Another grade school classic...does this get any better? Or should we just expect more of the same 5 year old shyte from you?
No you haven't, you came up with lame answers that prove nothing, you have only said this is how it is, you have no proof of your claims, all are supposition by YOU,nothing you have said about anything even sounds plausible , like fires bring down the towers ,where history proves no fires have ever brought down a steel framed building in the past , the air forcing down the elevators is also a rubbish answer the doors would be shut thus forcing the said air to go all the way to the bottom not out through the windows as you allude too, also NO 757 hit the pentagon as you now say it bounced your nuts m8 totally nuts and probably ill in the head
Lets take a step back here.
1, Fires started by aviation fuel, ignited combustibles in the WTC. Thus weakening the structure. Of which there is no other identical structure in the history of construction. A fact obviously missed by you. You have failed to provide any similar building in history.
2, Air being forced down by the collapsing building blows out windows located near ventilation ducts. Yet you adhere to some mystical notion of some mythical 'squibs'. Of which there are none in recorded history used in controlled demolition. Only in pyrotechnics, explosive bolts and Holywood.
3, Explosions in the lower levels of the WTC are more likely the result of air pressure and debris falling down the hundreds of feet of elevator shafts. Especially since the building collapse from above, not the bottom as with all other controlled demolitions in the history thereof. Yet you have failed to show that you have any understanding of what the construction of the WTC or its elevators. Whereas I am a licensed TSSA certified welder/fabricator that has built elevators, elevator components and devices.
4, You continually claim that the Pentagon was hit by a missile, and there is no damage to the ground, but ignore the berm that sits 150 yards off the face of the impact. And ignore the fact that the explosion is not conducive to high explosive munitions, as would indicative of a missile strike. Whereas I have shown you videos that show you what a missile strike looks like.
5, You ignore the fact that a plane travelling at that rate of speed, with that mass would disintegrate on impact. As shown in the video of the F4 Phantom, a plane of much less mass, travelling at roughly 500mph.
Nope, no supposition, plain verifiable facts and plausable. Unless we're talking about someone with a limited grasp of intelligence, a limited education and a tenuous grasp on reality. Which pretty much sums you up to a 't'.
Seems you need to have your head examined.
