911 Towers Were Exploded Outwards, Not Collapsed

[RealDealNeverstop]

Somehow a poster here thinks that the general public that came forth as witnesses are on the same league as explosive experts! Many people have witnessed UFO's and swear that they were alien in origin. Mass hysteria can have profound effects on how people witness events.

There were many first responders that witnessed explosions. Firemen, police, and paramedics are not the general public. But I love how desperate your camp has become that you have to imply only explosive experts can recognize explosions.

Did you ever find that conspiracy theory I was insisting on or have you finally decided to be honest and not put words in my mouth?

 

[Btodd]

I know supporting claims is not something you are used to doing, but if you are going to attribute a quote to me then at least have the balls to provide the link.

You were just asked to support a claim by Skaloop, and you dodged it (as usual). Are you really denying that you have said you take part in these discussion because you want people to doubt the official story (with the 'and to learn new info' caveat)?

This role-reversal business is transparent, man. You simply will not answer a straight question, no matter who asks it, or how nicely they do it. You were just arguing for demolitions, and then want to pretend we have to find a quote from you that says, 'I'm specifically arguing for demolitions', or you are justified in pretending you weren't. Good grief man, grow a pair.


Btodd

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

You were just asked to support a claim by Skaloop, and you dodged it (as usual). Are you really denying that you have said you take part in these discussion because you want people to doubt the official story (with the 'and to learn new info' caveat)?

This role-reversal business is transparent, man. You simply will not answer a straight question, no matter who asks it, or how nicely they do it. You were just arguing for demolitions, and then want to pretend we have to find a quote from you that says, 'I'm specifically arguing for demolitions', or you are justified in pretending you weren't. Good grief man, grow a pair.


Btodd

Don't ever attribute a quote to me without providing the link in the same post.

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

Like Btodd said, I don't care what you know. I'm wondering about what you are suggesting happened.

You asked me for an outline of my position and that is exactly what I gave. Accept it and stop whining. For the third and last time, whybdid you claim no explosions happened on other floors when there are plenty of witnesses stating otherwise?

 

[Skaloop]

You asked me for an outline of my position and that is exactly what I gave. Accept it and stop whining.

 

[Skaloop]

For the third and last time, whybdid you claim no explosions happened on other floors when there are plenty of witnesses stating otherwise?

Because witnesses are not as reliable as the videos of the situation, which, as far as I can tell, do not show explosions happening at various floors around the impact points. Unless you have a captured image showing otherwise...

 

[Btodd]

Don't ever attribute a quote to me without providing the link in the same post.

It's not a direct quote, it's a summation of the quote you made, and you're doing everything you can to avoid the simple question Skaloop asked you, as you've done repeatedly in the time I've seen you participate in these threads. It's pathetic and transparent, and you will waste 10 pages doing it instead of owning up like an adult.

I'm not going back and hunting it down to help you avoid answering the question, so get to it or admit that you have a set policy of dodging all questions.



Btodd

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

It's not a direct quote, it's a summation of the quote you made, and you're doing everything you can to avoid the simple question Skaloop asked you, as you've done repeatedly in the time I've seen you participate in these threads. It's pathetic and transparent, and you will waste 10 pages doing it instead of owning up like an adult.

I'm not going back and hunting it down to help you avoid answering the question, so get to it or admit that you have a set policy of dodging all questions.



Btodd

Don ever attribute a quote to me without providing a link in the same post. When you use the quote symbol you are trying to make a direct quote but no worries man, nobody is surprised by the outright attempt of dishonesty.

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

Because witnesses are not as reliable as the videos of the situation, which, as far as I can tell, do not show explosions happening at various floors around the impact points. Unless you have a captured image showing otherwise...

So video is the only evidence you will accept? Or is it possible your standards of evidence shift depending solely on your agenda? No wonder people laugh at you guys.

 

[Btodd]

Don ever attribute a quote to me without providing a link in the same post. When you use the quote symbol you are trying to make a direct quote but no worries man, nobody is surprised by the outright attempt of dishonesty.

The quote has been removed, and I apologize for the emotional damage it did. Now you may move on to answering the simple question you were asked by Skaloop, instead of deflecting attention in any way you can.

*waits for next excuse*


Btodd

 

[Skaloop]

So video is the only evidence you will accept? Or is it possible your standards of evidence shift depending solely on your agenda? No wonder people laugh at you guys.

The only evidence, no. But if there were massive explosions on floors that were not hit by the planes (as you claim), those should show up on at least one of the countless videos of the event. And I'll take video evidence over the word of witnesses who were in the middle of a fracas, dealing with all sorts of things going on around them, and were more than 80 stories away from where it was supposed to have happened. So yeah, video evidence would help. Or some physical evidence. Anything substantial to corroborate the witnesses. Got anything?

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

The only evidence, no. But if there were massive explosions on floors that were not hit by the planes (as you claim), those should show up on at least one of the countless videos of the event. And I'll take video evidence over the word of witnesses who were in the middle of a fracas, dealing with all sorts of things going on around them, and were more than 80 stories away from where it was supposed to have happened. So yeah, video evidence would help. Or some physical evidence. Anything substantial to corroborate the witnesses. Got anything?

Who said anything about massive explosions? Once again, you change what I say just to have an excuse to post. I don't know if there is videos footage of explosions but since we don't have video footage of the first tower being hit, the pentagon, or flight 93 I am guessing it is a hypocritical shift on your part to make videos paramount.

The real clincher? You don't care what the eyewitnesses say about explosions but you cite eyewitnesses for the pentagon and everything else.

 

[Btodd]

Who said anything about massive explosions? Once again, you change what I say just to have an excuse to post. I don't know if there is videos footage of explosions but since we don't have video footage of the first tower being hit, the pentagon, or flight 93 I am guessing it is a hypocritical shift on your part to make videos paramount.

The real clincher? You don't care what the eyewitnesses say about explosions but you cite eyewitnesses for the pentagon and everything else.

So now we have supposed explosions that were powerful enough to cause the collapse, but cannot be seen from the outside of the building in any video, nor heard on any audio source. Nor has any explanation been given as to how such devices would have survived the impacts and ensuing fires.

Nor can you be persuaded to offer a simple opinion of what happened, almost 10 years after it happened.

Thanks for playing.


Btodd

 

[Btodd]

I also particularly love the fact that this is being argued in a thread called '911 Towers Were Exploded Outwards, Not Collapsed'...yet we can't see or hear the outward explosion in any video/audio source.

These are very peculiar 'explosions', indeed. Must be that secret technology that 'they' would automatically have to support the already-held conclusion.


Btodd

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

So now we have supposed explosions that were powerful enough to cause the collapse, but cannot be seen from the outside of the building in any video, nor heard on any audio source. Nor has any explanation been given as to how such devices would have survived the impacts and ensuing fires.

Nor can you be persuaded to offer a simple opinion of what happened, almost 10 years after it happened.

Thanks for playing.


Btodd

I never said explosions cannot be seen from outside. It's like you're addicted to dishonesty every time you try to reply.

 

[Btodd]

I never said explosions cannot be seen from outside. It's like you're addicted to dishonesty every time you try to reply.

Great! Point them out in the video, then. They have to occur before collapse, not merely be the result of the upper block crashing down on the lower block and ejecting debris, so don't expect a picture of an already-collapsing building to count as evidence of explosions that preceded, and therefore caused, the collapse.



Btodd

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

Great! Point them out in the video, then. They have to occur before collapse, not merely be the result of the upper block crashing down on the lower block and ejecting debris, so don't expect a picture of an already-collapsing building to count as evidence of explosions that preceded, and therefore caused, the collapse.



Btodd

So basically you've been doing this so long you've set a standard that is impossible to satisfy because every single picture or video of visible exploding materials will be ignored by the claim the building was already coming down. Though I have nothing but disdain for the outright dishonesty the dedication is impressive.

 

[Btodd]

So basically you've been doing this so long you've set a standard that is impossible to satisfy because every single picture or video of visible exploding materials will be ignored by the claim the building was already coming down. Though I have nothing but disdain for the outright dishonesty the dedication is impressive.

I never discounted video, or as you love to say, 'Quote where I said that, or retract the claim!'.

So, you have no way of pointing out the supposed explosions, other than showing me pictures of an already-collapsing building? Sorry, that's not dishonesty on my part, it's lack of evidence on yours.

Post the video of collapse, and point out when you see and hear them (you can reference the time of the video). Thanks.


Btodd

 

[Skaloop]

Who said anything about massive explosions?

Non-massive explosions don't bring down skyscrapers the way you allege.

Once again, you change what I say just to have an excuse to post. I don't know if there is videos footage of explosions but since we don't have video footage of the first tower being hit, the pentagon, or flight 93 I am guessing it is a hypocritical shift on your part to make videos paramount.

So you're saying the massive explosions (from the necessarily massive explosives as demonstrated above) happened at the time when the planes hit? Then why didn't the towers collapse then, if that's when the massive explosions happened? And so what if there's no video of the first tower being hit; there's plenty of the second tower being hit. Or are you claiming that only the first tower that was hit had secret massive explosives in it?

The real clincher? You don't care what the eyewitnesses say about explosions but you cite eyewitnesses for the pentagon and everything else.

Please link to a post by me, in this thread or anywhere else, where I cite eyewitnesses for the Pentagon, or retract your fallacious statement.

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

I never discounted video, or as you love to say, 'Quote where I said that, or retract the claim!'.

So, you have no way of pointing out the supposed explosions, other than showing me pictures of an already-collapsing building? Sorry, that's not dishonesty on my part, it's lack of evidence on yours.

Post the video of collapse, and point out when you see and hear them (you can reference the time of the video). Thanks.


Btodd

You have already admitted anything exploding out is nothing but the building collapsing.