he does not keep mentioning bombs he said it once when he refered the 2 planes to "the bombing" and what do you think you are showing here? controlled demolition? this would be the 1st time in history that a controlled demolition was so out of control, it caused cars blocks away to explode (gas in their gas tanks) from the energy of the collapses.
@hgfbob did you see how widespread the debris field was? it was 16 acres wide just from the towers, an acre is 200 by 200 feet, so the debris field was 3200 by 3200 feet wide, there are 5280 feet in 1 mile so the energy of the collapses reached over 1/2 mile, watch videos of just how widespread the debris field and the smoke/dust clouds traveled, i saw your little comment on burden of proof, my video "burdon of proof" destroys your theory on that with facts backed by evidence and the truth.
'my video "burdon of proof" destroys your theory on that with facts backed by evidence and the truth."
well, since it was OFFICIALLY CLAIMED, YEARS AFTER INVESTIGATION that NO explosives or accelernats were used to assist", how is that done when INVESTIGATION NEVER TESTED.
"NIST did not test for the residue from explosives or accelerants" wtc. nist. gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006. htm
burden of proof lies with the ones who ASSERT the claims..always has, always WILL!
@hgfbob i can see you ignored my video, here is what it explains.
in this country it is innocent until proven guilty, no one is in jail that needs to prove their innocense, if no one being accused ever explains they will still not be sent to jail, if truthers never prove them guilty nothing changes, until you prove their guilt nothing changes, so who does the burdon of proof lie upon? you.
it only had to be claimed "no C.D." after truthers made it up. my video "how the towers fell" is proof.
@hgfbob in other comments you use what NIST reported to be a fact only because it would lead people to believe that the planes could not have destroyed the towers, you said the planes only caused 15% damage to the cores, yet the engine that landed 6 blocks to the north showed just how hard the planes hit the towers, that and the top of the south tower leaning over are indicators of how much actual damage to the cores there was.
NIST was asked to investigate the destruction of the WTC not just the collapse of 3 buildings, remember there were more than just 3 destroyed, the debris field should tell you that, it was 16 acres, an acre is 200 by 200 feet, so the field was 3200 feet, 1600 feet from the center of the 2 towers, building 7 was between 700 and 800 feet from the center, the energy of the collapses went 800 to 900 past past building 7.
massive amounts of energy is what destroyed building 7, it's funny how CT's never mention all the destruction the towers collapses caused, they also can't prove there was explosives, or can't seem to understand the reality of what type of destruction 2 jumbo jets hitting 2 towers really did when the evidence shows that destruction, yet the only evidence of explosives is from what people made up from "many people said they heard (unidentified) noises"
"it's funny how CT's never mention all the destruction the towers collapses caused"
tell us all about it.
tell us about the buildings DIRECTLY BELOW the towers and the DIRECT PATH of TONS of free falling debris, and NONE of them had the SAME GLOBAL unified descent EQUAL to that of Gravity that WTC7 did, in fact , that has NEVER occurred BEFORE or SINCE.
"evidence shows that destruction"
ANY image that shows the holes
MINIMAL localized asymmetrical damage--time to GROW UP!
@hgfbob the 2nd amendment gives the citizens of this country the right to bear arms for self defense and to keep the govt in line if they get out of hand, if the govt was behind 9/11 then why didn't the citizens including police, and military go after the government days after the attacks? why would the military go to war instead? because we were attacked by terrorists and we are now in the war on terror, there is no evidence of conspiracy except what you hear from other people with no proof.
"there is no evidence of conspiracy except what you hear from other people with no proof."
WRONG!!!
there is NO EVIDENCE of the OFFICIAL HYPOTHESIZED CLAIMS......THAT is the REASON WHY people are ASKING FOR PROOF.
starting to DRIFT pal....FOCUS!!!
YOU support the FACT that less than 15% localized asymmetrical damage and NO EVIDENCE the FIRES PRESENT failed ANY of the remaining FIREPROOFED 240 vertical steel support on the impact floor CAUSED the collapse of BOTH towers
@hgfbob the proof is in how 2 planes caused the towers to collapse and the area they were standing in to be devistated by fallout, the evidence is right in your face, this is why other countries joined us in striking back.
can i send you to jail for poisoning your grandmother who died of old age and expect you to prove there was no poison and keep you there till you do? it's innocent until proven guilty, that is why no americans are in jail, truthers need to prove explosives were used.
@hgfbob what makes you believe there were explosives planted? is it because everyone else is saying "thousands of people said they heard explosions"? what those people heard were loud noises, the towers made many loud noises as they were falling apart and collapsing, and none of the noises heard were ever proven to be from explosives, is it because you can't understand the physics of how 2 planes destroyed the towers? what makes you believe there were explosives planted? the hearsay? the rumors?
"towers made many loud noises as they were falling apart and collapsing"
LIEUTENANT PATRICK SCARINGELLO EMS
WTC2
"I heard the explosion from up above. I looked up, I saw smoke and flame and then I saw the top tower tilt, start to twist and lean".
YOU IGNORE ,*REALITY*, for hundreds, even AFTER the 3 second delay it takes sound to travel, see it BEFORE it impacts the lower floors to CREATE the sound.
'you can't understand the physics of how 2 planes destroyed the towers"
lol...repeating it does NOT make it true....you keep IGNORING the FACT that INVESTIGATION PROVED, [operative word being 'PROVED'], that the impact damage was MINIMAL.
"what makes you believe there were explosives planted'
PROVE there was NONE used, as the OFFICIAL CLAIM says..I am asking for YOUR PROOF of this OFFICIAL Gov. claim into the mass murder of 3000 innocents.
'the towers made many loud noises as they were falling apart and collapsing'
and the Wacky 9-11 Physics lets SOUND travel FASTER than LIGHT through air, so HUNDREDS can HEAR the collapse BEFORE it happens. Normal physics would have the SOUND heard after a 3 second delay because of DISTANCE, but NOT on 9-11
FIREFIGHTER RICHARD BOERI WTC2
"...when you heard the crackling. You looked up and you saw the one floor explode on itself and the top start to slide.
MORE wacky 9-11 physics with FAST sound and SLOW light!
FIREFIGHTER WILLIAM REYNOLDS
WTC2-
"I was distracted by a large explosion from the south tower and it seemed like fire was shooting out a couple of hundred feet in each direction, then all of a sudden the top of the tower started coming down"
Edward Cachia FDNY WTC2
"there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.
@hgfbob when the top of the tower fell on the floor below where do you think the fire would go? out the sides that is the physics you can't grasp, throw a board on a camp fire the same thing happens, it also made a loud noise that sounded like an explosion, none of the witnesses can tell you what actually made the noises, you are taking claims like "it sounded like a bomb" when a gas tank in a car explodes what does it sound like? all you have is hearsay, rumors, speculations, and opinions.
'all you have is hearsay, rumors, speculations, and opinions'
ROTFLMAO!!!
YOU just described the OFFICIAL STORY to a TEE!!
"out the sides that is the physics you can't grasp"
dude, if the SOUND IS the collapse, HOW do they HEAR IT after the 3 second DELAY it takes the SOUND to even reach them, to look up and SEE IT BEFORE it IMPACTS with the lower section.
This is NOT just one witness, this is HUNDREDS!!!!
they are TRAINED professionals who deal with this everyday
@hgfbob you believe something that has never been proven. who is in jail for inside job?
where are all the protests demanding a new investigation? with all the regular people like charlie sheen, alex jones, jesse ventura, michael moore, people who speak to the public and get paid who can raise money from the people who go to see them speak about 9/11, why aren't they paying for a new investigation? because they are lying to make money and did not find any real evidence in their own research.
@hgfbob my logic is that the debris field was 3200 by 3200 feet (over 1/2 mile by 1/2 mile) and the fallout from the energy reached cars that were parked on the streets, if explosives were planted in the buildings then those cars would not have been effected cuz in a controlled demo the buildings come straight down, you keep putting your foot in your mouth.
we are talking EVIDENCE of the OFFICIAL CLAIMS MADE in a public investigation.....why do YOU have such a problem with that.
"if explosives were planted in the buildings then those cars'
is that your answer for HOW they arrived at their decision that "NO explosives or accelerants were used"..this is a scientific investigation MORON...is that all you have?
@hgfbob i have proof that truthers hide info and cover up other info to make it look like the planes could not have done the destruction they did in the attempt to con people into believe it had to be explosives. /watch?v=E1FTx-PhW_s
the video is further proof that there is no evidence of explosives except what other people say about it, like is said all you have is hearsay, rumors, speculations, and opinions.
@hgfbob you say that nist did not test for explosives as if they wanted to cover up the truth, then you say other things they said that makes it sound like explosives are what caused the collapses. you only use part of what nist says that fits the agenda.
the plane cut thru the so. tower to the point that the fires weakened the undestroyed steel and the weight from above caused the top of the so. tower to lean over just before collapse showing more than 15% damage. more like 40% damage.
@hgfbob you believe something that has never been proven. who is in jail for inside job?
where are all the protests demanding a new investigation? with all the regular people like charlie sheen, alex jones, jesse ventura, michael moore, people who speak to the public and get paid who can raise money from the people who go to see them speak about 9/11, why aren't they paying for a new investigation? because they are lying to make money and did not find any real evidence in their own research.
'where are all the protests demanding a new investigation'
when the 9-11 Commission report came out, there were protests throughout the country where they held a mock 'Tea Party', to throw them into the river as protest.....those people were further knows as ...the 'Tea Party Movement'.
if ya can't go through the FRONT DOOR, go in the back......lol
@hgfbob you believe something that has never been proven. who is in jail for inside job?
where are all the protests demanding a new investigation? with all the regular people like charlie sheen, alex jones, jesse ventura, michael moore, people who speak to the public and get paid who can raise money from the people who go to see them speak about 9/11, why aren't they paying for a new investigation? because they are lying to make money and did not find any real evidence in their own research.
1) In WTC rubble, "meteorites" were found: composite chunks of concrete and metal. Analysis shows metal was iron and steel (google search: meteorites 9/11).
2) Conventional fires do not burn hot enough to melt iron or steel (google it).
3) Nano thermite found in the dust in dust from WTC's; findings published in peer reviewed scientific journal (google scholar search: thermitic materials 9/11)
4) Investigate 9/11! THUMBS UP if you agree with this comment, and copy and paste it to other videos.
Occam (a total stranger to you, alas) suggests you are probably sincere.
Here's a more profitable suggestion. It might lead somewhere (your current babbling leads nowhere, at best, makes you a prince among fools).
Check out my channel background. 120 skunks most of whom should be tried & then hanged. How many can you identify? How many can you "justify"? I do name them if you aren't familiar.
feedmecoolshit: "cars looked crushed to me not melted... and even so what is it meant to prove"
Good observation and good question. You won't get any answers from the troofer idiots. They believe whatever Elvis Presley tells them in bed each night.
These tuckfards are probably secretly encouraged by the NeoCons - I object to their nonsense because they bring discredit on legitimate fighters who wish to bring Bush, Blair, Cheney & fellow War Criminals to justice.
This fucknut blocked me from his vids, as he couldn't answer my questions (I'm a real physicist, not a crank like his "experts"). I'm still waiting to hear from him on the nature of the hyperbolic cosine function (e.g., discontinuities, if any) as is relevant to the equations of motion for a free-falling body in a fluid. Also, to list what assumptions underlie the equations he quotes...
"You can't pretend to be all anti neo-con and try and say that WTC 1, 2 & 7 were not demolished at the same time"
No two things can happen at the same time, fool. Every time you write something you show that you are no scientist - one gaffe after another.
Answering what you TRIED to write - there is no contradiction whatever. That I hate the NeoCon agenda does not make me want to accuse them of something they did not do.
So, let's discuss the hyperbolic cosine function.
NIST have included a 2.25s period of free-fall in the WTC 7 Final Report
A body of mass in free-fall is continually converting all of it's potential energy into kinetic energy in order to fall with the acceleration of gravity, and so cannot be crushing, breaking or involved in deformation of any resisting structure at the same time
The NIST model shows deformation occurring at ALL times
The NIST model does NOT explain the descent of WTC 7
Answer: Margin of error in time measurements. I'd estimate the total "slowdown" caused by power dissipation in bucklings etc. to be 0.1-0.2 second.
While I realize the numbskull I'm "conversing" with won't comprehend this, there are other readers:-- It may appear counterintuitive that the delta-time is so small, but that's only because your real world perception of support-delays are based on far less massive objects than buildings. Enormous inertia once they get going.
"0.1-0.2s is laughable, and also would preclude free-fall."
Leaving aside the results of your numerous experiments with destroying enormous buildings (HEAVY sarcasm for the logic-impaired) which would be needed to comment adversely on my estimate of 0.1-0.2 deformational slowdown, the second clause of your sentence does not follow from the first.
You -do- realize, do you, that your nonsense is a giveaway that you really don't understand physics?
(a) Why are you such a COWARD - if you have the truth, why block me from your own conspiracy-nut vids. Sorry, we know the answer. Your delicate ego, inability to take direct speech - and fear of your crap being debunked. LOLOLOL!
(b) How much are your Blair govt. paying you to put out this crap? You are serving them, & making an idiot of yourself - so for your own sake I hope you are being paid for it. You pervert the whole cause of justice. Sad.
Yep, I thought that's where your qualifications lay, femr2.
So, if you're so bright, how come you are unemployed & living off welfare benefits? Wouldn't you have been getting ready for work over the last hour or so? LOL! ;D
Now, when ELVIS comes to your bed tonight, with his tongue hungry for your posterior parts, be sure to groan nicely to the tune of "JFK! UFOs! Alien abductions! Illuminati! Bilderberg! Jooos!" or whatever other things you believe in.
he does not keep mentioning bombs he said it once when he refered the 2 planes to "the bombing" and what do you think you are showing here? controlled demolition? this would be the 1st time in history that a controlled demolition was so out of control, it caused cars blocks away to explode (gas in their gas tanks) from the energy of the collapses.
loosechangeexposed 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
"caused cars blocks away to explode (gas in their gas tanks) from the energy of the collapses"
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!
you are borderline psychotic. you are truly delusional..where is the EVIDENCE of ANYTHING you claim.....
hgfbob 4 months ago
@hgfbob did you see how widespread the debris field was? it was 16 acres wide just from the towers, an acre is 200 by 200 feet, so the debris field was 3200 by 3200 feet wide, there are 5280 feet in 1 mile so the energy of the collapses reached over 1/2 mile, watch videos of just how widespread the debris field and the smoke/dust clouds traveled, i saw your little comment on burden of proof, my video "burdon of proof" destroys your theory on that with facts backed by evidence and the truth.
loosechangeexposed 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
'my video "burdon of proof" destroys your theory on that with facts backed by evidence and the truth."
well, since it was OFFICIALLY CLAIMED, YEARS AFTER INVESTIGATION that NO explosives or accelernats were used to assist", how is that done when INVESTIGATION NEVER TESTED.
"NIST did not test for the residue from explosives or accelerants" wtc. nist. gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006. htm
burden of proof lies with the ones who ASSERT the claims..always has, always WILL!
hgfbob 4 months ago
@hgfbob i can see you ignored my video, here is what it explains.
in this country it is innocent until proven guilty, no one is in jail that needs to prove their innocense, if no one being accused ever explains they will still not be sent to jail, if truthers never prove them guilty nothing changes, until you prove their guilt nothing changes, so who does the burdon of proof lie upon? you.
it only had to be claimed "no C.D." after truthers made it up. my video "how the towers fell" is proof.
loosechangeexposed 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
"truthers never prove"
you really must be a shill cause no one can be this stupid..
truthers ASK for PROOF of the OFFICIAL CLAIMS asserted.
lets make it SIMPLE for you...
Congress bestowed NIST to investigate the collapse of 3 buildings on 9-11.
NIST investigated, tested and HYPOTHESIZED a conclusion...
I am asking for the PROOF, DATA, EVIDENCE that determines their HYPOTHESIS and ASSERTED OFFICIAL CLAIMS.
hgfbob 4 months ago
@hgfbob in other comments you use what NIST reported to be a fact only because it would lead people to believe that the planes could not have destroyed the towers, you said the planes only caused 15% damage to the cores, yet the engine that landed 6 blocks to the north showed just how hard the planes hit the towers, that and the top of the south tower leaning over are indicators of how much actual damage to the cores there was.
cont next post.
loosechangeexposed 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post,
NIST was asked to investigate the destruction of the WTC not just the collapse of 3 buildings, remember there were more than just 3 destroyed, the debris field should tell you that, it was 16 acres, an acre is 200 by 200 feet, so the field was 3200 feet, 1600 feet from the center of the 2 towers, building 7 was between 700 and 800 feet from the center, the energy of the collapses went 800 to 900 past past building 7.
cont next post.
loosechangeexposed 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post.
massive amounts of energy is what destroyed building 7, it's funny how CT's never mention all the destruction the towers collapses caused, they also can't prove there was explosives, or can't seem to understand the reality of what type of destruction 2 jumbo jets hitting 2 towers really did when the evidence shows that destruction, yet the only evidence of explosives is from what people made up from "many people said they heard (unidentified) noises"
loosechangeexposed 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
"it's funny how CT's never mention all the destruction the towers collapses caused"
tell us all about it.
tell us about the buildings DIRECTLY BELOW the towers and the DIRECT PATH of TONS of free falling debris, and NONE of them had the SAME GLOBAL unified descent EQUAL to that of Gravity that WTC7 did, in fact , that has NEVER occurred BEFORE or SINCE.
"evidence shows that destruction"
ANY image that shows the holes
MINIMAL localized asymmetrical damage--time to GROW UP!
hgfbob 4 months ago
@hgfbob the 2nd amendment gives the citizens of this country the right to bear arms for self defense and to keep the govt in line if they get out of hand, if the govt was behind 9/11 then why didn't the citizens including police, and military go after the government days after the attacks? why would the military go to war instead? because we were attacked by terrorists and we are now in the war on terror, there is no evidence of conspiracy except what you hear from other people with no proof.
loosechangeexposed 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
"there is no evidence of conspiracy except what you hear from other people with no proof."
WRONG!!!
there is NO EVIDENCE of the OFFICIAL HYPOTHESIZED CLAIMS......THAT is the REASON WHY people are ASKING FOR PROOF.
starting to DRIFT pal....FOCUS!!!
YOU support the FACT that less than 15% localized asymmetrical damage and NO EVIDENCE the FIRES PRESENT failed ANY of the remaining FIREPROOFED 240 vertical steel support on the impact floor CAUSED the collapse of BOTH towers
hgfbob 4 months ago
@hgfbob the proof is in how 2 planes caused the towers to collapse and the area they were standing in to be devistated by fallout, the evidence is right in your face, this is why other countries joined us in striking back.
can i send you to jail for poisoning your grandmother who died of old age and expect you to prove there was no poison and keep you there till you do? it's innocent until proven guilty, that is why no americans are in jail, truthers need to prove explosives were used.
loosechangeexposed 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
"the proof is in how 2 planes caused the towers to collapse"
but they DIDN'T as INVESTIGATION FOUND.
"evidence is right in your face"
good, the POST IT...where it the EVIDENCE the remaining 240 FIREPROOFED intact vertical support on the impact floor FAILED from the FIRES PRESENT.
"to jail for poisoning your grandmother"
how would they know, there is NO BODY to EXAMINE!!!
NCSTAR1-3 p.iii, 7.7.3..."no steel was recovered from WTC7"
how do you EXAMINE what is NOT there?
hgfbob 4 months ago
@hgfbob what makes you believe there were explosives planted? is it because everyone else is saying "thousands of people said they heard explosions"? what those people heard were loud noises, the towers made many loud noises as they were falling apart and collapsing, and none of the noises heard were ever proven to be from explosives, is it because you can't understand the physics of how 2 planes destroyed the towers? what makes you believe there were explosives planted? the hearsay? the rumors?
loosechangeexposed 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
"what makes you believe?'
the behavior of the collapses.
"towers made many loud noises as they were falling apart and collapsing"
LIEUTENANT PATRICK SCARINGELLO EMS
WTC2
"I heard the explosion from up above. I looked up, I saw smoke and flame and then I saw the top tower tilt, start to twist and lean".
YOU IGNORE ,*REALITY*, for hundreds, even AFTER the 3 second delay it takes sound to travel, see it BEFORE it impacts the lower floors to CREATE the sound.
hgfbob 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
'you can't understand the physics of how 2 planes destroyed the towers"
lol...repeating it does NOT make it true....you keep IGNORING the FACT that INVESTIGATION PROVED, [operative word being 'PROVED'], that the impact damage was MINIMAL.
"what makes you believe there were explosives planted'
PROVE there was NONE used, as the OFFICIAL CLAIM says..I am asking for YOUR PROOF of this OFFICIAL Gov. claim into the mass murder of 3000 innocents.
they claimed, they PROVE!
hgfbob 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
'the towers made many loud noises as they were falling apart and collapsing'
and the Wacky 9-11 Physics lets SOUND travel FASTER than LIGHT through air, so HUNDREDS can HEAR the collapse BEFORE it happens. Normal physics would have the SOUND heard after a 3 second delay because of DISTANCE, but NOT on 9-11
FIREFIGHTER RICHARD BOERI WTC2
"...when you heard the crackling. You looked up and you saw the one floor explode on itself and the top start to slide.
hgfbob 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
MORE wacky 9-11 physics with FAST sound and SLOW light!
FIREFIGHTER WILLIAM REYNOLDS
WTC2-
"I was distracted by a large explosion from the south tower and it seemed like fire was shooting out a couple of hundred feet in each direction, then all of a sudden the top of the tower started coming down"
Edward Cachia FDNY WTC2
"there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.
hgfbob 4 months ago
@hgfbob when the top of the tower fell on the floor below where do you think the fire would go? out the sides that is the physics you can't grasp, throw a board on a camp fire the same thing happens, it also made a loud noise that sounded like an explosion, none of the witnesses can tell you what actually made the noises, you are taking claims like "it sounded like a bomb" when a gas tank in a car explodes what does it sound like? all you have is hearsay, rumors, speculations, and opinions.
loosechangeexposed 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
'all you have is hearsay, rumors, speculations, and opinions'
ROTFLMAO!!!
YOU just described the OFFICIAL STORY to a TEE!!
"out the sides that is the physics you can't grasp"
dude, if the SOUND IS the collapse, HOW do they HEAR IT after the 3 second DELAY it takes the SOUND to even reach them, to look up and SEE IT BEFORE it IMPACTS with the lower section.
This is NOT just one witness, this is HUNDREDS!!!!
they are TRAINED professionals who deal with this everyday
hgfbob 4 months ago
@hgfbob you believe something that has never been proven. who is in jail for inside job?
where are all the protests demanding a new investigation? with all the regular people like charlie sheen, alex jones, jesse ventura, michael moore, people who speak to the public and get paid who can raise money from the people who go to see them speak about 9/11, why aren't they paying for a new investigation? because they are lying to make money and did not find any real evidence in their own research.
loosechangeexposed 3 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
your logic is geared to the mentality of a child, you have NO evidence, you have to BEG to be believed.
hgfbob 4 months ago
@hgfbob my logic is that the debris field was 3200 by 3200 feet (over 1/2 mile by 1/2 mile) and the fallout from the energy reached cars that were parked on the streets, if explosives were planted in the buildings then those cars would not have been effected cuz in a controlled demo the buildings come straight down, you keep putting your foot in your mouth.
loosechangeexposed 4 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
"my logic is that the debris field'
your logic is to CHANGE the topic?
we are talking EVIDENCE of the OFFICIAL CLAIMS MADE in a public investigation.....why do YOU have such a problem with that.
"if explosives were planted in the buildings then those cars'
is that your answer for HOW they arrived at their decision that "NO explosives or accelerants were used"..this is a scientific investigation MORON...is that all you have?
hgfbob 4 months ago
@hgfbob i have proof that truthers hide info and cover up other info to make it look like the planes could not have done the destruction they did in the attempt to con people into believe it had to be explosives. /watch?v=E1FTx-PhW_s
the video is further proof that there is no evidence of explosives except what other people say about it, like is said all you have is hearsay, rumors, speculations, and opinions.
loosechangeexposed 3 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
'i have proof that truthers hide info and cover up other info to make it look like the planes could not have done the destruction'
how about the OFFICIAL INVESTIGATION ASSHOLE!!!!!
which found impacts caused MINIMAL localized asymmetrical damage leaving 240 INTACT FIREPROOFED vertical support on EACH tower impact floor
33 outer columns were damaged which comes out to 14%, NIST estimates that 6-8 core columns 7 out of 47 comes out to 15% leaving 85%...MINIMAL DAMAGE
hgfbob 3 months ago
@hgfbob you say that nist did not test for explosives as if they wanted to cover up the truth, then you say other things they said that makes it sound like explosives are what caused the collapses. you only use part of what nist says that fits the agenda.
the plane cut thru the so. tower to the point that the fires weakened the undestroyed steel and the weight from above caused the top of the so. tower to lean over just before collapse showing more than 15% damage. more like 40% damage.
loosechangeexposed 3 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
'you say that nist did not test for explosives'
NO SHILL ASSHOLE......THEY DO!!!
"NIST did not test for the residue from explosives or accelerants" wtc. nist. gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006. htm
why do YOU LIE and TRY to TWIST....oh yea, your a fuck n shill here to LIE and SUPPORT the MASS MURDER of 30000 innocents.
15% damage. more like 40% damage."
that is YOUR BOGUS OPINION based on?
NOT the EVIDENCE that INVESTIGATION found, which is LESS THAN 15% to EACH TOWER.
hgfbob 3 months ago
@hgfbob you believe something that has never been proven. who is in jail for inside job?
where are all the protests demanding a new investigation? with all the regular people like charlie sheen, alex jones, jesse ventura, michael moore, people who speak to the public and get paid who can raise money from the people who go to see them speak about 9/11, why aren't they paying for a new investigation? because they are lying to make money and did not find any real evidence in their own research.
loosechangeexposed 3 months ago
@loosechangeexposed
'where are all the protests demanding a new investigation'
when the 9-11 Commission report came out, there were protests throughout the country where they held a mock 'Tea Party', to throw them into the river as protest.....those people were further knows as ...the 'Tea Party Movement'.
if ya can't go through the FRONT DOOR, go in the back......lol
hgfbob 3 months ago
@hgfbob you believe something that has never been proven. who is in jail for inside job?
where are all the protests demanding a new investigation? with all the regular people like charlie sheen, alex jones, jesse ventura, michael moore, people who speak to the public and get paid who can raise money from the people who go to see them speak about 9/11, why aren't they paying for a new investigation? because they are lying to make money and did not find any real evidence in their own research.
loosechangeexposed 3 months ago
when he says clean up effort he really means destroy a crime seen and loose the evidence
BlackGoldEstates 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dimitri Khalezov's 9-11 Nuclear Demolition Videos Being Scrubbed Off Web!
democracyoreugenics 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1) In WTC rubble, "meteorites" were found: composite chunks of concrete and metal. Analysis shows metal was iron and steel (google search: meteorites 9/11).
2) Conventional fires do not burn hot enough to melt iron or steel (google it).
3) Nano thermite found in the dust in dust from WTC's; findings published in peer reviewed scientific journal (google scholar search: thermitic materials 9/11)
4) Investigate 9/11! THUMBS UP if you agree with this comment, and copy and paste it to other videos.
152czar 1 year ago
I concede NIST is guilty - grossly so - of overestimating the reading age & scientific knowledge of the consumers of their report.
GurnSi 3 years ago
Occam (a total stranger to you, alas) suggests you are probably sincere.
Here's a more profitable suggestion. It might lead somewhere (your current babbling leads nowhere, at best, makes you a prince among fools).
Check out my channel background. 120 skunks most of whom should be tried & then hanged. How many can you identify? How many can you "justify"? I do name them if you aren't familiar.
Quite a few Brits made it onto the page.
Then productive things may occur to you.
GurnSi 3 years ago
Can't 'debunk' the statement, so attacks the person. lol.
Silly shilly.
NIST model animations show gradual lateral deformation of the lower facade columns over a much longer period.
Your 'calculation' is irrelevant.
NIST's inclusion of a 2.25s period of free-fall and the content of their report and model animations are in direct conflict with each other.
The NIST report is worthless until the issues are resolved.
A new report is required.
femr2 3 years ago
Mere repetitive cut & paste of the same debunked nonsense. Argumentum ad quantitum, ad repetitum, ad nauseam..
Follow the suggestions I've given. They WERE enormous outrages, even worse than the ones that your conspiracy-nut-"theories" allege.
GurnSi 3 years ago
feedmecoolshit: "cars looked crushed to me not melted... and even so what is it meant to prove"
Good observation and good question. You won't get any answers from the troofer idiots. They believe whatever Elvis Presley tells them in bed each night.
These tuckfards are probably secretly encouraged by the NeoCons - I object to their nonsense because they bring discredit on legitimate fighters who wish to bring Bush, Blair, Cheney & fellow War Criminals to justice.
Very low IQs...
GurnSi 3 years ago
I'll try and root out a video I have of a fire truck about 100m from the base of WTC 1, which was not hit by any debris, but was badly melted.
femr2 3 years ago
LOL@tuckfard trooofer ignoramus.
This fucknut blocked me from his vids, as he couldn't answer my questions (I'm a real physicist, not a crank like his "experts"). I'm still waiting to hear from him on the nature of the hyperbolic cosine function (e.g., discontinuities, if any) as is relevant to the equations of motion for a free-falling body in a fluid. Also, to list what assumptions underlie the equations he quotes...
LOL@idiot. ;D ;D
GurnSi 3 years ago
Someone is throwing his toys out of the cot.
You can't pretend to be all anti neo-con and try and say that WTC 1, 2 & 7 were not demolished at the same time.
Just makes you look very very silly.
(btw he was objecting to a calc of the free-fall timing for an apple from the top of WTC 7. lol. How dare I ! lol.)
femr2 3 years ago
"You can't pretend to be all anti neo-con and try and say that WTC 1, 2 & 7 were not demolished at the same time"
No two things can happen at the same time, fool. Every time you write something you show that you are no scientist - one gaffe after another.
Answering what you TRIED to write - there is no contradiction whatever. That I hate the NeoCon agenda does not make me want to accuse them of something they did not do.
So, let's discuss the hyperbolic cosine function.
How's Elvis doing? ;D
GurnSi 3 years ago
view_play_list?p=16D800790A246 B99&playnext=1
NIST have included a 2.25s period of free-fall in the WTC 7 Final Report
A body of mass in free-fall is continually converting all of it's potential energy into kinetic energy in order to fall with the acceleration of gravity, and so cannot be crushing, breaking or involved in deformation of any resisting structure at the same time
The NIST model shows deformation occurring at ALL times
The NIST model does NOT explain the descent of WTC 7
femr2 3 years ago
Answer: Margin of error in time measurements. I'd estimate the total "slowdown" caused by power dissipation in bucklings etc. to be 0.1-0.2 second.
While I realize the numbskull I'm "conversing" with won't comprehend this, there are other readers:-- It may appear counterintuitive that the delta-time is so small, but that's only because your real world perception of support-delays are based on far less massive objects than buildings. Enormous inertia once they get going.
End of, really. ;D
GurnSi 3 years ago
0.1-0.2s is laughable, and also would preclude free-fall.
NIST model animations show gradual lateral deformation of the lower facade columns over a much longer period.
Your 'calculation' is irrelevant.
NIST's inclusion of a 2.25s period of free-fall and the content of their report and model animations are in direct conflict with each other.
The NIST report is worthless until the issues are resolved.
A new report is required.
femr2 3 years ago
"0.1-0.2s is laughable, and also would preclude free-fall."
Leaving aside the results of your numerous experiments with destroying enormous buildings (HEAVY sarcasm for the logic-impaired) which would be needed to comment adversely on my estimate of 0.1-0.2 deformational slowdown, the second clause of your sentence does not follow from the first.
You -do- realize, do you, that your nonsense is a giveaway that you really don't understand physics?
Hilarious. How you must want to delete these...
GurnSi 3 years ago
NIST model animations show gradual lateral deformation of the lower facade columns over a much longer period.
Your 'calculation' is irrelevant.
NIST's inclusion of a 2.25s period of free-fall and the content of their report and model animations are in direct conflict with each other.
The NIST report is worthless until the issues are resolved.
A new report is required.
:)
femr2 3 years ago
femr2 - two questions for you, now. My turn. :P
(a) Why are you such a COWARD - if you have the truth, why block me from your own conspiracy-nut vids. Sorry, we know the answer. Your delicate ego, inability to take direct speech - and fear of your crap being debunked. LOLOLOL!
(b) How much are your Blair govt. paying you to put out this crap? You are serving them, & making an idiot of yourself - so for your own sake I hope you are being paid for it. You pervert the whole cause of justice. Sad.
GurnSi 3 years ago
I block obvious shills, such as yourself jizzm.
femr2 3 years ago
"jizzm"
Yep, I thought that's where your qualifications lay, femr2.
So, if you're so bright, how come you are unemployed & living off welfare benefits? Wouldn't you have been getting ready for work over the last hour or so? LOL! ;D
Now, when ELVIS comes to your bed tonight, with his tongue hungry for your posterior parts, be sure to groan nicely to the tune of "JFK! UFOs! Alien abductions! Illuminati! Bilderberg! Jooos!" or whatever other things you believe in.
Thanks for the laughs.. ;D ;D
GurnSi 3 years ago
Good post! There was more involved in the attacks than we're being told.
SpudXXXX 3 years ago
cars looked crushed to me not melted... and even so what is it meant to prove?
misleading hgfbob!
feedmecoolshit 3 years ago