Debunker says what?

[FineWine]

Which demolition experts?

The Loizeaux family, the Protec people, Bouhouris, Inc., Vaccaro Construction, Bergen Electric & Demolition Company, Inc., Brandenburg Industrial Service Co., Jersey Shore Demolition, Bluegrass Companies, A-1 Affordable Construction Company, EJB Global Services, Cutting Technologies, Demolition Consultants, D.H. Griffin Companies, Robinette Demolition--this is fun. I just copy from an old thread.

As you know, your insane movement's poster boys--Hugo Bachmann, Jorgen Schneider, and Danny Jowenko-- all agree that the collapses of the towers don't resemble controlled demolitions.

Demolition experts who swallow your idiocy are nonexistent.

 

[Homeland Insurgency]

The Loizeaux family, the Protec people, Bouhouris, Inc., Vaccaro Construction, Bergen Electric & Demolition Company, Inc., Brandenburg Industrial Service Co., Jersey Shore Demolition, Bluegrass Companies, A-1 Affordable Construction Company, EJB Global Services, Cutting Technologies, Demolition Consultants, D.H. Griffin Companies, Robinette Demolition--this is fun. I just copy from an old thread.

As you know, your insane movement's poster boys--Hugo Bachmann, Jorgen Schneider, and Danny Jowenko-- all agree that the collapses of the towers don't resemble controlled demolitions.

Demolition experts who swallow your idiocy are nonexistent.

I notice you are not posting any statements from any of them. I wonder why? lol

And please I use a Loizeaux right in this thread to discredit the likes of you.

You have nothing. What does Danny Jowenko say about WTC-7 btw? Is he not an expert in your book? Do the experts have a consensus or not?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2319605&postcount=67

lol

 

[HeyLeroy]

Say whaaa...?

According to your story one hour and no explosives at all are needed to demolish a skyscraper.

Or is it tons and tons of explosives and months of preparation?

Some people need to make up their mind.

The towers were hit with gigantic molotov cocktails filled with kerosene and, yes, people.

If you're to continue with the mindless 'hidden explosives' drivel, please feel free to take a swing at some questions: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2311113&postcount=2

 

[dtugg]

And please I use a Loizeaux right in this thread to discredit the likes of you.

Do you actually believe your own lies, liar? She said they use the smallest amount necessary. So? Rational people realize that the smallest amount neccesary doesn't mean a small amount, especially for buildings much larger than have ever been destroyed using explosives.

 

[The Platypus]

I notice you are not posting any statements from any of them. I wonder why? lol

And please I use a Loizeaux right in this thread to discredit the likes of you.

You have nothing. What does Danny Jowenko say about WTC-7 btw? Is he not an expert in your book? Do the experts have a consensus or not?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2319605&postcount=67

lol

Gee, like nobody will notice how you just played the "move the goal posts" game again.

 

[~enigma~]

And please I use a Loizeaux right in this thread to discredit the likes of you.

I spoke to Stacy Loiseaux 2 years ago and would gladly tell you what she said about the subterranean morons know as the truth movement but the MA forbids me from using such language but the gist of it was you guys are wrong and show such disrespect for human life that she would be glad to see you living on Europa where the world is made of ice just like your blood is.

 

[FineWine]

I notice you are not posting any statements from any of them. I wonder why? lol

And please I use a Loizeaux right in this thread to discredit the likes of you.

You have nothing. What does Danny Jowenko say about WTC-7 btw? Is he not an expert in your book? Do the experts have a consensus or not?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2319605&postcount=67

lol

You are using Stacey Loizeaux, a person who despises you ridiculous frauds. She has totally destroyed your lunatic myths about demolition. How on earth can anything Stacey Loizeaux says discredit the sane side? You were caught lying about her meaning. She stated that many tons of explosives would be required and no demolition company has ever attempted a job so formidable.

You may be ill, but even you must confront harsh realities occasionally.

No, Danny Jowenko has never demolished a tall building. His expertise doesn't begin to compare with, say, the Loizeaux family or Ron Dokell.

You "wonder" why I'm not posting statements from the companies cited in the old thread? No, you don't wonder at all. They all say the same thing--as you know. If you really "wondered," you'd call a few of them. But, you're a "truther." You never ever do anything.

 

[FineWine]

We were talking about consensus and from what I already posted of Stacy Loizeaux and her opinion from BEFORE 9/11 some people couldn't have picked a worse name to bring up to make their case.

Typical pretend debunking. Good job.

Is this your Ultima1 impression? Remember how you were behaving before your ugly meltdown on the serial numbers thread?

Let's go slowly...

Stacey Loizeaux is an expert in demolition.

She hates you frauds for your dishonesty, your stupidity, and for your obscene disrespect toward the victims of the terrorists you enable.

She has stated in interviews before and after 9/11 that the goal of a demolition company is to control the collapse by using the smallest amount of explosives necessary to do the job.

She estimated the amount of explosives necessary to take down the towers as "many tons."

She stated that prepping such an enormous building would involve teams of demolition professionals working for months.


You CANNOT POSSIBLY derive any comfort from Stacey Loizeaux. She loathes your insane movement. Nothing she has ever said helps you one iota.

Stop this madness.

 

[johnny karate]

You made the baseless accusation.

Your words are right there for everyone to see.

 

[Disenchanted]

What does that mean? Her post 9/11 opinion is slanted?

Why would her view be slanted? Maybe she holds people like you in contempt for things like misrepresenting what she said, as you have done in this thread.

jeeez... don't have an aneurysm. And yeah it does contradict. Sorry.

What contradiction? The smallest amount needed would be tons of explosives.

 

[Reactor drone]

Video of investigator getting through security.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2009/07/08/VI2009070802941.html

As you've already stated that you don't know what happened on 9/11 what do you think this has to do with the events on that day?

Seems like a completely unrelated story to me and therefore off topic in the 9/11 sub forum....unless you believe that 9/11 somehow involved bombs being smuggled into buildings.

 

[triforcharity]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/kaboom/loizeaux.html

NOVA: I understand that you try to use the smallest amount of explosives possible.

SL: Right.

NOVA: Can you explain why?

SL: Well, the explosives are really just the catalyst. Largely what we use is gravity. And we're dealing with Class A explosives that are embedded into concrete—and that concrete flies. So, let's say your explosive is 17,000 feet per second—you've got a piece of concrete moving at that speed when you remove it from the structure. So we try to use the minimal amount to keep down the fly of debris for a safe operation. Other than that, it comes down to cost effectiveness. You know, the more holes you have to drill, it's more labor, more time, and it's more expensive. So, obviously, the smallest amount of work is best.

KABOOM!

lol

Concrete structure V steel framed structure. So now your saying that someone DRILLED HOLES into the floors and such to cause this?? This is assinine at best. It didn't happen. Plus, there was very little concrete in WTC than in other buildings.

Go play with your crayons son.

 

[Corsair 115]

Oh stop with the jet fuel and 500 mph crap already.

You are aware that the kinetic energy alone involved in the impact of each jet into each of the respective WTC towers was the equivalent of a 2,000 lb bomb, aren't you? Do you think a 2,000 lb bomb strike on a building might cause some significant structural damage?

You need not believe me in terms of the TNT equivalent of the kinetic energy involved; you could do the calculations yourself. But you need not do so, because forum member X has already performed the calculations in this post.

He arrived at figures of 549.7 kg of TNT equivalent for the first impact and 764.8 kg of TNT for the second. That converts to 1,212 lbs and 1,686 lbs of TNT, respectively. The U.S. Mk 84 GP 2,000 lb bomb has a warhead containing 945 lbs (429 kg) of high explosive. So, in other words, each of the WTC towers was hit by the equivalent of a bomb more powerful than the Mk 84. For simplicity's sake, however, call each impact the equivalent of a 2,000 lb bomb hit.

Of course, Homeland Insurgency is also the same fellow who, in this thread asked the following:

Didn't kamikazes also pack the nose of their planes with explosives?

How single-engined aircraft like the Zero, Oscar, Kate, Val, or Judy used for a kamikaze attack would replace its engine in the nose with a bomb and then go on its mission is something of a mystery...

 

[Baylor]

Homeland doesn't exactly pride himself with his vast knowledge of physics. His reading comprehension skills aren't that great either. If it's not a YouTube video you're not going to get through to him. But maybe, just maybe he might be able to understand this.

 

[triforcharity]

I bet if Chuck Norris did a round house onto the 100th floor, it would bring the whole thing down. And it would fall in 5 seconds. FAASTER THAN FREEFALL!!!

Can we put that on the scale you just posted???

 

[MIKILLINI]

Say whaaa...?

According to your story one hour and no explosives at all are needed to demolish a skyscraper.

Investigations had been carried out and conclusions made to determine the catalyst that caused the WTC buildings to collapse. Those initial investigations and future subsequent ones have not come up with anything of significance that would overshadow the already known evidence. Did you miss this?

Or is it tons and tons of explosives and months of preparation?

That's the truther claim: David Ray Griffith, Steven Jones, Alex Jones, etc.

Some people need to make up their mind.

People like you, for instance.

 

[doobiedoright]

http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Briefs/4884.htm

One of the most alarming attributes of TATP is that it cannot be detected by bomb-sniffing dogs, making it easier to smuggle into airports and onto airplanes. It is also very easy to synthesize in clandestine labs, using readily available chemicals.

Say whaaa....?

lol

I dont think you will find many people willing to run around with this very unstable explosive!

There are currently not any k9's trained to detect this compound,however that may not be the case 6 months from now.
It would not take much to train for this compound as well!
Just goes to show you have no clue what your talking about!
Training can be towards any scent known to man..........you lose!

 

[triforcharity]

I don't claim to know the government or Interpol were behind 9/11 and never said as much.

I claim debunkers don't know what happened on 9/11 anymore then I do they just pretend they do.

Now I just wonder why someone would lie about what I said to support their faith. Bitter?

Why not quote me?

Ok HI, here you go, I am quoting you directly from Page nine.

I was there. You were not. I, by default, know vastly more than you do about 9/11. If you were in NYC, I would still know more about 9/11 than you do. I worked that site every day for 17 days straight, took one day off, then went back to GZ for another 42 days. I took other people's shifts so they could attend funerals I wasn't able to attend. (IE: Out of town)

Now, what would you like to discuss. I would love to hear this.

PS, you should start a new thread, as it would be off topic. Put up or shut up.

 

[Baylor]

This is the same person who compared a skyscraper to a barbecue. We don't need to point out that he's wrong. It's understood that he's wrong just like it's understood the crazy street preacher is crazy. Let the troll starve to death. Or at the very least, start replying to his posts when he learns the difference between then and than.

 

[beachnut]

How does that fairytale go again? You know, the one about how explosives could never have gotten close to the WTC because of all the security and people who would have witnessed it?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/08/national/main5143545.shtml?tag=stack

Bomb Materials Smuggled into Fed Buildings

Whaaa...?

How did that happen?

Gee whiz, why are there zero noises of explosives on 911?

Failure comes in many ways when you lack knowledge, evidence, facts, logic, sound judgment, and rational thinking; why do you fail to understand 911? After 7 years why have you not earned an engineering degree so you would not be fooled by idiots who spew the same ideas you have on 911?