911 Towers Were Exploded Outwards, Not Collapsed

Status
Not open for further replies.

Museveni

Homo Sapiens Invictus
Feb 28, 2007
892
52
Sweden
✟8,845.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Already explained it to them on page 2 I think it was(toilet rolls) how the walls can be propelled outwards. Heck as someone mentioned every explosive in the world works by using compressed air as a propellant for either debries(shrapnel) or by augmenting the compressed air blast(heat being the most common). So by saying that "compress air" could'nt move a section of the wall the nutty-nutters just admited that there were no explosives in the WTC...also they apperently admitted that the WTC never actully came down at all....

Not 100% on how controlled demolition works yet but from what I could gather from the local Military people atleast they figured for large buildings they actully use the airblasts to clear a sort of "Tunnel" of air for the building to collapse into , hitting it from all 4 sides at the same time with explosives directed inwards.
 
Upvote 0

WalksWithChrist

Seeking God's Will
Jan 5, 2005
22,847
1,352
USA
Visit site
✟38,526.00
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
I don't care anymore.

Does it really matter anymore? Can't we just move on with our lives?
Plenty of us care. If you'd like to move on with your life, then with respect I say leave these threads alone.

They have been perpetuated from what I've seen by the endless ridicule of posters here. Is honest discussion really dead?
 
Upvote 0
M

Martingale

Guest
I love hanging out in places like this. its like watching trains wreck.

I've been marked down as a paid disinfor agent of the NWO. this is true. the 911 Toofers were close, really close, to blowing the conspiracy wide open, back in 2004, on a local bulletin board in Kansas City, when a toofer blogged that we I mean They used Explodium dihydride as the super secret explosive that mimics airplanes crashing.

but we I mean They disappeared that blogger.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

WalksWithChrist

Seeking God's Will
Jan 5, 2005
22,847
1,352
USA
Visit site
✟38,526.00
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Just for the record, I'm just an observer here. I haven't made up my mind fully one way or the other. I'm just sick of these threads getting trashed by insults and obvious logic fails...see my previous post on that.

If you don't have anything to contribute in the way of facts, sources, video or anything like that by all means leave these threads alone. Anything less is spamming/flaming by my estimation.

And if any of this applies to those supporting the OP by all means adjust your posting as well. Returning the ridicule/namecalling does nothing for your support of the truth as you believe it. Take the high road.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

Btodd

Well-Known Member
Oct 7, 2003
3,677
292
✟20,354.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Just one thing to point out, for someone who hasn't dealt with Truthers before. There's a set operating procedure, one that I've pointed out here repeatedly...in which Truthers get to ask all the questions, demand answers, bombard their opponent with a mass of links straight from copy&pasting it from the conspiracy site they found it from...and then when asked to elaborate on what it means for their explanation...they refuse.

The subject changes, a la, 'Oh, well what about THIS, then?'. They typically will not stop and answer a single question about such magic appeals as thermite or controlled demolitions that have no sound. The official story is supposed to answer everything down to the tiniest detail, but the word 'thermite' is enough for them to conclude how the buildings fell otherwise. It's a game.

Their entire act is to throw as much stuff out there as possible, and even when their opponent tries to answer the questions (which takes MUCH longer than throwing out questions and bizarre speculation about thermite, etc..."it takes longer to clean up spilled milk than it does to spill it"), they're already moving on to something else.

So, some of us have dealt with this repeated psychological display over the years, numerous times...and realized that you can answer a few questions here and there, but once they start that game of jumping all over the place (see ManFromUncle's attempts to post pictures of Dick Cheney when asked a scientific question about thermite as an example), then we get tired of the charade and simply poke fun at them for this double-standard.

But we do continue to point out the flaws in their methodology when they slow down enough to listen, point out their inability to answer questions about the conspiracy, and make fun of the whole enterprise as soon as they go back to the non-sequitur style I've articulated.

As others have said, if you do not like it, you can either deal with it and stay, or give up and leave. As I said before, I actually take these things very seriously, and don't care to let Truthers treat reality like it's an episode of Jerry Springer. If that makes me a jerk, then...


Btodd
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

WalksWithChrist

Seeking God's Will
Jan 5, 2005
22,847
1,352
USA
Visit site
✟38,526.00
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Just one thing to point out, for someone who hasn't dealt with Truthers before. There's a set operating procedure, one that I've pointed out here repeatedly...in which Truthers get to ask all the questions, demand answers, bombard their opponent with a mass of links straight from copy&pasting it from the conspiracy site they found it from...and then when asked to elaborate on what it means for their explanation...they refuse.

The subject changes, a la, 'Oh, well what about THIS, then?'. They typically will not stop and answer a single question about such magic appeals as thermite or controlled demolitions that have no sound. The official story is supposed to answer everything down to the tiniest detail, but the word 'thermite' is enough for them to conclude how the buildings fell otherwise. It's a game.

Their entire act is to throw as much stuff out there as possible, and even when their opponent tries to answer the questions (which takes MUCH longer than throwing out questions and bizarre speculation about thermite, etc..."it takes longer to clean up spilled milk than it does to spill it"), they're already moving on to something else.

So, some of us have dealt with this repeated psychological display over the years, numerous times...and realized that you can answer a few questions here and there, but once they start that game of jumping all over the place (see ManFromUncle's attempts to post pictures of Dick Cheney when asked a scientific question about thermite as an example), then we get tired of the charade and simply poke fun at them for this double-standard.

But we do continue to point out the flaws in their methodology when they slow down enough to listen, point out their inability to answer questions about the conspiracy, and make fun of the whole enterprise as soon as they go back to the non-sequitur style I've articulated.

As others have said, if you do not like it, you can either deal with it and stay, or give up and leave. As I said before, I actually take these things very seriously, and don't care to let Truthers treat reality like it's an episode of Jerry Springer. If that makes me a jerk, then...


Btodd
Thanks for the explanation. I appreciate it.
 
Upvote 0

cloud watcher

Diligent Seeker
Jun 12, 2011
36
5
✟15,177.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
It's nonsense that people like yourself don't realize that something can be an insult without it being intended.

9/11 conspiracy talk IS an insult to me and to tens of thousands perhaps hundreds of thousands and for all I know millions of American citizens who've been so deeply affected by the events of that day. Some jerkoffs are so insensitive about the issue because they are so far removed from any truly personal connection to that day. A friend of mine lost his brother, someone I knew and played basketball with and got rides from, etc. 3 people from my hometown were killed. I grew up within sight of the World Trade Center, been there many times, have friends who worked there.

So don't go spouting crap that there's no insult when someone talks 9/11 conspiracy garbage. Capiche?

I see nothing in this paragraph and others before this glorifying God. I think everyone needs to try to keep the kingdom first before America in our thoughts and comments. Our first loyalty is to the Lord as those born again are in the world but not of it. Jesus did not fight for Rome he fought for souls.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

oldbetang

Senior Veteran
Jul 21, 2005
7,361
461
✟17,487.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
After a string of psycho-babble analysis or 911 truth advocates which proves the desperation of the disinformation operation (never, EVER address the facts,) let's get back on track. Here is a video of that "lie", Building 7. Please watch:

YouTube - ‪This is an Orange‬‏

And here is the expert testimony:

from:
WTC 7 - Gallery of Evidence

Kamal S. Obeid, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Berkeley, of Fremont, California, says: "Photos of the steel, evidence about how the buildings collapsed, the unexplainable collapse of WTC 7, evidence of thermite in the debris as well as several other red flags, are quite troubling indications of well planned and controlled demolition"

Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis, of Novato California, writes: "Why would all 110 stories drop straight down to the ground in about 10 seconds, pulverizing the contents into dust and ash - twice. Why would all 47 stories of WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven seconds the same day? It was not struck by any aircraft or engulfed in any fire. An independent investigation is justified for all three collapses including the surviving steel samples and the composition of the dust."

Graham John Inman, structural engineer, of London, England, points out: "WTC 7 Building could not have collapsed as a result of internal fire and external debris. NO plane hit this building. This is the only case of a steel frame building collapsing through fire in the world. The fire on this building was small & localized therefore what is the cause?"

Paul W. Mason, structural engineer, of Melbourne, Australia, argues: "In my view, the chances of the three buildings collapsing symmetrically into their own footprint, at freefall speed, by any other means than by controlled demolition, are so remote that there is no other plausible explanation!"

"In my opinion WTC7 was with the utmost probability brought down by controlled demolition done by experts" -Hugo Bachmann, Professor emeritus for structural analysis and construction at ETH and former Chairman of the Department of Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. (source)

They don't seem to be very credentialed If you're interested in what real experts in engineering have to say try reading the NIST report on WTC7.
 
Upvote 0

Btodd

Well-Known Member
Oct 7, 2003
3,677
292
✟20,354.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
After a string of psycho-babble analysis or 911 truth advocates which proves the desperation of the disinformation operation (never, EVER address the facts,) let's get back on track.

What a selective memory you have. You've never addressed how these powerful explosions were so quiet, nor how thermite is supposed to:

1. Leave molten metal for weeks
2. Sever vertical columns, in perfectly-timed succession to make it appear like it collapsed from the top-down, since it uses gravity to 'melt' through its target (like an acid would)
3. Survive the impact of the planes and ensuing fires and still work
4. How any of this was installed, what mechanism would be used
5. How much thermite would be needed to accomplish this
6. A single example of thermite ever being used to demolish a skyscraper, after saying it's 'old hat in demolitions'

Should I continue, or do you need to change the subject now?


ManFromUncle said:
Kamal S. Obeid, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Berkeley, of Fremont, California, says: "Photos of the steel, evidence about how the buildings collapsed, the unexplainable collapse of WTC 7, evidence of thermite in the debris as well as several other red flags, are quite troubling indications of well planned and controlled demolition"

Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis, of Novato California, writes: "Why would all 110 stories drop straight down to the ground in about 10 seconds, pulverizing the contents into dust and ash - twice. Why would all 47 stories of WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven seconds the same day? It was not struck by any aircraft or engulfed in any fire. An independent investigation is justified for all three collapses including the surviving steel samples and the composition of the dust."

Graham John Inman, structural engineer, of London, England, points out: "WTC 7 Building could not have collapsed as a result of internal fire and external debris. NO plane hit this building. This is the only case of a steel frame building collapsing through fire in the world. The fire on this building was small & localized therefore what is the cause?"

Paul W. Mason, structural engineer, of Melbourne, Australia, argues: "In my view, the chances of the three buildings collapsing symmetrically into their own footprint, at freefall speed, by any other means than by controlled demolition, are so remote that there is no other plausible explanation!"

"In my opinion WTC7 was with the utmost probability brought down by controlled demolition done by experts" -Hugo Bachmann, Professor emeritus for structural analysis and construction at ETH and former Chairman of the Department of Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. (source)

This is exactly what I was talking about earlier. So, not only do we have the voluminous, technical detail of the NIST report, which painstakingly describes the mechanism of collapse, as well as several other, independent studies that confirm the same thing, done by hundreds upon hundreds of top professionals in their fields...and you have 5 guys, all who went to the trouble of leaving a few sentences on AE911Truth, saying, 'Yeah, I don't think that could have happened'.

And I haven't even checked them out yet; AE911Truth is notorious for letting anyone sign up to their list, without checking credentials or anything. Members of the JREF Forums signed up there with bogus credentials and remained on the list for 2+years, just to point this out to the Truther community. It's a fraud.

So, the NIST Report and several independent, peer-reviewed science papers vs. a few sentences of personal incredulity from the stooges at AE911Truth. I'll take the former, thank you.

Now, get back to answering those questions about thermite and silent explosions, since you've been dodging them from the moment you heard them. A discussion or debate involves both sides answering questions, not just one.


Btodd
 
Upvote 0

pgp_protector

Noted strange person
Dec 17, 2003
51,661
17,590
55
Earth For Now
Visit site
✟390,187.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
APopcorn.gif
 
Upvote 0

oldbetang

Senior Veteran
Jul 21, 2005
7,361
461
✟17,487.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
M

ManFromUncle

Guest
SirSpamAlot,

You claim the WTC 7 collapse was an obvious controlled demolition. Why is it that controlled demolition do not agree with you?

You don't need experts, for this one, you can believe your own eyes. But why is it all of the sudden you care what experts say? 1200 architects, engineers, demolitions professionals seem to mean nothing to you. Oh I get it, the experts who support the official story are credible, but not those who do not. Or do you mean the experts at NIST who were investigated by their own profession, American Society of Civil Engineers, for accepting a large amount of money for the 911 report?

Now don't forget to include the following that is missing from your quote of me. Well? Has motive, means, and opportunity been established? If I had expressed the desire to invade Iraq repeatedly, had at my disposal airliners which could be used as weapons, and had helped steal $2.3 trillion, shouldn't I be a suspect, especially if the official collapse theory is physically impossible?


[SIZE=-1]Pentagon Comptroller Dov Zakheim and Commercial Aircraft Remote Control "Flight Termination System"[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]Flying a plane by remote control is old technology (remote flying is common, Predator drones over Afghanistan.) In October 2001, the government was caught lying that it had the technology to override control of a commercial aircraft from the ground, ostensibly to foil hijackers and guide the plane in for a landing. The inventor of this technology was Dov Zakheim, CEO of Systems Planning Corporation (SPC) and later Comptroller of the Pentagon under George W. Bush at the time $2.3 trillion was announced missing from the Pentagon, on Sept. 10, 2001, the day before 911. The money has never been accounted for.

October 2, 2001: Remote Controlled Passenger Airplane Flew Before 9/11, Despite Claims to the Contrary (HistoryCommons.org)


A Raytheon 727 lands in New Mexico in August, 2001. [Source: Associated Press] It is reported that the US company Raytheon landed a 727 six times in a military base in New Mexico without any pilots on board. This was done to test equipment making future hijackings more difficult, by allowing ground control to take over the flying of a hijacked plane. [Associated Press, 10/2/2001; Der Spiegel (Hamburg), 10/28/2001]

Wikipedia entry for Dov Zakheim:

"From 1987-2001, Zakheim was CEO of SPC International, a subsidiary of System Planning Corporation, a high-technology analytical firm...He was then appointed to be Undersecretary of Defense and Comptroller from 2001 to 2004 under the George W. Bush administration, and served in this capacity until April 2004.

SPC description of Flight Termination System (click on image):


[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]The above document reads:
[/SIZE]


[SIZE=-1]"Flight Termination System...System Planning Corporation's is proud to offer the Flight Termination System (FTS), a fully redundant turnkey range safety and test system for remote control and flight termination of airborne test vehicles."

[/SIZE]
MAIN SITE: THE TOWERS WERE EXPLODED OUTWARD, NOT COLLAPSED

http://busharchives.org/911/
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

oldbetang

Senior Veteran
Jul 21, 2005
7,361
461
✟17,487.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You don't need experts, for this one, you can believe your own eyes. But why is it all of the sudden you care what experts say?


My eyes see a partial view of a building collapsing. That's it. I don't hear any detonations going off prior to or doing the collapse. I refer to the experts on this because they are...well, experts.


http://ae911truth.org/


I'm not impressed by any of those. I can't find any real experts among them. Who among them hold doctorates in their fields? Which of those have designed and built skycrapers over 40 stories high? Who are their demolition experts? What major demolitions have they been involved in and what were their roles?

Or do you mean the experts at NIST who were investigated by their own profession, American Society of Civil Engineers, for accepting a large amount of money for the 911 report?


What did the ASME find?
Now don't forget to include the following that is missing from your quote of me. Well? Has motive, means, and opportunity been established? If I had expressed the desire to invade Iraq repeatedly, had at my disposal airliners which could be used as weapons, and had helped steal $2.3 trillion, shouldn't I be a suspect, especially if the official collapse theory is physically impossible?

I'm still waiting for you to answer my question regarding the $2.3 trillion myth. How were they able to steal $2.3 trillion from $389 billion? Now, answer it. If you can't, then quit repeating the myth.
 
Upvote 0
M

Martingale

Guest
either you are a disinfo agent or you are a liar......is that clear enough english.....you stated yourself "this was the truth"

I work for the New World Order, as a Disinformation Officer (O-6), although I am in the exchange program with the Bilderbergs/CFR. you people will never come close the the TRVTH on my watch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Criada
Upvote 0

spiritman1

Active Member
Jun 13, 2011
253
14
✟464.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I love hanging out in places like this. its like watching trains wreck.

I've been marked down as a paid disinfor agent of the NWO. this is true. the 911 Toofers were close, really close, to blowing the conspiracy wide open, back in 2004, on a local bulletin board in Kansas City, when a toofer blogged that we I mean They used Explodium dihydride as the super secret explosive that mimics airplanes crashing.

but we I mean They disappeared that blogger.
His own words say "I've been marked down as a paid disinfo agent of the NWO. "This is TRUE"..............so I say your either a paid disinfo agent or a Liar, either one can't be trusted
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.