazing however are hitting glass thats very close in proximity to the explosive device. The glass will not even survive the pressure wave being that close let alone muffle it.

Evidently this small building in Dallas had more room inside then the WTC did to place the explosives away from the windows and Muff the sound. LOL

And you who claimed this…

All of those have very audible sounds of the demo charges going off, and they're also recorded through a closed window and from far away which greatly deadens the sound coming from outside.

More glass soundproofing?

Then you again who claimed this…

Sometimes when a long (not tall!) building is demolished there are charges that go off sequentially as the building collapses, there's an example in the CNN video linked.

Is sequentially before? LOL

 

[pomeroo]

It's just as much if not more valid then Gravy's cherry-picked videos and opinion. Which is what I am debunking here. Remember?

You are not debunking anything. You are babbling incoherent nonsense.

 

[DavidJames]

I mean we have all seen some people who are truly out there logically, but this guy takes the cake.

Gentlemen, LC doesn't care about 9/11 facts, he's here to jerk the adults around, period. Think of the wrestling with a pig joke (no offense to the pig).

 

[WildCat]

My bad it was A W Smith who claimed this…

No, he didn't. Amd since you're a pathological liar I'll assume you're just lying rather than merely unable to understand what you are reading.

You claimed that demo charges would be inaudible, and posted videos of CD's with audible demo charges.

In fact, you're the only one here claiming a "no sound" controlled demolition. And you've been unable to back it up.

The only way you can prove your case is by presenting a video of a CD in which the demo charges cannot be heard over other noise, and of course you haven't done so and never will.

 

[1337m4n]

Lastchild:

1) Please provide the names of all buildings destroyed by controlled demolition, which collapsed before a single demolition charge went off.

2) Please provide a video of a controlled demolition in which the demolition charges are completely inaudible (not merely quiet).

3) Please explain why no demolition charges are heard in this video:



Why don't I hear charges? Is it the microphone? Is it because it's too tall? Or is it because there are none?

 

[LastChild]

Lastchild:

1) Please provide the names of all buildings destroyed by controlled demolition, which collapsed before a single demolition charge went off.

2) Please provide a video of a controlled demolition in which the demolition charges are completely inaudible (not merely quiet).

3) Please explain why no demolition charges are heard in this video:



Why don't I hear charges? Is it the microphone? Is it because it's too tall? Or is it because there are none?

No more dodging. Please provide all the additional recordings that should have picked up the explosive sounds I linked to. This is the debunker standard.

Or admit you fail.

 

[Drudgewire]

No more dodging.

Oh that's rich.

 

[DGM]

LastChild:
When will you retract your statement that the collapse would mask the explosions? It's obvious you have no intention of backing up this claim.

 

[LastChild]

No, he didn't. Amd since you're a pathological liar I'll assume you're just lying rather than merely unable to understand what you are reading.

You claimed that demo charges would be inaudible, and posted videos of CD's with audible demo charges.

In fact, you're the only one here claiming a "no sound" controlled demolition. And you've been unable to back it up.

The only way you can prove your case is by presenting a video of a CD in which the demo charges cannot be heard over other noise, and of course you haven't done so and never will.

It's your claim they can't even be heard through glass. LOL

Should they be? Different events, different distances, different ambient noises.


An explosion inside a building (especially one where many of the windows are already broken) is still going to be extremely loud when heard outdoors. It (the explosion in another building) won't be nearly as loud from within a building with sealed windows, buildings are usually designed to mute outside noises.

Now stop dodging. Find another recording of my explosions or admit you fail.

 

[1337m4n]

No more dodging.

 

[nicepants]

It's your claim they can't even be heard through glass. LOL

Now I'm laughing. Wildcat made no such claim. There you go again just making up quotes to suit your agenda.

 

[WildCat]

It's your claim they can't even be heard through glass. LOL

Another lie!

Sometimes, you have to lie for THE TRUTH!

When will you be backing up your claim that the sound of demo charges going off can be masked by other sounds? Or will you be retracting that claim?

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

It's your claim they can't even be heard through glass. LOL

Whhhooooaaaaa...

Either LastChild is going for the gold in Internet Trolling, or Gravy's video quite literally broke LC's brain.

And the video you attempted to post unsuccessfully was recorded indoors through a closed window. And you can still bear the demo charges!

All of those have very audible sounds of the demo charges going off, and they're also recorded through a closed window and from far away which greatly deadens the sound coming from outside.

You failed, LastChild. Your memory is poor, your research abilities are laughable, and your critical thinking skills are negligible. There's no shame in accepting and admitting that, but there is plenty of shame in what you're doing, even if you can't see it yourself.

 

[Stout]

Either going for trolling gold, or what we could be seeing here is a truther crisis of faith. Seems to me that you have one camp, or belief, that the towers were a typical CD job, a la Loose Change. The other is the silent, or lesser quantity explosives, a la Stephen Jones.

It's like there's two opposing truther prophets and the question is more...

Who to follow ?

When truther Pilgrims eventually colonize Mars, I wonder what their holy book will say ?

 

[A W Smith]

My bad it was A W Smith who claimed this…

In your video example above the windows are far from the explosives and at that distance they only have to muffle widely dispersed sound and pressure waves hitting a small target. Demolition explosives in a closed finished building with intact glazing however are hitting glass thats very close in proximity to the explosive device. The glass will not even survive the pressure wave being that close let alone muffle it.

Evidently this small building in Dallas had more room inside then the WTC did to place the explosives away from the windows and Muff the sound.
LOL

You cant even comprehend what you are reading. i was referring to the glass the observers were watching the CD from moron,.

 

[LastChild]

You cant even comprehend what you are reading. i was referring to the glass the observers were watching the CD from moron,.

Well if that's what you meant then I can only say that trying to decipher your babbling gibberish is like trying to pick out explosive sounds over the sound of a collapsing 110 story building.

In the end its still just glass between the demolition charges and the microphone that you are claiming is muffling the sound.

 

[chillzero]

No more name calling. Please keep it civil and polite, or the thread will go to moderated status.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero