Debunker says what?

[Grizzly Bear]

[qimg]http://i625.photobucket.com/albums/tt332/JREFImages/dB.jpg[/qimg]

In laymen terms that's loud enough to completely devastate a person's eardrums, incurring either temporary or permanent hearing loss.

 

[Homeland Insurgency]

I know you aren't the sharpest tool in the shed so I'll make this as simple as possible: They weren't recorded on any videos because they weren't loud enough. Therefore they couldn't have been explosives because explosives make very louds sounds which would have been recorded and heard by everybody in the lower Manhattan area. I hope this clears up any issues that you may have. I doubt it though, you have proven time and time again that you are unable to understand very simple concepts.

Thanks for the attempted debunking.

Debunker: "Only OUR explosions can be hush-a booms you crazy moonbat Twoofer!"

Congratulations debunkers. I think you've all come full circle.

lol

 

[Baylor]

Thanks for the attempted debunking.

Debunker: "Only OUR explosions can be hush-a booms you crazy moonbat Twoofer!"

Congratulations debunkers. I think you've all come full circle.

lol

Because ours don't have to cut a steel box column

 

[dtugg]

Thanks for the attempted debunking.

Debunker: "Only OUR explosions can be hush-a booms you crazy moonbat Twoofer!"

Congratulations debunkers. I think you've all come full circle.

lol

Shockingly, you missed the point entirely and came up with a totally incoherent response.

Even simpler:

Explosions or sounds described as explosions are not always created by explosives.
Explosions created by explosives are always extremely loud.
Therefore, any explosions or sounds described as explosions that are not extremely loud (ie not heard by everybody within a mile and recorded on video cameras) were not created by explosives.

Are you really unable to understand this very simple concept or are you just pretending not to for your trolling puproses? I honestly cannot tell.

 

[triforcharity]

Justin, you like my new avaatar?? Cool eh????

 

[Gaspode]

Some posts moved to AAH.

Back on topic please. And keep it civil.

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

 

[Stellafane]

Justin, you like my new avaatar?? Cool eh????

Outstanding avatar -- only coming up short of perfection by neglecting to also include "2007."

 

[Justin39640]

Justin, you like my new avaatar?? Cool eh????

hehe i was gonna make a rebuttal avatar but there was no room for the interlocking NY with all those years

 

[triforcharity]

Stella,

I borrowed it from a website that is pretty cool. This guy tells it how it is.

www.m4040.com I believe. He's an engineer, and he thinks the truthers are scum. Go figure!!

Justin, har har har, Touche sir. Touche.

 

[Disenchanted]

Thanks for the attempted debunking.

Debunker: "Only OUR explosions can be hush-a booms you crazy moonbat Twoofer!"

Congratulations debunkers. I think you've all come full circle.

lol

It is your misrepresenting what debunkers are saying that has come full circle. Why do you continue to lie about what debunkers mean by hush-a-booms?

Questions you have so far ignored:

If the explosions were from bombs why were they not heard by more people from outside?

Why did the producers of truther videos need to add fake explosion sounds to their videos?

 

[johnny karate]

How about this, I'll rephrase the question:

Do you believe an explosion witnessed on 9/11 was most likely caused by bombs, or the "natural phenomena" of a collapsing skyscraper?

Bump for deep44.

 

[bio]

Shockingly, you missed the point entirely and came up with a totally incoherent response.

Even simpler:

Explosions or sounds described as explosions are not always created by explosives.
Explosions created by explosives are always extremely loud.
Therefore, any explosions or sounds described as explosions that are not extremely loud (ie not heard by everybody within a mile and recorded on video cameras) were not created by explosives.

Are you really unable to understand this very simple concept or are you just pretending not to for your trolling puproses? I honestly cannot tell.

Do you just want to say us, that an explosion does not necessarily need be caused by explosives? If yes - you are right.

 

[BigAl]

What do you want? You debunk yourself into nonsense.

When there is an explosion, then we hear an explosion.
When a skyscraper collapse, then we hear a skycraper collapsing.

And what we have on the audio tracks of from the many video cameras are the sounds of skyscrapers collapsing.

 

[bio]

And what we have on the audio tracks of from the many video cameras are the sounds of skyscrapers collapsing.

of course, but there are also witness accounts of explosions "like a bomb" and recorded sounds of explosions, which -could be caused by bombs-.

 

[stateofgrace]

What do you want? You debunk yourself into nonsense.

When there is an explosion, then we hear an explosion.
When a skyscraper collapse, then we hear a skycraper collapsing.

And when there is an earthquake, then we hear an earthquake, right?
Oh wait.............

Sounded like loud explosion, off in distance
Sounded like loud explosion, nearby.
Sounded like loud explosion
The first sound is low and muffled, followed by a big BOOM
Like an explosion

http://facstaff.gpc.edu/~pgore/daculaquakedata.html

( which could have been caused by bombs )

 

[dtugg]

of course, but there are also witness accounts of explosions "like a bomb" and recorded sounds of explosions, which -could be caused by bombs-.

There were no recorded sounds of explosions.

 

[Homeland Insurgency]

There were no recorded sounds of explosions.

There were plenty of explosions reported by witnesses. More than can just be accounted for by the initial crashes. Debunkers will then claim to know what the explosions were or weren't. Regardless of what the were or weren't debunkers don't have any recordings either.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

of course, but there are also witness accounts of explosions "like a bomb" and recorded sounds of explosions, which -could be caused by bombs-.

Similes and metaphors aren't evidence of anything other than proof that someone knows how to use similes and metaphors.

 

[BigAl]

There were plenty of explosions reported by witnesses. More then can just be accounted by the initial crashes. Debunkers will then claim to know what the explosions were or weren't. Regardless of what the were or weren't debunkers don't have any recordings either.

Nobody at WTC said they witnessed man-made demolition except as a metaphor or in reference to the 1993 bombing.

 

[Homeland Insurgency]

"The Scott cylinders and the oxygen cylinders were all letting go. They were blowing up left and right."
FDNY Firefighter Todd Heaney on 9/11 (FDNY oral testimony transcripts)"

Left and right but no recordings? I don't believe him.