• 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.

Tricky Ways To Pull Down A Skyscraper

LSSBB said:
Did they even watch and read, or did they just hear "blah blah blah blah Pull it blah blah blah"??!!?
Click to expand...

Pretty much the latter. The only words that they hear are ones that resonate with their confirmation bias. Nothing else is strong enough to overcome their mental filters.
 
Its one of their supporters on the facebook page, in the comments. He's also now claiming the nanothermite that Jones found has to be nanonthermite because it looks like nanothermite, of course he can't show any other nanonthermite that looks like this nanothermite.

And "pull it" is now not an official demolition term, but its commonly used in the industry, although he can point to no example of the common usage - other than to say to 'Google it'.
 
Lets see - 2 floors every 10 days

Hmm - divide 110 by 2 multiply by 10

If math is correct thats 550 days for each building, a yearand half

Thats a long ti,e to free fall......
 
I have found the comment. It is relevant because the headline mentioned the word PULL. Then when he was queried on the subject he changed the subject

John Barroso I know I promised you would get the last word, but, this is too tempting, lol. First, we can finally agree on something, I do not believe that Bush or his family were the masterminds of 911 (he was essentially manipulated and duped) , but it wasn't 19 "evil doers" sent by Bin Laden either. Out of respect for AE 911 Truth, I will refrain from identifying the culprits here. Suffice it to say, the criminal investigation, when it comes, will determine who was behind the criminal cabal of 911. Since you insist on dealing with the minor issue of "pull it". Google "demolition" and "pull" (not "pull it") and you will see that it is common to associate the word pull with demolition projects. Example: The New York Times science section on June 17, 2013 had an article by Henry Fountain with the title Tricky Ways To Pull Down A Skyscraper. Also in forums dealing with demolition you will see talk of pulling down a section, or of it being pulled. Next, the issue is not what caused the molten-metal, it's that it existed at all ( it's color meant that it wasn't aluminum from the planes, but in fact melted steel, and guess what, office fires and jet fuel cannot do that.) Lastly, you chose to overlook the suspicious fact that WTC 1 and 2 went from public to private hands just before the crime, and that it wasn't just insured against terrorism, but, that they insured it to the maximum amount possible for total destruction and loss. As I've said before, the evidence is overwhelming and it is easy to understand that the official story is a deception on the American people. Why some otherwise loyal and decent Americans cannot come to terms with it can only be explained by the psychological fear of acknowledging that some criminal force rules over us or simply misguided patriotism or perhaps just stubborn pride over recognizing that we've been tricked.
Click to expand...


Here is the thread https://www.facebook.com/ae911truth/posts/10151613450376269

Do a search for
I know I promised you would get the last
and you will find it.
 
threadworm said:
I picked up on something in the article and googled it.

Here is what using explosions to make a building fall into its own footprint looks and sounds like:

http://makezine.com/2013/06/09/watch-this-apartment-building-on-governors-island-go-boom-and-implode/
Click to expand...

A guy in the Make comments has an even better yt:



Note the height of the tower and the very NOTICEABLE sound the demolition explosives make, conspicuously absent from the streets of Manhattan on 9/11/2001.
 
What kind of noise do detonations make from the inside core of a fully furnished half-kilometre-tall highrise?

No answer to this yet from 9/11 twoofers.

When you point out to them that indeed many did report on hearing the crack-crack-crack sound of explosives, twoofers then say "it was water coolers" or "it was transformers"... "it WASN'T explosives". Why? "Because it wasn't."

That's the kind of logic you face with twoofers. There's no point engaging with them.
 
Last edited:
ergo said:
What kind of noise do explosives make from the inside core of a fully furnished half-kilometre-tall highrise?

No answer to this yet from 9/11 twoofers.

When you point out to them that indeed many did report on hearing the crack-crack-crack sound of explosives, twoofers then say "it was water coolers" or "it was transformers"... "it WASN'T explosives". Why? "Because it wasn't."

That's the kind of logic you face with twoofers. There's no point engaging with them.
Click to expand...
Actually in the report on WTC7 this data was presented.

Did you miss it?
 
What data did they present that refers to my post above? And cite the reference please.

Your reply will consist of factual statements and not questions.
 
ergo said:
What kind of noise do explosives make from the inside core of a fully furnished half-kilometre-tall highrise?

No answer to this yet from 9/11 twoofers.

When you point out to them that indeed many did report on hearing the crack-crack-crack sound of explosives, twoofers then say "it was water coolers" or "it was transformers"... "it WASN'T explosives". Why? "Because it wasn't."

That's the kind of logic you face with twoofers. There's no point engaging with them.
Click to expand...

So, when exactly were those 'reports' heard? At the moment of collapse initiation? Do you have any audio recording that matches what was in the video? Plus, as DGM said, the report lists analysis. Read that, and get back to us.
 
I'll check back later to see if our twoofers have provided any answers. Any bets? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom