At this point I'm only responding to show how ridiculous your arguments really are.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1zED8dy63w
Listen to the firefighters. Do you think the jumpers caused the entire lobby to collapse on the firefighters? Seriously, why do you even bother posting your nonsense?
None of them saw explosives. If they had been in a lobby and explosive had gone off that collapsed the lobby, none of them would have been there to talk about it. You know what actually happened? They were in the lobby when WTC2 collapsed.
Don't believe it? They speak of 3 explosions. They note the first was Flight 175 hitting WTC 2, the third was WTC 1 collapsing. What do you think number 2 was?
LOL. They were supposed to investigate the collapse. If they didn't test for explosives, or if no one else did, then it just proves massive incompetence at multiple levels.
No they weren't meant to investigate the collapse, they were tasked to do a more indepth study into the collapse initiation. As to the High-lighted part, why do you keep ignoring what you are told? The NYPD and FBI using over 55 teams of over 12,000 people, a total of over 40,000 when you add in the other groups, investigated the collapses as a crime, and they looked for traces of explosives and found none. ARE YOU CLAIMING THAT THE FBI AND NYPD ARE IN ON IT, OR THAT THEY ARE INCOMPETENT?
The fact that no one tested for explosives is not proof they did not exist.
Learn to read. The FBI and NYPD tested and searched the rubble and found nothing. They were the ones responsible for the initial criminal investigations. NIST was not and never was.
The testimony of the people who were there indicates that explosives were used. You simply refuse to listen to the people who where there. Go ahead, mock them. That is what you are doing.
No, the testimony of these people indicates that they heard and experienced things that they assumed were explosions. This in itself is NOT evidence of explosives, especially in the absence of real physical evidence such as explosive damaged steel, chemical residues, explosions heard over the greater part of NYC when the collapses occurred, and the remains of the explosives in the rubble, which thousands of people. most of them Cops, Fire crews and demolition experts all would have seen these things and subsequently have remained totally silent about.
This argument wins for most absurd argument of the day. People heard explosions. The evidence is there.
People heard what they
believed to be explosions. These are two decidedly different things. And that's before getting to actual explosions still don't prove Explosives as many things can explode in a fire, as evidenced above.
I can't even respond. How can you ignore what you don't test for?
Apparently the same way you ignore every investigation before NISTs
Let me use an analogy
A plane crashes. The FBI, Police and NTSB all investigate it. The Police says, after examining the wreckage we found no evidence of foul play. The FBI says, after checking the wreckage we can find no signs of explosives or physical damage inconsistent with a crash. The NTSB says After studying the wreckage and the FDR we have determined that the plane suffered a lose of control which the pilots were unable to correct, resulting in the plane going into an irrecoverable stall, before falling into a steep dive and crashing.
Now the Airline and the Pilot's association comes along as says "Look, we're a bit worried that there might be something wrong with these planes, can we get a more in depth investigation?"
Thus NIST comes along and after studying it says. "The plane suffered icing in the Pitot tubes causing the Auto Pilot to believe that the planes air speed had dropped and so it put the plane into a climb. The Pilots failed to understand the problem and when they tried to recover airspeed the indicators were telling them a false reading resulting in them putting the plane is to steep dive they could not pull out from."
Now a Conspriacy theorist comes along and declares that because NIST didn't investigate the possibility of the plane being shot down by a missile, they didn't do their job right.
This is the same thing you are doing. The FBI and Police did an extensive criminal investigation into 9/11 and part of that was the testing of steel for residues and seeking out any steel that could tell them or those working with them what happened. No physical evidence of explosives was found. That trumps everything, unless you are going to start claiming that it was magical explosives that exploded so quietly that only those right next to the building heard them, and they did so without leaving any traces on the building remains.
If so, what use is a new investigation, it's going to find exactly what the old ones did.
