• 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.

Gravity defying buildings? :D

bardamu said:
The evidence is the fact that 58 steel columns helped the roof to defy gravity for over 14 years, then in the space of a few hundred milliseconds, all 58 were totally overwhelmed by the same gravity
Click to expand...

Another twoofer, another pack of lies.

It wasn't a few hundred milliseconds, Bard. It was actually more than 7 hours of uninterrupted fire.
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
It is curious though, as to why you are obsessive over whether it looks like a CD or not because orbital laser cannons are never used in controlled demolitions.
Click to expand...

Orbital laser cannons have never been used because a box of matches is cheaper and just as effective.
 
9/11 Chewy Defense said:
Never been used = never existed!

Bard, lay off the Star Wars movies for a while!
Click to expand...

Do you agree that, if NIST's "probable collapse sequence" is correct, then somebody with knowledge of WTC 7's design flaws could have brought the building down in exactly the same way using nothing more than a box of matches?
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
Another twoofer, another pack of lies.

It wasn't a few hundred milliseconds, Bard. It was actually more than 7 hours of uninterrupted fire.
Click to expand...

The 58 perimeter columns were resisting gravity right up to the kinking of the roofline, which occurred a few hundred milliseconds before the entire perimeter collapsed.
 
bardamu said:
Do you agree that, if NIST's "probable collapse sequence" is correct, then somebody with knowledge of WTC 7's design flaws could have brought the building down in exactly the same way using nothing more than a box of matches?
Click to expand...

Bard, here's a question that you probably won't answer:

Would you, Bard, run into a burning building with several floors on fire & plant explosives inside the still burning building?

Fire causes explosives to explode! Would anyone be dumb or crazy enough to send teams of people into WTC7, with explosives, while it's on fire? No, it's not possible unless you want to get blown to hell in the process of planting explosives.
 
bardamu said:
The 58 perimeter columns were resisting gravity right up to the kinking of the roofline, which occurred a few hundred milliseconds before the entire perimeter collapsed.
Click to expand...

Doesn't prove anything about explosives being used. Now what's your other great white lie you want to push on us?
 
9/11 Chewy Defense said:
Bard, here's a question that you probably won't answer:

Would you, Bard, run into a burning building with several floors on fire & plant explosives inside the still burning building?
Click to expand...

No, I would never do that!


9/11 Chewy Defense said:
Fire causes explosives to explode! Would anyone be dumb or crazy enough to send teams of people into WTC7, with explosives, while it's on fire? No, it's not possible unless you want to get blown to hell in the process of planting explosives.
Click to expand...

My question was about matches, not explosives.Could somebody familiar with the design flaws have brought the building down by lighting fires in some of the offices? Are you going to answer the question?
 
bardamu said:
My question was about matches, not explosives.Could somebody familiar with the design flaws have brought the building down by lighting fires in some of the offices? Are you going to answer the question?
Click to expand...

Why would "they" bother...the collapse of WTC1 did it for them...:confused:
 
bardamu said:
No, I would never do that!




My question was about matches, not explosives.Could somebody familiar with the design flaws have brought the building down by lighting fires in some of the offices? Are you going to answer the question?
Click to expand...


If you turn off all fire systems and break some windows all over and keep all fire fighting efforts to zero, you can light a fire and destroy, total a building. I know of many buildings that have fires that were fought and they were totaled anyway. Only 911 truth is dumb enough to avoid using reality based evidence and make up the lies you fail to support.

What design flaws?

Are you now saying WTC towers started the fires on purpose to bring down WTC 7? We know there were zero explosives and no thermite, so you are now blaming WTC towers for breaking windows to feed the fire air, and starting the fires in 7?
 
Last edited:
bardamu said:
Do you agree that, if NIST's "probable collapse sequence" is correct, then somebody with knowledge of WTC 7's design flaws could have brought the building down in exactly the same way using nothing more than a box of matches?
Click to expand...

If they disabled the sprinkler systems and kept the firefighters away from the building, possibly.
 
bardamu said:
Orbital laser cannons have never been used because a box of matches is cheaper and just as effective.
Click to expand...

And when has a major skyscraper ever been destroyed by a book of matches?

I know of two that were destroyed buy 757's (130 million USD each) and and another that was destroyed by a skyscraper twice its size falling on it (2 billion?).

I hardly think any demolition firm is going to be pulling a profit working like that though.
 
bardamu said:
The 58 perimeter columns were resisting gravity right up to the kinking of the roofline, which occurred a few hundred milliseconds before the entire perimeter collapsed.
Click to expand...

It was a progressive failure. This has been explained to you before.
 
bardamu said:
No, I would never do that!

My question was about matches, not explosives.Could somebody familiar with the design flaws have brought the building down by lighting fires in some of the offices? Are you going to answer the question?
Click to expand...

So you wouldn't run into a burning building with explosives strapped on you. So that means that a CD never occured in WTC7 if that never happened. I rest my case!

WTC1 was a pretty big "match" to start all those fires on several floors in WTC7. Question answered!
 
9/11 Chewy Defense said:
So you wouldn't run into a burning building with explosives strapped on you. So that means that a CD never occured in WTC7 if that never happened. I rest my case!
Click to expand...

I'm pretty confident bardamu wouldn't fly a jetliner into a building either. Would that then disprove the terrorists flying jetliners into the WTC towers? And if so then it would prove the other nut theories, like drone airplanes, missiles, CGI collisions and of course CDs.
 
Garb said:
If they disabled the sprinkler systems and kept the firefighters away from the building, possibly.
Click to expand...

So randomly-started office fires would "probably" bring the building down exactly the way we see in the videos, but office fires targeting the structure's weak points only "possibly"?
 
9/11 Chewy Defense said:
So you wouldn't run into a burning building with explosives strapped on you. So that means that a CD never occured in WTC7 if that never happened. I rest my case!
Click to expand...

If I'm ever accused of taking part in a terrorist attack, I'll hire you as my lawyer!


9/11 Chewy Defense said:
WTC1 was a pretty big "match" to start all those fires on several floors in WTC7. Question answered!
Click to expand...

It was a match that accidently started fires in all the right places.
 
Miragememories said:
Idiocy was on the rise maybe?

There is no evidence that supports the possibility of any fire ever resulting in the complete, symmetrical, high speed collapse of a modern steel structure like WTC7.

On the other hand, there is ample evidence to show that controlled demolitions could easily achieve the type of collapse that was observed
with WTC7.

I believe Occam would clearly see where to stick his razor.

MM
Click to expand...

I would think you need to learn the definition of this word, BEFORE you use it, as it is COMPLETLY wrong in this context.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom