9/11 conspiracy debunking videos
- Thread starter Toro
- Start date
You would rather believe someone than believing your own eyes, you don't have to be an expert of whatever you want to understand that building 7 wasnt smashed at all, however what can i expect from the loyalists?
Whoa! These eyes - my own BTW - have been calling up beam, column and girder schedules and studying panel specs for WTC's 1, 2 and 7 for almost a month now - and have been getting rather annoyed at what space this head couldn't get itself into.
There are NO girders. All spans between perimeter and core are a system of OWSJ/floorpan and poured slab. In a conventional steel structure, to get the sort of fall I watched - with my own eyes, BTW - would have required some help to sever structural components.
These eyes have watched WTC catch airplanes and fall so often this head is starting to worry every time the water bomber flies over my roof. I can hear every creak, groan, snap, bang and roar - and I was almost a thousand miles away.
In my opinion, from an engineering standpoint, though as a whole the structure is incredibly sound and stable for its mass, structural integrity is too entirely dependent on too little support.
That's why, IMHO, the damned building fall down go boom - once its structure was compromised.
Loyalists? In the USA? Okay....
Wolf
Last edited:
Mr. illogical 7 check out this web site.......without blinders on.....if possible:?:
http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7.htm
http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7.htm
Here's another page from the same site. The video at the very bottom wraps it up nicely.
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
If it was debris from the falling towers that knocked down Tower 7, the building should have keeled over rather than imploded.
But miracles do happen, don't they?
But miracles do happen, don't they?
Why would it keel over. It was a 40-plus story building, not a garbage can. Saying it should have keeled over is baseless.
But, I suppose, it is perfectly OK to say it imploded because it got hit at its base with flying debris.
Like I said, miracles do happen ...
Like I said, miracles do happen ...
It didn't "implode", it collapsed into a heap. It's perfectly OK to say so because I watched....Millions watched....it happen.
... yup, very thoughtful of that heap of falling mass to miss the buildings that were closer to Towers 1,2 ...
miracles
miracles!
miracles
miracles!
Oh sure. Debris just conveniently bypasses a couple of buildings so that it can take down Tower 7. Very thoughtful, indeed.
If you drop a handful of nuts from the top of a step ladder do they all hit the floor at the same place?
Wolf
Wolf
I don't expect from a loyalist to think by themselves.
Secondly ,the damned building fell down, almost at free fall speed(demolition evidence), now the official story says, the debris from wtc 1 smashed wtc 7, which would have compromised the structure, however when you look at all videos from the collapse, you got to be some kind of naive to believe that, cause wtc1 debris barely touch wtc7.
Now there must be something else to support the claim that building 7 was demolish by explosives, besides the way it fell, besides it was barely touch by the debris, and that something else is Larry Sylverstein, building 7 owner, who admits in a PBS documentary that they demolish the building with explosives.
pull it
definition of pull
You just can't refute this.
Now there will be some retard who will say, he meant to get the firefighter out of the building(which by the way took a year to get that explanation from sylverstein), which is impossible, cause the building was evacuated since 11h30 in the morning, according to 9-11 report and fema report.
Well then I must be some retard, because it seemed pretty evident to me that he meant to pull the effort off the building and not risk anymore human life in trying to save the structure.
*** But I would suggest that the only person with a learning disability is one who needs to resort to anticipatory name calling in order to try to get a leg up in a discussion***
Well you already know what it wasn't. I see a hollow in that downward plume of dust - what I referred to as a tongue. To me, that indicates something very solid is within and is messing with airflow. Two frames beyond, the dust cloud radiates - splashes if you will - in all directions from the area of WTC 7's hidden face. That is indicative of impact. What hit? I don't know. I can only assume it was a portion of outside wall panels Anyone who was standing there will not likely speak of it to tell us for certain.
Debris wouldn't have to take out the whole front to weaken the structure - just snap several columns. I don't care how miraculous the method of construction, no building can defy gravity. I don't know this for a fact. I am merely looking at evidence - evidence YOU provided - with my own eyes.
If George Bush wants to buy my testimonial for a couple of million dollars, I will graciously and in good conscience accept because I have seen, studied, and drawn my own conclusion about the evidence. Don't ever get the idea that I swallow the official story - just the parts that seem like truth. More power to you if you can determine and prove anything else. I promise to listen.
Wolf
EDIT: Pardon my English - but clarify "loyalist"
Debris wouldn't have to take out the whole front to weaken the structure - just snap several columns. I don't care how miraculous the method of construction, no building can defy gravity. I don't know this for a fact. I am merely looking at evidence - evidence YOU provided - with my own eyes.
If George Bush wants to buy my testimonial for a couple of million dollars, I will graciously and in good conscience accept because I have seen, studied, and drawn my own conclusion about the evidence. Don't ever get the idea that I swallow the official story - just the parts that seem like truth. More power to you if you can determine and prove anything else. I promise to listen.
Wolf
EDIT: Pardon my English - but clarify "loyalist"
Last edited:
IF everything you say is true, then building 6 wouldnt have survived, at all
A building can't just fell down the way building 7 did, by having couple debris hitting one side of the building, that is just a fact, try harder.
They won't, however the problem with your explanation, is the fact that wtc 1, 2 and 7 collapse basically on its own footprint, so there was no resistance when it fell, so the step ladder is irrelevent to the collapse.