Q's about AE911T

[twinstead]

ergo is carefully not claiming ANYTHING.

 

[TruthersLie]

Oystein, did "the building" (by your definition) (translation for the rest of us: debris), crash into other buildings in four directions simultaneously? Did it fall at free fall speed at all times? Yes or no?

OH poor ERgo.

It is absolutely fantastically funny that he is avoiding my absolutely pwning him on his citation of a "footprint" by using his OWN citation.

keep on running stundie Ergo.

 

[TruthersLie]

LOL. Now ergo is the one picking on "semantics"!

No, Twinstead, this isn't a case of mere "semantics", when we have real people here trying to make a real argument that parts of a building are the building itself. In fact, this seems to underlie the entire bee dunker argument that WTC 7 "didn't fall straight down".

Try reading the threads you post in some time.

Run away from your own citation about a "footprint."

it is rather amusing watching you now shift to Debris.

Does this mean you admit that your "footprint" argument is bogus?

 

[TruthersLie]

Bump for stundie Oops... I mean Ergo. Why won't he answer about his own citation? Must be like that whole caracas tower fiasco...


This is about that bad demolition in florida, which included the video of the prep and collapse.

Wowsers.
You are now a bee dunker. Great job.

This bad CD threw shrapnel into nearby buildings. Dozens of pieces of shrapnel. Fabulous.

Where are the hospital records for the people who were struck by shrapnel from wtc 1,2 or 7?

I mean if they do such a ****** job of CD, why aren't there dozens of folks who were hit by shrapnel? After all, the Cd folks obviously wouldn't have put up screens, or wrapped the explosives... so there shoudl be dozens of (if not hundreds) people who were admitted to ER's around NYC on 9/11 from shrapnel. Where are they?

Self bee dunking free of charge. Thanks Ergo.

ETA: I'm sure you also watched the video of that implosion right? You heard the loud BOOMS, right?

where are they in EVERY video of the towers or wtc7? Those booms which threw debris over 142 feet in your article seem to be missing.

I'm sure you also watched the video and noticed ALL of the prep work that had to be done right? And yet no one ever noticed that in wtc7... ninjaneers!!!!!

 

[Oystein]

So then you're conceding that the WTC 7 itself did not hit Fiterman Hall, and that it was a piece of the building that hit it.

If one day at the pub you find your nose bleeding, it wasn't I who punched you in the face, it was only a piece of me.
In ergo's wonderworld of weasle semantics, that is.
In that same world, it was only a piece of WTC7 that fell in the footprint, so if, in ergo-world, WTC7 didn't hit Fiterman, it also didn't fall in the footprint.

In the real world, it will be happily I who hits you on the nose, and in the same real world, it was WTC7 that hit Fiterman Hall. And the Verizon Building. And the US Post Office building. Ans WTC6. And Washington Street. And Barclay St. And West Broadway. And Vesey St.
But here comes the catch: It did NOT fall in its footprint.
Not in any use of the term that a professional building demolitioner would ever employ.
Unless of course you give us that citation of what "footprint" means in the demolition industry, and it doesn't contradict your stupidity!

 

[Oystein]

... at least I got bee dunkers so far to stop saying the building fell sideways!

Liar.
We never stopped what we didn't start, and we didn't stop what we started.
"Sideways" was stupid word with no useful application in the real world of WTC7. It was you who started that stupidity.
WTC7 didn't fall "sideways", just like it didn't fall "straight down". It fell all over the place.

However, if you insist that it fell straight down, then you must accept that it also fell sideways. Both would be a weird way of saying that it fell untidily in all directions of the compass, and waaaaaay outside of its footprint.

 

[Edx]

If one day at the pub you find your nose bleeding, it wasn't I who punched you in the face, it was only a piece of me.
In ergo's wonderworld of weasle semantics, that is.
In that same world, it was only a piece of WTC7 that fell in the footprint, so if, in ergo-world, WTC7 didn't hit Fiterman, it also didn't fall in the footprint.

In the real world, it will be happily I who hits you on the nose, and in the same real world, it was WTC7 that hit Fiterman Hall. And the Verizon Building. And the US Post Office building. Ans WTC6. And Washington Street. And Barclay St. And West Broadway. And Vesey St.
But here comes the catch: It did NOT fall in its footprint.
Not in any use of the term that a professional building demolitioner would ever employ.
Unless of course you give us that citation of what "footprint" means in the demolition industry, and it doesn't contradict your stupidity!

What amazes me about truthers that will keep pushing the "fell in its own footprint" claim is how easily they will switch to "they didn't care about not causing lots of damage!!!" to explain why it doesn't look that way but also won't admit it didn't fall in its own footprint at the same exact time.

 

[ergo]

Liar.
"Sideways" was stupid word with no useful application in the real world of WTC7. It was you who started that stupidity.
WTC7 didn't fall "sideways", just like it didn't fall "straight down".

You're digging yourself ever deeper into your Stupid hole.

It fell all over the place.

Right.... Not pieces of it. The building itself fell "all over the place".

However, if you insist that it fell straight down, then you must accept that it also fell sideways. Both would be a weird way of saying that it fell untidily in all directions of the compass, and waaaaaay outside of its footprint.

I think maybe Oystein is self-imploding. I wonder if he'll fall into his own footprint.

 

[ergo]

If one day at the pub you find your nose bleeding, it wasn't I who punched you in the face, it was only a piece of me.
In ergo's wonderworld of weasle semantics, that is.
In that same world, it was only a piece of WTC7 that fell in the footprint, so if, in ergo-world, WTC7 didn't hit Fiterman, it also didn't fall in the footprint.

In the real world, it will be happily I who hits you on the nose, and in the same real world, it was WTC7 that hit Fiterman Hall. And the Verizon Building. And the US Post Office building. Ans WTC6. And Washington Street. And Barclay St. And West Broadway. And Vesey St.

So if someone threw your severed hand at me, it would be you hitting me?

 

[twinstead]

So if someone threw your severed hand at me, it would be you hitting me?

Even better, if Oystein threw his severed hand at you, would it still be him hitting you?

 

[Sabretooth]

So if someone threw your severed hand at me, it would be you hitting me?

You seriously don't have a clue what is going on, do you?

Why don't you just come out and say what you mean instead of doing this stupid dance with everyone?

Pieces, parts, items, chunks, or whatever you want to f-ing call it, of WTC7 were ejected into neighboring buildings as it collapsed. This means, that industrial terms, the building did not collapse into it's own footprint and it also means that this is not a characteristic of a CD.

Get out of your own way already...you're just being a blatant troll.

 

[Edx]

You seriously don't have a clue what is going on, do you?

Why don't you just come out and say what you mean instead of doing this stupid dance with everyone?

Pieces, parts, items, chunks, or whatever you want to f-ing call it, of WTC7 were ejected into neighboring buildings as it collapsed. This means, that industrial terms, the building did not collapse into it's own footprint and it also means that this is not a characteristic of a CD.

Get out of your own way already...you're just being a blatant troll.

The key word is controlled...

But even then, the China demolition presumably also intended them to fall over outside their footprint.

Its not that falling outside the footprint is not an indicator of a controlled demolition, its that the footprint doesn't tell you anything. "They" could have caused WTC7 to collapse outside its footprint, according to ergo this would make it less suspicious, so why didn't they (according to him)?

 

[fess]

Right.... Not pieces of it. The building itself fell "all over the place".

So, what you are saying is; after falling on the Post Office, WTC moved itself to the north and fell on the Fiterman building, and then moved to the west to fall on the Verizon building and then fell to the south?
That’s a lot of falling for one building… isn’t it?

 

[dafydd]

So, what you are saying is; after falling on the Post Office, WTC moved itself to the north and fell on the Fiterman building, and then moved to the west to fall on the Verizon building and then fell to the south?
That’s a lot of falling for one building… isn’t it?

Anything is possible in the wacky cartoon world that is Trutherland.

 

[beachnut]

Special delusional physics is used by AE911T; sideways is straight down in the delusional world of free-fall and footprint.

4. Imploded, collapsing completely, and landed in its own footprint http://www.ae911truth.org/

Telling lies; Gage sells lies and makes 70k a year doing it.

1. Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration

Gage posts lies, does he think collapsing building are eclectic circuits? The WTC towers did not fall near free-fall; another lie. How dumb do we have to be to believe these lies?

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

This thread is apparently one of those unfortunate moments when an idiot tries to play theoretical physicist with human language. ("It's wrong to say that atoms have mass, because it's actually the subatomic particles that make up the atom which have mass.")

 

[ergo]

So, what you are saying is; after falling on the Post Office, WTC moved itself to the north and fell on the Fiterman building, and then moved to the west to fall on the Verizon building and then fell to the south?
That’s a lot of falling for one building… isn’t it?

Sounds a little kooky, doesn't it?

 

[tsig]

I don't have to do anything here, really.

You haven't.

 

[TruthersLie]

Sounds a little kooky, doesn't it?

Poor ergo.

Have any citation which support your claim about a "demolition" or "debris" footprint? Still waiting. Cuz the last one you posted really ********** you up.

Have you figured out the Caracas tower's lack of a collapse yet? (pssss.... it might have something to do with the reinforced concrete... I'm just sayin.)

How about center of mass yet?

Getting screwed over by your own sources.... that is priceless.

 

[Oystein]

Obvious troll made Ignore List.

*sigh*