Metatheory and the NIST report

[T.A.M.]

"Evidence for demolition of WTC 7 is nil?" ...........Did it not look similar to a building that has been demolished by CD?

If I look out my window and the world around me looks flat, is this proof the world is in fact flat, rather than the gigantic sphere we know it to be?

TAM

 

[TerryUK]

No bombs were found, no bombs were heard, no bombs detected, there was no opportunity to plant bombs beforehand, there was no reason to bomb the building, etc.

Bombs? why bombs?
I'm absolutely certain there are methods to sever or weaken steel sections, using devices other than conventional explosives.
So, as to the supposed absence of the sound of loud explosions, this in no way means CD was impossible.

If anyone can show examples of other building collapses which were not CD, but looked like CD, then I would reconsider my viewpoint on this.
Or alternatively , give a credible explanation of any collapse mechanism which would look exactly like CD, but without being CD.
It's clear that there had to be a failure of the weight supporting columns, across the entire >300ft horizontal width of the building, and it had to be pretty much simultaneous. I don't believe this could happen without CD.

 

[Rich M]

ooh, lookee, an argument from incredulity!

Those are always fun.

 

[TerryUK]

If I look out my window and the world around me looks flat, is this proof the world is in fact flat, rather than the gigantic sphere we know it to be?

TAM

"Ladies and gentlemen, let's have a big round of applause for..... TAM!
Thankyou, TAM. And now, for our next act, ladies and gentlemen, I'd like you to give a big, big welcome to ... hmm.?

edit :no offense TAM

 

[GlennB]

... and it had to be pretty much simultaneous. I don't believe this could happen without CD.

You need to speak to Christopher7. He claims the 'long' ends of WTC7 were detonated several seconds early in order to arrange a neat collapse.

And this, TerryUK, is the 9/11 sceptic quandry. You folks make diametrically opposing claims in support of the CT.

Why can't you all get together - maybe call a stonking great Convention?? - and sort out exactly what your story is ???

 

[wooooody64]

If I look out my window and the world around me looks flat, is this proof the world is in fact flat, rather than the gigantic sphere we know it to be?

TAM

Could you show conclusive proof of either?

 

[TerryUK]

You need to speak to Christopher7. He claims the 'long' ends of WTC7 were detonated several seconds early in order to arrange a neat collapse.

And this, TerryUK, is the 9/11 sceptic quandry. You folks make diametrically opposing claims in support of the CT.

"a few seconds" ... so for you, that = "diametrically opposing claims"

No wonder you don't really understand things

Why can't you all get together - maybe call a stonking great Convention?? - and sort out exactly what your story is ???

Maybe because 'we' don't have to do that - we are not trying to hide anything, just trying to tell things as we see them.
Some of you guys, on the other hand, are trying to defeat the truth IMO

 

[GlennB]

"a few seconds" ... so for you, that = "diametrically opposing claims"

No wonder you don't really understand things

Several seconds.

Learn to read.

 

[David Wong]

Bombs? why bombs?
It's clear that there had to be a failure of the weight supporting columns, across the entire >300ft horizontal width of the building, and it had to be pretty much simultaneous. I don't believe this could happen without CD.

How do you account for the many thousands of experts who have actually examined the collapse who disagree? Each of them much much much much much much much more educated and experienced on the subject than you?

Come on, we're going back in time here. The discussion has advanced beyond this. Other people have done the research. You just refuse to read it, then complain that your lack of reading has left you unconvinced. Well, read. It's not our fault you won't put any effort into this.

 

[Gravy]

"Evidence for demolition of WTC 7 is nil?" ...........Did it not look similar to a building that has been demolished by CD?

Not to me, or to the explosives demolitions experts who were right there when it collapsed. Arguments from incredulity don't cut it here. Next.

 

[Brainache]

So has anyone ever seen a Controlled Demolition that looked like WTC7? You know one of these CDs with no months of prep work weakening supports and wiring det cord all over the place? No series of loud charges racing up the side of the building prior to collapse? No almighty BOOM as the central supports are knocked out?

Anyone ever seen any of those non-conventional demolition methods that the Truthers talk about?

 

[T.A.M.]

"Ladies and gentlemen, let's have a big round of applause for..... TAM!
Thankyou, TAM. And now, for our next act, ladies and gentlemen, I'd like you to give a big, big welcome to ... hmm.?

edit :no offense TAM

Terry:

given my analogy was a serious one, and you insulted me by comparing me to a circus act, I did take offense.

As to why you would post it, and then tell me you meant no offense is beyond me. Is there something about my analogy that strikes you as funny?

"You mean, let me understand this cause, ya know maybe it's me, I'm a little BLEEPED up maybe, but I'm funny how, I mean funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you? I make you laugh, I'm here to BLEEPIN' amuse you? What do you mean funny, funny how? How am I funny?"

TAM

 

[Revolutionary91]

Not to me, or to the explosives demolitions experts who were right there when it collapsed. Arguments from incredulity don't cut it here. Next.

So we have demo experts on the scene. Hmm.

Heres a thought: Maybe THEY demolished it.

It looked like a demolition to Jowenko.

 

[CHF]

Terry has a point that the problem with pseudo skeptics is the dismissal of all evidence contrary to the dogma.

Oh the irony.

 

[CHF]

It looked like a demolition to Jowenko.

Yeah it looked like a demolition to just about everyone.

Problem: it didn't sound like one.

 

[e^n]

So we have demo experts on the scene. Hmm.

Heres a thought: Maybe THEY demolished it.

It looked like a demolition to Jowenko.

No permit nor approval was issued, if they did so they did so with no equipment and illegally. Jowenko also asserts WTC1 and 2 were not controlled demolitions, do you believe him here or do you want to disqualify his statements based on your opinion?

 

[beachnut]

Could you show conclusive proof of either?

Yes, can you?

 

[Revolutionary91]

Yeah it looked like a demolition to just about everyone.

Problem: it didn't sound like one.

How do you know?

Will you address the first 2 lines of my post? There were demo experts on the scene. So we have means and opportunity for sure.

 

[Revolutionary91]

No permit nor approval was issued, if they did so they did so with no equipment and illegally. Jowenko also asserts WTC1 and 2 were not controlled demolitions, do you believe him here or do you want to disqualify his statements based on your opinion?

Please back up your claim that they had no equipment.

Perhaps the lack of permit is why they cover it up.

 

[CHF]

How do you know?

Rev, a real rebuttal from you would have been posting a video showing WTC7s charges going off.

Will you address the first 2 lines of my post? There were demo experts on the scene. So we have means and opportunity for sure.

Ah so they rigged up WTC7 on 9/11 itself???