it's seems mr.bored is another brainless inexperienced unecated knowitall member of the cult. I suggest he be ignored or ridiculed at your leisure. I fart in the general direction OF all truthers and especially the architcets who claim it was demo by the government. they are all worth of nothing but a bucket of night slop and ridicule of the lowest order.
@GrigoriZhukov AND you are just another typical patri-IDIOT who thinks the US government has never LIED to 'we the sheeple' The 911 FIB lead to >> WMD LIES >> occupation of Iraq IDIOT The 911 crooks left clues everywhere. INSIDE JOB = MOTIVE and who had ACCESS prior to 911 to plan the demolition? ENRON files became history? A robbery was taking place under WTC4? WTC4 Bank of Nova Scotia Fucking patri-IDIOTS beget more patri-IDIOTS, this dysfunctional twisted tribe needs to be sterilized.
yep, thanks to damage from debris falling from the north tower the structure was critically damaged adn then fatally so by the fires raging inside that the fire fighters could not get to because it was not structurally safe to go inside.
@MrBoredatwork that work was done by several differnt groups as far back as 5 years ago and as recently as 2 years. I suggest you get a clue, learn to work with steel. I have can and do. Ever weld? Ever cut steel? Ever heated and shaped steel? hmmm? I have and I've seen what fuel fires can do...like melting corningware. So just what is your problem with facts and teh real world?
@GrigoriZhukov I am not a truther and I never was. I dont know if you are getting my account confused or what but I never claimed anyone but the terrorists pulled off 9/11.
@MrBoredatwork Then for that I apologize. When I'm wrong I apologe PUBLICLY. 8^) The rest, I speak from DOING. Heck I've even shaped horse shoes. Like I said the fire tests were done. I've BENT steel under a load and miniamal heat retention, with just muscle power. So the I beams easily could have bent. Also the explosive force COULD and did blown the insulation off the beams.
It has been well-known around the world that the buildings came down because of a controlled demolition. Americans are the only ones who still have the wool over their eyes, due to corporate media brainwashing. Wake up people. It's time to realize what's going on and DEMAND JUSTICE!
@imanoutkast this video is proof that control demolition extramley bad explanation. if it a was controled demoltion miller would have die in tower 7 because it would look sound. Debris took out a critaial support in wtc 7 and show clear signs of damage. Did you heard him. Miller said the structural integrity was not there! Are you deaf.
This doesn’t prove why the building fell symmetrically and for a few seconds at free fall speed. These are not characteristic of a fire collapse. How did all the columns throughout the entire building give away at once? Then for a few moments, fall without any resistance?
That guy sounds exactly like the actor that says the same thing about buildings 1 and 2...... structial integratey......lol.... He probably isn't alive now.
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Since Larry Silverstein said pull it, demolished WTC 7 and collected billions in insurance, why would the insurance company pay the claim if there's evidence of fraud?
If WTC 1 & 2 were destroyed by demolition & not fire, how do you explain video of the exterior columns buckling under heat and stress loads 18 minutes after impact?
How can Marvin Bush be in charge of WTC security when he stopped working for Securecom in June of 2000?
@ctcole77 1. Well simply bc NIST never investigated it for anything other than fires. How could there be any evidence of anything other, if no investigation was done? 2. No one is saying that the exterior columns were not buckling in the argument is what’s causing them to buckle in “Possible molten iron falling from impact zone” would say something other than fire & structural damage brought it down 3. I did not know that, either way it wouldn’t change any of my options. more questions?
You know most people just want a real investigation done & there’s plenty of reason for why many things should have been investigating. Molten iron for 1 it was never even looked into.
not all truthers are crazy conspiracy theorists, theres video of bbc reporting this before it happened, they say that it already went down when its clearly standing 20 minutes before it goes down, theres also video of police officers telling ppl to clear because the building is going to be "blown up", both videos on youtube, so how do the "non-truthers" explain that instead of getting angry at ppl asking legit questions
The mention of the WTC7 fall is from the voice-over (is that voice-over part of the original clip? what is the date of its airing?)
Nowhere in this short clip firefighter Miller says the WTC7 is about to collapse. He tells of the difficulty to extinguish the fire. Moreover it is not clear if Miller is referring to the WTC7. The source of the smoke is uncertain, as large fires were burning in WTC 5 and WTC 6 nearby. Also firefighters reinforcement at 3pm doesn't accredit a collapse scenario.
If there were explosives in that building, there would be a series of extremely loud bangs immediately before the collapse. They would have clearly been recorded on all cameras present. Building 7 had no sounds of explosions at all.
Remember, it is not the collapse of WTC7 that is the anomaly. It is the MANNER of the collapse: all together (except for the penthouses) and at free fall for 25 meters. Both facts acknowledged by NIST.
The anomaly of WTC7 is not the collapse but the manner of collapse: together and at free fall for 25 meters (NIST). The towers did not drop at free fall; WTC7 did. So what? Free fall for 25 meters means 25 meters of vertical support removed SUDDENLY from all over the base of WTC7. NOT weakened by fire; removed suddenly. Free fall for 25 meters limits possible explanations. CD works perfectly, so does "knee joints" and hinges in the vertical support beams. Anyone have the blueprints?
I need to get myself some of those silent explosives for fireworks night so my dog doesn't get frightened.
Do you know where to get some. Have they back engineered any from alien technology. There's another thing that doesn't leave behind evidence. Wow some of that technology they have out in the desert, it's indistinguishable from magic!
@beorhav Thermite/ thermate does not make much noise. ThermATE makes noise if it is confined. Gunpowder makes noise when confined but just a whoosh when ignited in a heap on the ground. In order to make a "bang" a chemical reaction must propagate faster than sound or generate gasses that do so once released, like a gun barrel. In fireworks, gunpowder makes a bang only when it is confined in a tightly wound roll of paper; pressure builds then releases suddenly faster than sound: bang!
But there wan't any trace of thermite found. And that paper that you will mention isn't pseudoscience and isn't taken seriously by the scientific community. Not surprising a pseudoscientist found rust and aluminium and assumed it was thermite. Plus being slow buring it would be impossible to get the timing right. And experiemnts have shown that a metal pillar surrounded by thermite wouldn't fail.
The pseudoscientist who claimed to find thermite dodn't even do a control!!!! They even do controls on mythbusters but a so-called scientist neglected too!!!!
As soon as one support loses it's strength, the weight would instantly be distributed to the others, resulting in forces they were not designed to withold, hence their collapse.
But don't listen to me, listen to the expert consensus (and no AE9/11 isn't the expert consensus)
@beorhav Thanks; would you like to try explaining the 25 meters of free fall, followed by descent at a constant velocity?
Could you find a video of a building collapsing because one support is removed? The ones I have seen show one end falling first. The other end falls later or not at all. I welcome alternative hypotheses and new evidence!
The building in the middle of the video, from 11 - 15 seconds, is not "leaning" at all. Take a business card, hold it against the left side of WTC 7, perpendicular to the bottom of the frame, and you see that it is exactly straight up. It is parallel to the other buildlings on the sky line. Only the one at the far left seems to be leaning to the right, but is not a WTC.
The firefighters on the scene were heroes. This one, like all of them, were intelligent, hard working Americans. As for the notion that it was destroyed on purpose, my heart goes out to Larry Silverstein. It must be painful to be implicated in a mass murder of 3000 innocent people by internet nut cases. Then again, maybe he isnt offended considering the source.
@athabascka, LARRY SILVERSTEIN IS A HERO HAHAHAHAHAHA No wonder it is so easy to own and control dumb Americans. You can fuck them and they make u their hero! I live about 10 minutes away from Michigan (in Canada) and since I was a kid I could never get over how ignorant, dumb and mind-controlled (but very, very nice and decent people I will give u that) Americans are. When it comes to 911 they are like a battered wife. No matter how much u beat her, she still stands up for her bastard abuser!
@facebookprogrammer: I didnt say Larry Silverstein is a hero. I said the fire fighters were heroes. They saved a lot of lives that day. Firefighters are members of the working class and do valuable work for their communities. I dont "stand up" for the American government. The American government is guilty of many war crimes from the slaughter of Native Americans to Afghanistan and Iraq. So next time you open your big fucking mouth, you might want to know what the fuck youre talking about.
@athabascka No one was killed in the collapse of WTC7. You are trying too hard to be outraged. Calm down just a little bit and you'll feel a lot better.
@athabascka Actually, the main point of contention is that the incident wasnt investigated, since we investigate everything that happens ever. It is suspicious. We as americans must always question our government and be sure that they were not involved. You do not remember the USS Maine, but in 1898 she was sent to havana and there exploded, leading to the spanish american war. Many people think the government caused this. And lets all not forget pearl harbor.
@Salinear: Pearl Harbor? What about it? It was a Japanese attack. Not an inside job. The evidence that al Qaeda did 9/11 is overwhelming. They admit it, they celebrate it, they pat themselves on the back. At this very moment, young Jihadists at Punjab University in Pakistan are promoting an essary contest, where participants mourn the death of Bin Laden. Posters promoting this contest show the burning Twin Towers. Deniers of what really happened cannot be taken seriously.
@athabascka actually they said they had nothing to do with it. ask anyone who speaks arab and theyll tell you those videos of al queada are mistranslated. have you ever heard of the gulf of tonken?
@KennyBare: Gulf of Tonken has nothing to do with al Qaeda or 9/11. Nobody with any credibility takes you people seriously. That ought to tell you something.
@KennyBare: Your argument is an example of a non-sequitur logical fallacy. Because one war was started by a false flag operation, all wars must be started by a false flag operation. The premise does not lead to the conclusion. In fact the conclusion is so hysterical and wrong, it reinforces why nobody with any credibility takes conspiracy theorists seriously.
@athabascka looks at our evidence though, those thing fell at the speed of gravity straight with no resistance, almost all the witnesses there heard explosions and then the towers came down. afgahnistan is a gold mine. 90% of the worlds opium is there. the president of afgahnsitan's brother who just died was getting payrolls by the cia to sell heroin!!! open up your god damn mind. those buildings cant break the rules of physics. its impossible.
@KennyBare: Free fall would have been 9.2 seconds. The towers actually took over 14 seconds to fall. Nice try. Good luck getting laughed at the rest of your life.
@KennyBare: No, it did not. If something fell at the speed of gravity, it would have fallen in 9 seconds. It took the twin towers over 14 seconds to fall. Video shows the point of failure at the point of impact. There is no evidence for anything but a plane impact and a fire. Like I said, good luck getting laughed at the rest of your life. I hope you get used to eyes rolling. The 9/11 conspiracy theory is more like a religion than a theory. No evidence, fanatical belief, ect.
@athabascka yeah that's really overwhelming evidence, what about Barry Jennings who witnessed explosions within the WTC7 building before the first tower collapsed
@crisisofconsciousnes: Most firemen predicted the WTC7 collapse because the building was heavily damaged, on fire for hours, and wasn't stable. It makes me angry that people like you think you have legitimate theory. Its like talking to a Christian fundamentalist. Irrational beliefs do not deserve respect and are not legitimate. The 9/11 conspiracy theory is certainly an irrational belief. Too many people would have to know about it.
@athabascka You haven't explained the eyewitness Barry Jennings who witnesses explosions within WTC7 before either tower had collapsed. How does that one fit into your theory?
@crisisofconsciousnes: In the sciences, eyewitness testimony is generally considered unreliable. Some people thought they saw missiles or what not. It is a fundamental misunderstanding of science to assume that a few discrepancies can overthrow a solid scientific theory, especially when we are talking eyewitness testimony. Of course its possible that explosions did happen in WTC7. There are a number of reasons why there could be explosions in a building on fire.
@athabascka I think you may have misunderstood me, Barry Jennings witnessed explosions within WTC7 before either of the towers had collapsed, he was interviewed straight after the event, another witnessed testified that he had to help Barry escape from the building because the whole lobby was blown up.
@crisisofconsciousnes: You mean to tell me that explosions in WTC7, set off before either towers 1 or 2 collapsed, caused the building to collapse about 5 hours later, a theory not only illogical, but entirely dependant upon one man's testimony. The firemen knew the structural integrity of the building was compromised, and the collapse was anticipated - not due to phantom explosions in the lobby - but to structual damage and fire caused by the towers collapse. Get real. You believe a fairy tale.
@crisisofconsciousnes: According to Occam's Razor, when faced with competing hypotheses, one should choose the explanation that makes the fewest new assumptions. In other words, avoid unnecessarily complex explanations. This is where the 9/11 conspiracy theory fails. All the footage clearly shows the planes and fires causing the damage. Asserting that planted explosives were also involved is adding an unnecessary assumption without a shred of proof. So the 9/11 conspiracy theory fails.
You see the fire? he askes?? NO I dont.. lol it was not engulfed in flames when it went down. You can see this from any video of it. Bottom line is that buildings dont collapse like this.
@EARTH51087 Thats a true sign of ignorance to start out insulting someone right off the bat.I especially don't like that term"retarted" people that are retarted have a genetic defect that they can't control, where as YOU have no excuse for being ignorant.That aside, the most important part of this clip is that they are not even showing bld 7,it was at least 47 stories high.. the two clips they show here are of buildings much smaller. So yes so far I have not seen building 7 engulfed
@EARTH51087 By the way it's spelled retarded, not retarted.. so the next time you call someone that you better spell it right so you don't look that way.
@EARTH51087 By the way it's spelled retarded, not retarted.. so the next time you call someone that you better spell it right so you don't look that way.
@EARTH51087 By the way it's spelled retarded, not retarted.. so the next time you call someone that you better spell it right so you don't like YOU are.
@katlovesall For a building to be ENGULFED IN FLAMES it would be on every floor and with smoke and flames coming out of every window. Building seven falls like the rug has been pulled out from under it. Anyone that believes this fell from a small fire on three floors is a moron. If buildings came down this easy from setting them on fire then we would not need pyrotechnic experts to take them down with exposives. NO in the real world buildings just don't fail like this freom a fire .
There is a huge difference between a building that "falls down" or "collapses" and what happened to WTC7. Building Seven did not just collapse; it collapsed almost simultaneously and a free fall acceleration. If WTC7 had suffered a partial, uneven collapse like most buildings damaged by fire or bombs, I would believe the official story. I would be insulting the "kook-tard twoofer-faggots" and being as nasty as anyone here.
It DID suffer a partial, uneven collapse. First the penthouse then two seconds later the rest of the building. This video has never been shown on one of the conspiracy "documentarys". I wonder why.
WTC7 fell straighter and more evenly than any other building collapse due to a CD or anything else. Find a building anywhere near the size of WTC7 that collapsed as WTC7 did and post the video here on YouTube and I will STFU. NIST reported that the upper east and west corners of the north facade dropped within a half second of each other, though separated by 100 meters. That's a football field plus one end zone.
THats the problem with all the truthers. When you pin them on something they cant explain, they instantly go to. "Hes obviously a plant and works for the governement." Its impossible to win an arguement when they fall back on that everytime.
@dirtybird2212 The problem is that the "sheep" are the ones who are not being led around by the ear, using only prisoplanet and youtube videos. The "sheep" are the ones who look at all credible evidence to form logical and reasonable conclusions about what happened. The truthers, the same ones who talk about "doing your own research", are the ones that truly do not do there own research and believe that poorly edited youtube videos are the absolute truth without digging any further.
@MrBoredatwork I don't really listen that much to alex jones, and I read the laws, al these new laws, regulations, militarized police, the and what about the 200 million that went into no where?
@MrBoredatwork "The truthers...are the 1s that truly do not do there own research & believe that poorly edited youtube videos are the absolute truth without digging any further."
yep. 1 brought up the "2nd page" of the ASCE Report about witnesses. I corrected him that it was pg 12&13. He tried to pull a slickwilly & pretend he left a 1 off the 12 as a typo. I asked him if he normally says 12 as "12nd." Epic fail on a facesave. He didn't know what pg it was on because he never read the report.
@MrBoredatwork Agreed. That's a smart firefighter. But I wouldn't say his statement precludes controlled demo, which is what it looks like in the end. Keep in mind that possibility was not available to the NIST investigation; the scope of their project was to come up with data to fit a building model. Similarly, the scope of the 911 Commission investigation was strictly limited to intelligence failures.
@wllmdnldsn "Yep if it was a secet controlled demolition you wouldnt be able to predict it,s collapse
"
Right, unless the firement were inadvertently admitting that they knew about the "covert" demolition and allowed it to happen. Now, I've been accused of hating police, firemen and 911 victims by these imbeciles, but this obvious conclusion smacks of indicting firemen and implicating them as more than liars, but murderers. Shame on you 911 "truthers". You SUCK.
@MrBoredatwork The commenter beneath you tries a slick willey to get around the fact that these firefighters were talking about the building leaning because of the work of covert delolition experts. Here we see the building leaning and deemed doomed to fall by firefighters before the alleged "explosives" go off and now it's "strategic cuts in girders". You're right. You can't win. They will deny clear fact, even change their stories to maintain their delusion that the "evil empire did this.
@MrBoredatwork If this were the country these "truther" imbeciles portray it as, these blibbering idiots wouldve been rounded up & shot 10yrs ago. Their stories damn themselves 2 a horrific future 1 yr away--2 be rounded up at 4am from red & yellow lists, chained in trains & freighted off 2 facilities where they will be systematically gassed while still in their railcars, kept fresh 3 at a time in FEMA caskets until torched 2 ash in a furnace. Is that what they relentlesly want to believe? lol
@MrBoredatwork At least some of us can spell "argument". That's probably because many of us use the term in our working lives. Hint for the computer ignorant: an "argument" is a variable or a string or piece of information that a function takes and processes and then returns a value. The old programmers used that term because mathematical functions are said to take arguments and return values.
@MrBoredatwork then you tell them to prove it cause in this day and age of science we ask for proof and not speculation.... you say prove it, they cant, and they loose again....
@MrBoredatwork you are so ignorant you did not realize i was on your side, and if you cant come back against a "truth er" who says something that idiotic, then remove your self from a serious conversation of that nature.... cause when someone just argues speculation and not the facts, i ask them to "prove it" not "dammit the got me again with the government planted that guy argument" pwned by a guy that takes pics with his shirt off....
@jdogg781517 LOL. You got me.....I didn't really read your comment. Just skimmed it and assumed you were a truther. You are still a dbag for the cellphone/mirror/shirtless self pic though. That shit doesn't change. Its still better than being a cellphone/mirror/shirtless/truther though.
@MrBoredatwork i wasn't taking a shirtless picture of my body for girls like some people do cause thats all they have to offer, i happened to not have a shirt on and took a face pic for my facebook, not a body pic....
@MrBoredatwork STEEL HIGH-RISED BUILDINGS HAVE NEVER EVER COLLAPSED FROM FIRE AND NEVER WILL, even some controlled demolitions go wrong and fail to blow up every floor resulting in a partial collapse, in this case, all the resistance was blown up at the same time and melted which is why it fell perfectly down without tipping over at any time.
@MrBoredatwork Underwrites laboratory did tests simulating the weight of the upper section pressing down on columns similar to the WTC which were exposed to 6 hours of constant maximum heat jetfuel fire, they increase the temperatures in furnaces, blew oxygen in, increased the load, did the columns weaken? No, did they soften? No, did the entire thing collapse? No. That's science, you claim jetfuel and damage on the upper floors can implode a 110 steel building? Man you are a genius.
@Xendrius Can we stick to one argument before jumping to others? You claimed that no other steel high rise building has collapsed to due fire and I told you that there had never been another steel high rise tower hit by 757's traveling at over 500 miles per hour. Comment on that first. Do you admit that your claim is dis-ingeniousness to try and compare those things?
@MrBoredatwork You ASSUME that a it is possible for an airliner hitting a building, to implode it 50 minutes later, I told you then that they did tests to see if that was possible, they increased the heat, the duration, the load, it did not happen.
@Xendrius Because those tests were not the same as what happened on 9/11. I have read the tests you claim to have seen and you clearly have not. If you would have seen the tests you are citing, you would be able to tell that the tests were not the same conditions as the WTCs. The tests had INTACT columns, WITH fireproofing. The WTC had neither of those things when the planes hit.
@MrBoredatwork They did the tests with no fireproofings, don't go ahead to claim that the severed columns were responsible for the upper section to break lose completely, the planes also hit very differently, even if they severed all the core columns on impact, it would have toppled over, not crushed 80 stories of the same material, learn some basic science will you. We are not talking about a house of cards here.
The point is simple, jetfuel cannot soften steel. That's science.
@SergeantPepper99 They were not meant to withstand multiple planes....only 1 plane. What you fail to realize is that it was designed to take a smaller plane hitting it at MUCH slower speeds to simulate a plane hitting while lost in fog. They built that into the system because it already happened to the Empire State Building. The planes hit MUCH MUCH faster than intended and in turn caused an order of magnitude more damage that the building was not designed to take. Good job on your research. /s
@MrBoredatwork Some truthers make up evidence to try to prove their theory. I'll post a couple facts instead:
These same firefighters bought the official story of the building falling by fire later on anyways.
If a firefighters captain tells the group to evacuate an area because a building is about to fall due to fire damage, and you're a confused firefighter with no idea what's going on yourself, you'd try to save the people obviously.
So the firefighters wouldn't know or care why it fell.
@SergeantPepper99 There was no confusion as to why the building was going to come down and there was no one to save inside WTC7. It had been evacuated already. They were simply trying to stop the growing fires inside but could not because the collapse of the twin towers busted the main water supply underground. The fires grew to the point that fire officials knew the building would eventually collapse. The NYFD Chief ordered everyone out and away and they let the building fall.
Yea the voiceover not the fierfigher. What the video does show is WTC 5 not 7
"
True, but beside the point. The point is that the firefighters and rescue workers who were there knew it was just a matter of time before wtc7 fell. Read the print interviews and they go into more detail--the bldg was leaning progressively further to the south, a bulge popped out between the 10th & 14th floors, strange moaning sounds coming from the bldg as it shifted and settled, etc.
"Their are a lot of firefighters saying their is something worng with the offical story. "
No. There are a few, but there are a few nutjobs in every occupation. On the other hand, there are something like 500 interviews with the firefighters and rescue workers who were actually there that all describe massive fires in wtc7, the bldg leaning further and further to the south, and they all knew it was just a matter of time before that bldg came down.
Go fire fighters for 911 truth dott org, this will show it all, go 911 research and read the testimony of firefighters and ambulance workers that heard and felt explosions
W.T.C - 7: There goes a skyscraper collapsing as do all skyscrapers that are traumatized by designers who have made the strategic cuts in girders & planted explosives. There it is. Make of it what you will. There's no getting around the fact that it was brought down.
That fireman was proven to be a plant, he was also filmed talking with another fireman, explaining to him how the towers fell using the "official story". THIS WAS THE DAY OF 9/11, he looked all clean, like he had never even gotten close to the scene. Here he was telling a few DIFFERENT news men his story, why a clean fireman that had obviously not been close to the scene? He was a plant and notice how thet use his clip to tell of what horrible shape the building was in prior to collapse, LEARN.
And yet again you present another UNalarming bit of info. Look a bit harder. What ISN'T he wearing in this clip? Don't ya think that maybe, just MAYBE he was kinda hot and removed his slickers late in the day?
. . . the NIST director has determined that certain evidence . . is voluntarily provided . . not directly related to the building failure . . and that disclosure of that information would inhibit the voluntary provision of that type of information.
In other words: we aren't telling you all of our information. Only what we feel like. We can't check their work because they're not providing us with all of their information.
Are you kidding me? Is this true? My God, they are slapping you in the face and most of America says " slap me again, please". What in the hell is wrong with America, you are more communist than USSR ever was. Your government rules you with lies and crimes and you don't even see it. You are shit scared it might be true so you won't even look. WAKE THE F UP.
Yes. That was the first paragraph of disclaimer 3. The second paragraph states that, "additionally a substantial portion of evidence given to NIST was under non-disclosure agreements." In other words, they will tell us THAT they got to their conclusion; not WHY.
If this is blatantly obvious I don't know what is.
The original WTC7 was 47 stories high, was it not?
The building shown in this video (30 second video mark) seems a bit short, around 18+ stories.
NIST all these years later still haven't released the final report showing how a 47 story building symmetrically dropped at the speed of gravity, into a nice neat pile for 'Controlled Demolitions Inc' later to clean up.
Yup that was probably building 6, in this clip, they never give a good shot of #7. They show the more damaged #6 and #5 to confuse people into thinking that it was building 7 that had all that damage. More propaganda that the public, who don't even care to look into what really happened that day, see it and say "wow, that building was very damaged, no wonder it fell, those CT'ers are really crazy".It is a sad day that TV rules America,TV gives them their non reality life and they love it = SICK.
We could understand WTC7 collapsing; many buildings have collapsed due to bombs, earthquakes, fire, and other damage. BUT all of those collapses have been very different from WTC7: partial, chaotic, messy, uneven (pick your word). WTC7 was as smooth, intact, straight down, and as simultaneous as any controlled demolition on video. In fact, only one video (Landmark Tower in Ft. Worth) shows such a straight and simultaneous collapse due to a CD, and that was a much smaller building.
Now I understand. The wild theories are kids yacking at the mouth, dunderheads, and anti-U.S. and other cybershit. Anyhow, thanks to all those who took time to clear up this mess.
He said "See it leaning?" and he was certain it was going to fall. Man was he wrong! Instead of falling over, it magically PULVERIZED itself into dust, and went flying through the streets, while leaving all the heavy stuff in a convenient pile at the base. Wow!... Who could have seen that coming?
This is where you and your ilk's arguments turn bizzare. You say the government was willing to kill all those people and bring down the buildings under the guise of a terrorist attack, but....to do it as neatly as possible? Er, yeah, you wouldn't want the building to fall over, cuz that'll be REALLY messy. So absurd.
weather you choose to accept the facts does not concern me. I know that 1.Physics, 2.science, 3.eyewitnesses, 4.evidence, 5.video footage, and 6.common sense blast the "official version" into fairytale land! cave dwelling ragheads hit our DOD HQ with a passenger jet??? WTF?! with nothing to gain???
I don't know "weather" to laugh or cry at a rebuttal that separates physics and science into two separate categories, which in turn separates eyewitnesses and video footage from evidence. Putting your grammatical skills and thought process aside though, (Cave dwelling ragheads? Are you serious?) Which argument from a physics/science/eyewitness/evidence/video footage standpoint do YOU take that hasn't already been debunked by OTHER TRUTHERS as, in their own words "strawman arguments"?
So absurd? What is absurd is 3 giant buildings that were made to withstand airliners hitting them,wind of gale purportions,made with top grade steel in a design that if floors were damaged in anyway,the building would be able to withstand it.Absurd is THEY ALL FELL DUE TO HEAT(lol)IN THEIR OWN FOOTPRINT AND ALL THAT IS LEFT IS NICELY CUT METAL BEAMS.The rest was a fine dust that has killed first responders because the government told everyone it was safe to breath,now what is really ABSURD ??
Actually, your arguments are just plain STUPID. Withstand winds of gale forces? So what? Try this for an experiment. Stand in front of a giant fan blowing air at 120 mph. Then have someone throw a baseball at your head at only 80 mph. Note the difference? Now, let's pretend that those beams were not cut by ironworkers during cleanup. Where do you see the implosions occuring on the floors the beams were cut? You can clearly see the towers collapsing from the top down.
the wind was just example of how well it was built. did i mention anything about the beams? you are obviously one of those "guys" that just want to start going of on how twoofers are so dumb and are crazy. Just go along your merry way there chuckie, i have no use for you.
Actually, the TOWERS were pulverized into dust but WTC7 fell straight down and intact at nearly free-fall acceleration. WTC7 looks like a very good controlled demolition. The tower collapses were unprecedented. Many collapses like WTC7 have happened: all have been controlled demolitions. If WTC7 was a CD, it was rigged in advance, meaning powerful people knew about 911 in advance, so we should be mad as someone other than, or in addition to, Osama and the box cutter boys.
you CAN'T have thermite if there's no chemical signature. it would be like me trying to make water without hydrogen and oxygen. and your silent explosive video? IT ISN'T SILENT!!!!! damn
There is no chemical signature?WTF you are talking about?Every heard about professor Jones?Ah,I know you will try to ridicule his work "he found slphur.dry wall" HAHA men,he found IRON RICH SPHERULES and FEMA found high tempiture sulphidation.
Give an explanation.
He found no calcium,and the high-tempiture atack isn't from sulphuric acid.
WTF are you not getting? you don't mean THE steven jones who was discredited by his own university and by his peers? he's been found to be wrong on the thermite/thermate accusations several times. where's the aluminum oxide? where's the barium nitrate? you can't have MOST of the chemicals in order to make something,you have to have them ALL. try not to be so stupid next time.
lol he hasn't found any such thing,and barium nitrate HAS to be there or it can't be thermite. let's just say he found aluminum oxide...he'd be the ONLY one...hmmmm....
Basically you know shit about pyrotechnic,so lets spread your fantasies about the nice world with "bad" and "good" guys.
Technicaly thermite is a mixture of metaloxide and another metal.You can use everything.Your barium lie is..wtf?
Barium nitrate is poisonus..it isn't simply to buy big quantites of it and it is used simply to lower the ignition tempiture,nothing else,moreover the nitrogen lowers the tempiture,you don't have to use Ba(No3)2,and if you want to lower the i.t. you can
thermate is made of twenty nine percent barium nitrate. i know you're from a backwards country so i'm typing this real slow so maybe you can understand. IF YOU DON'T HAVE ALL OF THE CHEMICALS IN THERMATE YOU CAN'T HAVE IT.
oooo you've read a whole book!!! you're right about the debate....you can't even come up with anything good. you're just another truther who has his nose up steven jones' ass. next time try using your brain before you use monkeys to randomly type for you.
Oh fuck off. This is the mindset of you conspiracy fucks.
"YOU"RE WRONG. IM RIGHT. INSTEAD OF HAVING ME PROVE IT TO YOU, IM GOING TO NOT LEARN HOW TO DEBATE PROPERLY, AND POST A YOUTUBE LINK TO SHOW OTHERWISE"
it's seems mr.bored is another brainless inexperienced unecated knowitall member of the cult. I suggest he be ignored or ridiculed at your leisure. I fart in the general direction OF all truthers and especially the architcets who claim it was demo by the government. they are all worth of nothing but a bucket of night slop and ridicule of the lowest order.
GrigoriZhukov 3 months ago
islandbuoy4 1 month ago
yep, thanks to damage from debris falling from the north tower the structure was critically damaged adn then fatally so by the fires raging inside that the fire fighters could not get to because it was not structurally safe to go inside.
GrigoriZhukov 3 months ago
Please show me the tests with no fireproofing. I will wait.
MrBoredatwork 4 months ago
@MrBoredatwork that work was done by several differnt groups as far back as 5 years ago and as recently as 2 years. I suggest you get a clue, learn to work with steel. I have can and do. Ever weld? Ever cut steel? Ever heated and shaped steel? hmmm? I have and I've seen what fuel fires can do...like melting corningware. So just what is your problem with facts and teh real world?
GrigoriZhukov 3 months ago
@GrigoriZhukov I am not a truther and I never was. I dont know if you are getting my account confused or what but I never claimed anyone but the terrorists pulled off 9/11.
MrBoredatwork 3 months ago
@MrBoredatwork Then for that I apologize. When I'm wrong I apologe PUBLICLY. 8^) The rest, I speak from DOING. Heck I've even shaped horse shoes. Like I said the fire tests were done. I've BENT steel under a load and miniamal heat retention, with just muscle power. So the I beams easily could have bent. Also the explosive force COULD and did blown the insulation off the beams.
GrigoriZhukov 3 months ago
@GrigoriZhukov
Did you stick that horseshoe up your butt after you straightened it out?
What rocks of ages do you wankers crawl up from under?
Watch this and STFU
watch?v=NL91DdZyVPg&feature=related
islandbuoy4 1 month ago
It has been well-known around the world that the buildings came down because of a controlled demolition. Americans are the only ones who still have the wool over their eyes, due to corporate media brainwashing. Wake up people. It's time to realize what's going on and DEMAND JUSTICE!
/watch?v=0Odg8nDgMQQ&feature=related
imanoutkast 4 months ago
@imanoutkast this video is proof that control demolition extramley bad explanation. if it a was controled demoltion miller would have die in tower 7 because it would look sound. Debris took out a critaial support in wtc 7 and show clear signs of damage. Did you heard him. Miller said the structural integrity was not there! Are you deaf.
spark300c 2 months ago
@spark300c
need a better one?
watch?v=NL91DdZyVPg&feature=related
islandbuoy4 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o /watch?v=5qFsjdymqSk /watch?v=KhdppHwUJ9k /watch?v=zhnNy5EsebA /watch?v=iGqjzFQvfdI /watch?v=WxqoChniKVU /watch?v=9QWvkAgyIY4 /watch?v=qFpbZ-aLDLY /watch?v=HfmliaqIRBE /watch?v=HSjDCwN2i3w /watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ /watch?v=wKuLUu7SQU4
megamogx 4 months ago in playlist 9/11 - New York - WTC7 - Salomon Brothers Building
This doesn’t prove why the building fell symmetrically and for a few seconds at free fall speed. These are not characteristic of a fire collapse. How did all the columns throughout the entire building give away at once? Then for a few moments, fall without any resistance?
asdf35062 4 months ago
That guy sounds exactly like the actor that says the same thing about buildings 1 and 2...... structial integratey......lol.... He probably isn't alive now.
todzilla73 5 months ago
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Since Larry Silverstein said pull it, demolished WTC 7 and collected billions in insurance, why would the insurance company pay the claim if there's evidence of fraud?
If WTC 1 & 2 were destroyed by demolition & not fire, how do you explain video of the exterior columns buckling under heat and stress loads 18 minutes after impact?
How can Marvin Bush be in charge of WTC security when he stopped working for Securecom in June of 2000?
ctcole77 5 months ago
@ctcole77 1. Well simply bc NIST never investigated it for anything other than fires. How could there be any evidence of anything other, if no investigation was done? 2. No one is saying that the exterior columns were not buckling in the argument is what’s causing them to buckle in “Possible molten iron falling from impact zone” would say something other than fire & structural damage brought it down 3. I did not know that, either way it wouldn’t change any of my options. more questions?
asdf35062 4 months ago
You know most people just want a real investigation done & there’s plenty of reason for why many things should have been investigating. Molten iron for 1 it was never even looked into.
asdf35062 4 months ago
@ctcole77 Here is another question they don't want you to ask them.
Can you count up to twenty with out taking off your shoes?
littlesongbird1 4 months ago
not all truthers are crazy conspiracy theorists, theres video of bbc reporting this before it happened, they say that it already went down when its clearly standing 20 minutes before it goes down, theres also video of police officers telling ppl to clear because the building is going to be "blown up", both videos on youtube, so how do the "non-truthers" explain that instead of getting angry at ppl asking legit questions
bigu236 6 months ago
@bigu236 If you did even a little bit of research, you know that the BBC report has been explained. A long time ago.
watch?v=bZCO6eUslY4
911SanityandRespect 6 months ago
@911SanityandRespect everything has been explained, that's why the conspiracy's not true right?
bigu236 6 months ago
@bigu236 That is usually how it goes.
911SanityandRespect 6 months ago
The mention of the WTC7 fall is from the voice-over (is that voice-over part of the original clip? what is the date of its airing?)
Nowhere in this short clip firefighter Miller says the WTC7 is about to collapse. He tells of the difficulty to extinguish the fire. Moreover it is not clear if Miller is referring to the WTC7. The source of the smoke is uncertain, as large fires were burning in WTC 5 and WTC 6 nearby. Also firefighters reinforcement at 3pm doesn't accredit a collapse scenario.
vetranp 7 months ago
If there were explosives in that building, there would be a series of extremely loud bangs immediately before the collapse. They would have clearly been recorded on all cameras present. Building 7 had no sounds of explosions at all.
TimothyRaymond1 7 months ago
Remember, it is not the collapse of WTC7 that is the anomaly. It is the MANNER of the collapse: all together (except for the penthouses) and at free fall for 25 meters. Both facts acknowledged by NIST.
Skeptic121 9 months ago
Cops keep a low profile so that they can secretly protect us. This is why they are camera-shy.
procommenter 11 months ago
The anomaly of WTC7 is not the collapse but the manner of collapse: together and at free fall for 25 meters (NIST). The towers did not drop at free fall; WTC7 did. So what? Free fall for 25 meters means 25 meters of vertical support removed SUDDENLY from all over the base of WTC7. NOT weakened by fire; removed suddenly. Free fall for 25 meters limits possible explanations. CD works perfectly, so does "knee joints" and hinges in the vertical support beams. Anyone have the blueprints?
Skeptic121 1 year ago
I need to get myself some of those silent explosives for fireworks night so my dog doesn't get frightened.
Do you know where to get some. Have they back engineered any from alien technology. There's another thing that doesn't leave behind evidence. Wow some of that technology they have out in the desert, it's indistinguishable from magic!
beorhav 11 months ago
@beorhav Thermite/ thermate does not make much noise. ThermATE makes noise if it is confined. Gunpowder makes noise when confined but just a whoosh when ignited in a heap on the ground. In order to make a "bang" a chemical reaction must propagate faster than sound or generate gasses that do so once released, like a gun barrel. In fireworks, gunpowder makes a bang only when it is confined in a tightly wound roll of paper; pressure builds then releases suddenly faster than sound: bang!
Skeptic121 11 months ago
But there wan't any trace of thermite found. And that paper that you will mention isn't pseudoscience and isn't taken seriously by the scientific community. Not surprising a pseudoscientist found rust and aluminium and assumed it was thermite. Plus being slow buring it would be impossible to get the timing right. And experiemnts have shown that a metal pillar surrounded by thermite wouldn't fail.
NEXT!!!!
beorhav 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@beorhav "NEXT!!!" It's right here on YT: The Great Thermate Debate
Please note: there is an important difference between thermITE and thermATE besides spelling.
"...a metal pillar surrounded by thermite wouldn't fail." Correct! Watch the video; it's about thermATE surrounded by a metal pillar!
Skeptic121 11 months ago
The pseudoscientist who claimed to find thermite dodn't even do a control!!!! They even do controls on mythbusters but a so-called scientist neglected too!!!!
Silly man..
beorhav 11 months ago
As soon as one support loses it's strength, the weight would instantly be distributed to the others, resulting in forces they were not designed to withold, hence their collapse.
But don't listen to me, listen to the expert consensus (and no AE9/11 isn't the expert consensus)
beorhav 11 months ago
@beorhav Thanks; would you like to try explaining the 25 meters of free fall, followed by descent at a constant velocity?
Could you find a video of a building collapsing because one support is removed? The ones I have seen show one end falling first. The other end falls later or not at all. I welcome alternative hypotheses and new evidence!
Thanks again!
Skeptic121 11 months ago
The building in the middle of the video, from 11 - 15 seconds, is not "leaning" at all. Take a business card, hold it against the left side of WTC 7, perpendicular to the bottom of the frame, and you see that it is exactly straight up. It is parallel to the other buildlings on the sky line. Only the one at the far left seems to be leaning to the right, but is not a WTC.
rshaddock 1 year ago
@rshaddock The firefighters used a surveying tool called a transit to determine the building was leaning.
bagintree 1 year ago
Yes, a highly accurate scientific measuring device you thought up their!!!!
Oh dear....You are a victim of the system that you claim done this. It has left you aliented, resulting in fear and paranoia
beorhav 11 months ago
The firefighters on the scene were heroes. This one, like all of them, were intelligent, hard working Americans. As for the notion that it was destroyed on purpose, my heart goes out to Larry Silverstein. It must be painful to be implicated in a mass murder of 3000 innocent people by internet nut cases. Then again, maybe he isnt offended considering the source.
athabascka 1 year ago
@athabascka, LARRY SILVERSTEIN IS A HERO HAHAHAHAHAHA No wonder it is so easy to own and control dumb Americans. You can fuck them and they make u their hero! I live about 10 minutes away from Michigan (in Canada) and since I was a kid I could never get over how ignorant, dumb and mind-controlled (but very, very nice and decent people I will give u that) Americans are. When it comes to 911 they are like a battered wife. No matter how much u beat her, she still stands up for her bastard abuser!
facebookprogrammer 10 months ago
@facebookprogrammer: I didnt say Larry Silverstein is a hero. I said the fire fighters were heroes. They saved a lot of lives that day. Firefighters are members of the working class and do valuable work for their communities. I dont "stand up" for the American government. The American government is guilty of many war crimes from the slaughter of Native Americans to Afghanistan and Iraq. So next time you open your big fucking mouth, you might want to know what the fuck youre talking about.
athabascka 10 months ago
@athabascka No one was killed in the collapse of WTC7. You are trying too hard to be outraged. Calm down just a little bit and you'll feel a lot better.
Skeptic121 8 months ago
@athabascka Actually, the main point of contention is that the incident wasnt investigated, since we investigate everything that happens ever. It is suspicious. We as americans must always question our government and be sure that they were not involved. You do not remember the USS Maine, but in 1898 she was sent to havana and there exploded, leading to the spanish american war. Many people think the government caused this. And lets all not forget pearl harbor.
Salinear 7 months ago
@Salinear: Pearl Harbor? What about it? It was a Japanese attack. Not an inside job. The evidence that al Qaeda did 9/11 is overwhelming. They admit it, they celebrate it, they pat themselves on the back. At this very moment, young Jihadists at Punjab University in Pakistan are promoting an essary contest, where participants mourn the death of Bin Laden. Posters promoting this contest show the burning Twin Towers. Deniers of what really happened cannot be taken seriously.
athabascka 7 months ago
@athabascka actually they said they had nothing to do with it. ask anyone who speaks arab and theyll tell you those videos of al queada are mistranslated. have you ever heard of the gulf of tonken?
KennyBare 6 months ago
@KennyBare: Gulf of Tonken has nothing to do with al Qaeda or 9/11. Nobody with any credibility takes you people seriously. That ought to tell you something.
athabascka 6 months ago
@athabascka no but it prooves that people lie to go to war
KennyBare 6 months ago
Comment removed
athabascka 6 months ago
@KennyBare: Your argument is an example of a non-sequitur logical fallacy. Because one war was started by a false flag operation, all wars must be started by a false flag operation. The premise does not lead to the conclusion. In fact the conclusion is so hysterical and wrong, it reinforces why nobody with any credibility takes conspiracy theorists seriously.
athabascka 6 months ago
@athabascka looks at our evidence though, those thing fell at the speed of gravity straight with no resistance, almost all the witnesses there heard explosions and then the towers came down. afgahnistan is a gold mine. 90% of the worlds opium is there. the president of afgahnsitan's brother who just died was getting payrolls by the cia to sell heroin!!! open up your god damn mind. those buildings cant break the rules of physics. its impossible.
KennyBare 6 months ago
@KennyBare: Free fall would have been 9.2 seconds. The towers actually took over 14 seconds to fall. Nice try. Good luck getting laughed at the rest of your life.
athabascka 6 months ago
@athabascka o my god you are so fucking stupid!!!! it took fourteen seconds to fall but it fell at the speed of gravity!!!! hahahahahahaha
KennyBare 6 months ago
@KennyBare: No, it did not. If something fell at the speed of gravity, it would have fallen in 9 seconds. It took the twin towers over 14 seconds to fall. Video shows the point of failure at the point of impact. There is no evidence for anything but a plane impact and a fire. Like I said, good luck getting laughed at the rest of your life. I hope you get used to eyes rolling. The 9/11 conspiracy theory is more like a religion than a theory. No evidence, fanatical belief, ect.
athabascka 6 months ago
@athabascka yeah that's really overwhelming evidence, what about Barry Jennings who witnessed explosions within the WTC7 building before the first tower collapsed
crisisofconsciousnes 4 months ago
@crisisofconsciousnes: Most firemen predicted the WTC7 collapse because the building was heavily damaged, on fire for hours, and wasn't stable. It makes me angry that people like you think you have legitimate theory. Its like talking to a Christian fundamentalist. Irrational beliefs do not deserve respect and are not legitimate. The 9/11 conspiracy theory is certainly an irrational belief. Too many people would have to know about it.
athabascka 4 months ago
@athabascka You haven't explained the eyewitness Barry Jennings who witnesses explosions within WTC7 before either tower had collapsed. How does that one fit into your theory?
crisisofconsciousnes 4 months ago
@crisisofconsciousnes: In the sciences, eyewitness testimony is generally considered unreliable. Some people thought they saw missiles or what not. It is a fundamental misunderstanding of science to assume that a few discrepancies can overthrow a solid scientific theory, especially when we are talking eyewitness testimony. Of course its possible that explosions did happen in WTC7. There are a number of reasons why there could be explosions in a building on fire.
athabascka 4 months ago
@athabascka I think you may have misunderstood me, Barry Jennings witnessed explosions within WTC7 before either of the towers had collapsed, he was interviewed straight after the event, another witnessed testified that he had to help Barry escape from the building because the whole lobby was blown up.
crisisofconsciousnes 4 months ago
@crisisofconsciousnes: You mean to tell me that explosions in WTC7, set off before either towers 1 or 2 collapsed, caused the building to collapse about 5 hours later, a theory not only illogical, but entirely dependant upon one man's testimony. The firemen knew the structural integrity of the building was compromised, and the collapse was anticipated - not due to phantom explosions in the lobby - but to structual damage and fire caused by the towers collapse. Get real. You believe a fairy tale.
athabascka 4 months ago
@athabascka haha how ironic, you think I believe in a fairy tale
crisisofconsciousnes 4 months ago
@crisisofconsciousnes: According to Occam's Razor, when faced with competing hypotheses, one should choose the explanation that makes the fewest new assumptions. In other words, avoid unnecessarily complex explanations. This is where the 9/11 conspiracy theory fails. All the footage clearly shows the planes and fires causing the damage. Asserting that planted explosives were also involved is adding an unnecessary assumption without a shred of proof. So the 9/11 conspiracy theory fails.
athabascka 4 months ago
The CIA were behind 911 - FACT!
cigpapers 1 year ago
You see the fire? he askes?? NO I dont.. lol it was not engulfed in flames when it went down. You can see this from any video of it. Bottom line is that buildings dont collapse like this.
katlovesall 1 year ago
@katlovesal
You dont see the fire?? are you retarted or just stubborn?
l
EARTH51087 1 year ago
@EARTH51087 Thats a true sign of ignorance to start out insulting someone right off the bat.I especially don't like that term"retarted" people that are retarted have a genetic defect that they can't control, where as YOU have no excuse for being ignorant.That aside, the most important part of this clip is that they are not even showing bld 7,it was at least 47 stories high.. the two clips they show here are of buildings much smaller. So yes so far I have not seen building 7 engulfed
katlovesall 1 year ago
@EARTH51087 By the way it's spelled retarded, not retarted.. so the next time you call someone that you better spell it right so you don't look that way.
katlovesall 1 year ago
@EARTH51087 By the way it's spelled retarded, not retarted.. so the next time you call someone that you better spell it right so you don't look that way.
katlovesall 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EARTH51087 By the way it's spelled retarded, not retarted.. so the next time you call someone that you better spell it right so you don't like YOU are.
katlovesall 1 year ago
@EARTH51087 By the way it's spelled retarded, not retarted, so the next time you try to insult someone with that YOU don't look that way.
katlovesall 1 year ago
@katlovesall For a building to be ENGULFED IN FLAMES it would be on every floor and with smoke and flames coming out of every window. Building seven falls like the rug has been pulled out from under it. Anyone that believes this fell from a small fire on three floors is a moron. If buildings came down this easy from setting them on fire then we would not need pyrotechnic experts to take them down with exposives. NO in the real world buildings just don't fail like this freom a fire .
katlovesall 1 year ago
9/11 Deniers call people that believe in the truth troofers.
Creationists call people that believe the truth evilutionists. Interesting how similar the thought patterns are. Keep the faith lol.
niverent 1 year ago
@niverent
i love you
EARTH51087 1 year ago
@EARTH51087 No you don't. You are the creationist in my analogy.
niverent 1 year ago
There is a huge difference between a building that "falls down" or "collapses" and what happened to WTC7. Building Seven did not just collapse; it collapsed almost simultaneously and a free fall acceleration. If WTC7 had suffered a partial, uneven collapse like most buildings damaged by fire or bombs, I would believe the official story. I would be insulting the "kook-tard twoofer-faggots" and being as nasty as anyone here.
Skeptic121 2 years ago
It DID suffer a partial, uneven collapse. First the penthouse then two seconds later the rest of the building. This video has never been shown on one of the conspiracy "documentarys". I wonder why.
watch?gl=US&feature=player_embedded&v=CLHwvwJCmgk
Pontus80 2 years ago
WTC7 fell straighter and more evenly than any other building collapse due to a CD or anything else. Find a building anywhere near the size of WTC7 that collapsed as WTC7 did and post the video here on YouTube and I will STFU. NIST reported that the upper east and west corners of the north facade dropped within a half second of each other, though separated by 100 meters. That's a football field plus one end zone.
Skeptic121 2 years ago
Actually the penthouse fell closer to ten seconds before the north facade.
Mystylplx 2 years ago
Inexplicable collapse of 47 vertical steel central columns.
Nano Thermite. Anonymously peer reviewed.
INVESTIGATE 9/11 ... PROPERLY.
seekYEthetruth 2 years ago
Im sure he's a plant anyway... Google; Beijing skyscraper fire. 9/11 = inside job.
THERMATE MICROSPHERES
seekYEthetruth 2 years ago
"THERMATE MICROSPHERES "
So they ALL were plants? ALL the firefighters and rescue workers who were there?
Mystylplx 2 years ago
THats the problem with all the truthers. When you pin them on something they cant explain, they instantly go to. "Hes obviously a plant and works for the governement." Its impossible to win an arguement when they fall back on that everytime.
MrBoredatwork 2 years ago 6
@MrBoredatwork
there are idiots everywhere... both truther and sheep alike have their share
dirtybird2212 1 year ago
@dirtybird2212 The problem is that the "sheep" are the ones who are not being led around by the ear, using only prisoplanet and youtube videos. The "sheep" are the ones who look at all credible evidence to form logical and reasonable conclusions about what happened. The truthers, the same ones who talk about "doing your own research", are the ones that truly do not do there own research and believe that poorly edited youtube videos are the absolute truth without digging any further.
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork I don't really listen that much to alex jones, and I read the laws, al these new laws, regulations, militarized police, the and what about the 200 million that went into no where?
dirtybird2212 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork "The truthers...are the 1s that truly do not do there own research & believe that poorly edited youtube videos are the absolute truth without digging any further."
yep. 1 brought up the "2nd page" of the ASCE Report about witnesses. I corrected him that it was pg 12&13. He tried to pull a slickwilly & pretend he left a 1 off the 12 as a typo. I asked him if he normally says 12 as "12nd." Epic fail on a facesave. He didn't know what pg it was on because he never read the report.
BrokenAeroVT 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork Agreed. That's a smart firefighter. But I wouldn't say his statement precludes controlled demo, which is what it looks like in the end. Keep in mind that possibility was not available to the NIST investigation; the scope of their project was to come up with data to fit a building model. Similarly, the scope of the 911 Commission investigation was strictly limited to intelligence failures.
jalderwood 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork Yep if it was a secet controlled demolition you wouldnt be able to predict it,s collapse
wllmdnldsn 1 year ago 2
@wllmdnldsn "Yep if it was a secet controlled demolition you wouldnt be able to predict it,s collapse
"
Right, unless the firement were inadvertently admitting that they knew about the "covert" demolition and allowed it to happen. Now, I've been accused of hating police, firemen and 911 victims by these imbeciles, but this obvious conclusion smacks of indicting firemen and implicating them as more than liars, but murderers. Shame on you 911 "truthers". You SUCK.
BrokenAeroVT 1 year ago
Actually it was easily predictable and many news agencies reported that it was going to fall many hours before it fell.
MrBoredatwork 4 months ago
@MrBoredatwork The commenter beneath you tries a slick willey to get around the fact that these firefighters were talking about the building leaning because of the work of covert delolition experts. Here we see the building leaning and deemed doomed to fall by firefighters before the alleged "explosives" go off and now it's "strategic cuts in girders". You're right. You can't win. They will deny clear fact, even change their stories to maintain their delusion that the "evil empire did this.
BrokenAeroVT 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork If this were the country these "truther" imbeciles portray it as, these blibbering idiots wouldve been rounded up & shot 10yrs ago. Their stories damn themselves 2 a horrific future 1 yr away--2 be rounded up at 4am from red & yellow lists, chained in trains & freighted off 2 facilities where they will be systematically gassed while still in their railcars, kept fresh 3 at a time in FEMA caskets until torched 2 ash in a furnace. Is that what they relentlesly want to believe? lol
BrokenAeroVT 1 year ago
If you could reason with a truther, there wouldn't be any thruthers!
beorhav 11 months ago
@MrBoredatwork At least some of us can spell "argument". That's probably because many of us use the term in our working lives. Hint for the computer ignorant: an "argument" is a variable or a string or piece of information that a function takes and processes and then returns a value. The old programmers used that term because mathematical functions are said to take arguments and return values.
Skeptic121 8 months ago
@MrBoredatwork then you tell them to prove it cause in this day and age of science we ask for proof and not speculation.... you say prove it, they cant, and they loose again....
jdogg781517 7 months ago
@jdogg781517 I don't discuss serious issues with people who take shirtless pictures of themselves in mirrors.
MrBoredatwork 7 months ago
Comment removed
jdogg781517 7 months ago
@MrBoredatwork you are so ignorant you did not realize i was on your side, and if you cant come back against a "truth er" who says something that idiotic, then remove your self from a serious conversation of that nature.... cause when someone just argues speculation and not the facts, i ask them to "prove it" not "dammit the got me again with the government planted that guy argument" pwned by a guy that takes pics with his shirt off....
jdogg781517 7 months ago
@jdogg781517 LOL. You got me.....I didn't really read your comment. Just skimmed it and assumed you were a truther. You are still a dbag for the cellphone/mirror/shirtless self pic though. That shit doesn't change. Its still better than being a cellphone/mirror/shirtless/truther though.
MrBoredatwork 7 months ago
@MrBoredatwork i wasn't taking a shirtless picture of my body for girls like some people do cause thats all they have to offer, i happened to not have a shirt on and took a face pic for my facebook, not a body pic....
jdogg781517 7 months ago
Comment removed
jdogg781517 7 months ago
@MrBoredatwork STEEL HIGH-RISED BUILDINGS HAVE NEVER EVER COLLAPSED FROM FIRE AND NEVER WILL, even some controlled demolitions go wrong and fail to blow up every floor resulting in a partial collapse, in this case, all the resistance was blown up at the same time and melted which is why it fell perfectly down without tipping over at any time.
Xendrius 4 months ago
@Xendrius No steel high rise building has ever been hit with a 757 going over 500 miles per hour. Your argument is straw man and clearly flawed.
MrBoredatwork 4 months ago
@MrBoredatwork Underwrites laboratory did tests simulating the weight of the upper section pressing down on columns similar to the WTC which were exposed to 6 hours of constant maximum heat jetfuel fire, they increase the temperatures in furnaces, blew oxygen in, increased the load, did the columns weaken? No, did they soften? No, did the entire thing collapse? No. That's science, you claim jetfuel and damage on the upper floors can implode a 110 steel building? Man you are a genius.
Xendrius 4 months ago
@Xendrius Can we stick to one argument before jumping to others? You claimed that no other steel high rise building has collapsed to due fire and I told you that there had never been another steel high rise tower hit by 757's traveling at over 500 miles per hour. Comment on that first. Do you admit that your claim is dis-ingeniousness to try and compare those things?
MrBoredatwork 4 months ago
@MrBoredatwork You ASSUME that a it is possible for an airliner hitting a building, to implode it 50 minutes later, I told you then that they did tests to see if that was possible, they increased the heat, the duration, the load, it did not happen.
Xendrius 4 months ago
@Xendrius Because those tests were not the same as what happened on 9/11. I have read the tests you claim to have seen and you clearly have not. If you would have seen the tests you are citing, you would be able to tell that the tests were not the same conditions as the WTCs. The tests had INTACT columns, WITH fireproofing. The WTC had neither of those things when the planes hit.
MrBoredatwork 4 months ago
@MrBoredatwork They did the tests with no fireproofings, don't go ahead to claim that the severed columns were responsible for the upper section to break lose completely, the planes also hit very differently, even if they severed all the core columns on impact, it would have toppled over, not crushed 80 stories of the same material, learn some basic science will you. We are not talking about a house of cards here.
The point is simple, jetfuel cannot soften steel. That's science.
Xendrius 4 months ago
@MrBoredatwork
Two buildings that were built to withstand multiple planes flying into them literally imploded from a plane hitting them not long before this.
Obviously one firemen and I bet dozens more were saying this building that building is gonna be next.
In all fairness though, people started getting tip offs about 9/11 a fair ways down the corporate ladder.
Also one last point.
If you assume Flight 93 was the intended explanation for WTC 7's collapse, everything makes sense.
SergeantPepper99 4 months ago
@SergeantPepper99 They were not meant to withstand multiple planes....only 1 plane. What you fail to realize is that it was designed to take a smaller plane hitting it at MUCH slower speeds to simulate a plane hitting while lost in fog. They built that into the system because it already happened to the Empire State Building. The planes hit MUCH MUCH faster than intended and in turn caused an order of magnitude more damage that the building was not designed to take. Good job on your research. /s
MrBoredatwork 4 months ago
@MrBoredatwork Some truthers make up evidence to try to prove their theory. I'll post a couple facts instead:
These same firefighters bought the official story of the building falling by fire later on anyways.
If a firefighters captain tells the group to evacuate an area because a building is about to fall due to fire damage, and you're a confused firefighter with no idea what's going on yourself, you'd try to save the people obviously.
So the firefighters wouldn't know or care why it fell.
SergeantPepper99 4 months ago
@SergeantPepper99 There was no confusion as to why the building was going to come down and there was no one to save inside WTC7. It had been evacuated already. They were simply trying to stop the growing fires inside but could not because the collapse of the twin towers busted the main water supply underground. The fires grew to the point that fire officials knew the building would eventually collapse. The NYFD Chief ordered everyone out and away and they let the building fall.
MrBoredatwork 4 months ago
What Building was he talking about?
Just looks like one sided editing.
Their are a lot of firefighters saying their is something worng with the offical story.
sensless1mc 3 years ago
What building? The voiceover clearly states that he is talking about wtc7. He describes nothing that can be mistaken for something else than wtc7.
moj68 3 years ago
Yea the voiceover not the fierfigher. What the video does show is WTC 5 not 7
sensless1mc 3 years ago
"
Yea the voiceover not the fierfigher. What the video does show is WTC 5 not 7
"
True, but beside the point. The point is that the firefighters and rescue workers who were there knew it was just a matter of time before wtc7 fell. Read the print interviews and they go into more detail--the bldg was leaning progressively further to the south, a bulge popped out between the 10th & 14th floors, strange moaning sounds coming from the bldg as it shifted and settled, etc.
Explosives not needed.
Mystylplx 2 years ago
"Their are a lot of firefighters saying their is something worng with the offical story. "
No. There are a few, but there are a few nutjobs in every occupation. On the other hand, there are something like 500 interviews with the firefighters and rescue workers who were actually there that all describe massive fires in wtc7, the bldg leaning further and further to the south, and they all knew it was just a matter of time before that bldg came down.
Mystylplx 2 years ago
why didn't it fall where it was leaning
d31090 2 years ago
you are without a doubt sensless
MrBoredatwork 2 years ago
thats wtc 5
sidneyoh 3 years ago
THATS NOT WTC 7
sidneyoh 3 years ago
Go fire fighters for 911 truth dott org, this will show it all, go 911 research and read the testimony of firefighters and ambulance workers that heard and felt explosions
blite13 3 years ago
W.T.C - 7: There goes a skyscraper collapsing as do all skyscrapers that are traumatized by designers who have made the strategic cuts in girders & planted explosives. There it is. Make of it what you will. There's no getting around the fact that it was brought down.
procommenter 3 years ago 2
I want some of these silent explosives for bonfire night, then my dog wouldn't get scared.
P.S You are an expert, you're a victim of alienation, resulting in your critical being robbed.
beorhav 11 months ago
That fireman was proven to be a plant, he was also filmed talking with another fireman, explaining to him how the towers fell using the "official story". THIS WAS THE DAY OF 9/11, he looked all clean, like he had never even gotten close to the scene. Here he was telling a few DIFFERENT news men his story, why a clean fireman that had obviously not been close to the scene? He was a plant and notice how thet use his clip to tell of what horrible shape the building was in prior to collapse, LEARN.
blite13 3 years ago
And yet again you present another UNalarming bit of info. Look a bit harder. What ISN'T he wearing in this clip? Don't ya think that maybe, just MAYBE he was kinda hot and removed his slickers late in the day?
oxomaticman 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NIST's WTC 7 report disclaimer No. 3:
. . . the NIST director has determined that certain evidence . . is voluntarily provided . . not directly related to the building failure . . and that disclosure of that information would inhibit the voluntary provision of that type of information.
In other words: we aren't telling you all of our information. Only what we feel like. We can't check their work because they're not providing us with all of their information.
Criminal investigation.
bobbygnosis 3 years ago
Are you kidding me? Is this true? My God, they are slapping you in the face and most of America says " slap me again, please". What in the hell is wrong with America, you are more communist than USSR ever was. Your government rules you with lies and crimes and you don't even see it. You are shit scared it might be true so you won't even look. WAKE THE F UP.
blite13 3 years ago
Yes. That was the first paragraph of disclaimer 3. The second paragraph states that, "additionally a substantial portion of evidence given to NIST was under non-disclosure agreements." In other words, they will tell us THAT they got to their conclusion; not WHY.
If this is blatantly obvious I don't know what is.
Call for a criminal investigation.
bobbygnosis 3 years ago
controlled demolition means inside job.
nothwind 3 years ago
Wake up.
Evi1Jester 3 years ago
The original WTC7 was 47 stories high, was it not?
The building shown in this video (30 second video mark) seems a bit short, around 18+ stories.
NIST all these years later still haven't released the final report showing how a 47 story building symmetrically dropped at the speed of gravity, into a nice neat pile for 'Controlled Demolitions Inc' later to clean up.
australiamatters 3 years ago
Yup that was probably building 6, in this clip, they never give a good shot of #7. They show the more damaged #6 and #5 to confuse people into thinking that it was building 7 that had all that damage. More propaganda that the public, who don't even care to look into what really happened that day, see it and say "wow, that building was very damaged, no wonder it fell, those CT'ers are really crazy".It is a sad day that TV rules America,TV gives them their non reality life and they love it = SICK.
blite13 3 years ago
We could understand WTC7 collapsing; many buildings have collapsed due to bombs, earthquakes, fire, and other damage. BUT all of those collapses have been very different from WTC7: partial, chaotic, messy, uneven (pick your word). WTC7 was as smooth, intact, straight down, and as simultaneous as any controlled demolition on video. In fact, only one video (Landmark Tower in Ft. Worth) shows such a straight and simultaneous collapse due to a CD, and that was a much smaller building.
RichardC111165 3 years ago
Now I understand. The wild theories are kids yacking at the mouth, dunderheads, and anti-U.S. and other cybershit. Anyhow, thanks to all those who took time to clear up this mess.
jamesrobert2 3 years ago
He said "See it leaning?" and he was certain it was going to fall. Man was he wrong! Instead of falling over, it magically PULVERIZED itself into dust, and went flying through the streets, while leaving all the heavy stuff in a convenient pile at the base. Wow!... Who could have seen that coming?
BillBraskysDad 3 years ago
Er, the building wasn't "pulverized into dust". That's just stupid.
ClunkityClunk4Truth 3 years ago
This is where you and your ilk's arguments turn bizzare. You say the government was willing to kill all those people and bring down the buildings under the guise of a terrorist attack, but....to do it as neatly as possible? Er, yeah, you wouldn't want the building to fall over, cuz that'll be REALLY messy. So absurd.
oxomaticman 3 years ago 2
weather you choose to accept the facts does not concern me. I know that 1.Physics, 2.science, 3.eyewitnesses, 4.evidence, 5.video footage, and 6.common sense blast the "official version" into fairytale land! cave dwelling ragheads hit our DOD HQ with a passenger jet??? WTF?! with nothing to gain???
BillBraskysDad 3 years ago
I don't know "weather" to laugh or cry at a rebuttal that separates physics and science into two separate categories, which in turn separates eyewitnesses and video footage from evidence. Putting your grammatical skills and thought process aside though, (Cave dwelling ragheads? Are you serious?) Which argument from a physics/science/eyewitness/evidence/video footage standpoint do YOU take that hasn't already been debunked by OTHER TRUTHERS as, in their own words "strawman arguments"?
oxomaticman 3 years ago
So absurd? What is absurd is 3 giant buildings that were made to withstand airliners hitting them,wind of gale purportions,made with top grade steel in a design that if floors were damaged in anyway,the building would be able to withstand it.Absurd is THEY ALL FELL DUE TO HEAT(lol)IN THEIR OWN FOOTPRINT AND ALL THAT IS LEFT IS NICELY CUT METAL BEAMS.The rest was a fine dust that has killed first responders because the government told everyone it was safe to breath,now what is really ABSURD ??
blite13 3 years ago
Actually, your arguments are just plain STUPID. Withstand winds of gale forces? So what? Try this for an experiment. Stand in front of a giant fan blowing air at 120 mph. Then have someone throw a baseball at your head at only 80 mph. Note the difference? Now, let's pretend that those beams were not cut by ironworkers during cleanup. Where do you see the implosions occuring on the floors the beams were cut? You can clearly see the towers collapsing from the top down.
oxomaticman 3 years ago
the wind was just example of how well it was built. did i mention anything about the beams? you are obviously one of those "guys" that just want to start going of on how twoofers are so dumb and are crazy. Just go along your merry way there chuckie, i have no use for you.
blite13 3 years ago
Wow, a conspiracy nut has no use for me. That just breaks my heart.
oxomaticman 3 years ago
Actually, the TOWERS were pulverized into dust but WTC7 fell straight down and intact at nearly free-fall acceleration. WTC7 looks like a very good controlled demolition. The tower collapses were unprecedented. Many collapses like WTC7 have happened: all have been controlled demolitions. If WTC7 was a CD, it was rigged in advance, meaning powerful people knew about 911 in advance, so we should be mad as someone other than, or in addition to, Osama and the box cutter boys.
RichardC111165 3 years ago
i'm asking you where is the sound of the implosion......
crwnikeboy 3 years ago
you have NO idea what you're talking about....implosions make a hell of alot of noise......where is it if it's here?
crwnikeboy 3 years ago
again the boom boom argument,once the debunker movement dropped the barium nonsense there is another nonsene
you can use thermite
watch?v=Wn-MCCZ3O1M
..and hola hey
explosives can be silent
watch?v=Yq0iEKmoBIM
peterene 3 years ago
you CAN'T have thermite if there's no chemical signature. it would be like me trying to make water without hydrogen and oxygen. and your silent explosive video? IT ISN'T SILENT!!!!! damn
crwnikeboy 3 years ago
There is no chemical signature?WTF you are talking about?Every heard about professor Jones?Ah,I know you will try to ridicule his work "he found slphur.dry wall" HAHA men,he found IRON RICH SPHERULES and FEMA found high tempiture sulphidation.
Give an explanation.
He found no calcium,and the high-tempiture atack isn't from sulphuric acid.
...and have you watched the second video?
it clearly proves that explosions can be silent
peterene 3 years ago
the charge have 30g of explosive and it was filmed from 10m
charge required to destroy a core column (5kg)
yes taht is 160 times bigger,but distance square ....yes it is silent
peterene 3 years ago
WTF are you not getting? you don't mean THE steven jones who was discredited by his own university and by his peers? he's been found to be wrong on the thermite/thermate accusations several times. where's the aluminum oxide? where's the barium nitrate? you can't have MOST of the chemicals in order to make something,you have to have them ALL. try not to be so stupid next time.
crwnikeboy 3 years ago
WTF you are talking about!He found aluminium oxide,barium isn't esential for thermite.Another debunker-legend.
HOW EXACTLY WAS HE WRONG?
peterene 3 years ago
lol he hasn't found any such thing,and barium nitrate HAS to be there or it can't be thermite. let's just say he found aluminum oxide...he'd be the ONLY one...hmmmm....
crwnikeboy 3 years ago
Basically you know shit about pyrotechnic,so lets spread your fantasies about the nice world with "bad" and "good" guys.
Technicaly thermite is a mixture of metaloxide and another metal.You can use everything.Your barium lie is..wtf?
Barium nitrate is poisonus..it isn't simply to buy big quantites of it and it is used simply to lower the ignition tempiture,nothing else,moreover the nitrogen lowers the tempiture,you don't have to use Ba(No3)2,and if you want to lower the i.t. you can
peterene 3 years ago 2
use thousands of subtitutes like potassium permanganate and potassium nitrate....
It is hard to debate debunker with speculative objects even facts can't be mentioned to debunkers mind.
peterene 3 years ago
thermate is made of twenty nine percent barium nitrate. i know you're from a backwards country so i'm typing this real slow so maybe you can understand. IF YOU DON'T HAVE ALL OF THE CHEMICALS IN THERMATE YOU CAN'T HAVE IT.
crwnikeboy 3 years ago
"backwards" this needs no further comment
thermate TH-3 is made of Ba(No3)2,but thermite can be made from n chemicals.
I've read a whole book only about pyrotechnic mixtures,so I know what I'm talking about.
peterene 3 years ago 2
oooo you've read a whole book!!! you're right about the debate....you can't even come up with anything good. you're just another truther who has his nose up steven jones' ass. next time try using your brain before you use monkeys to randomly type for you.
crwnikeboy 3 years ago
ooooo men, I HAVE U DON'T I'm thousand times more competent than U!U know shit about this problem!
Fuck you!
peterene 3 years ago
ahhh...my 2nd fuck you of the day from the CT'ers. go back to sucking off jarmila kratchovilova
crwnikeboy 3 years ago
You idiot Implosions make noise like this
watch?v=79sJ1bMR6VQ
Was no implosion!
bilracer 3 years ago
wtf is LOUD ranting? I'M SORRY IS THIS TOO LOUD FOR YOUR COMPUTER SPEAKERS TO HANDLE? Hmm, you are smart with words.
The figure: this video.
You've debated shit.
lulzz.
sobernuts 3 years ago
Oh fuck off. This is the mindset of you conspiracy fucks.
"YOU"RE WRONG. IM RIGHT. INSTEAD OF HAVING ME PROVE IT TO YOU, IM GOING TO NOT LEARN HOW TO DEBATE PROPERLY, AND POST A YOUTUBE LINK TO SHOW OTHERWISE"
sobernuts 3 years ago
seems like that is your attitude actually bud
webovisionca 3 years ago
...no it isn't. GTFO
sobernuts 3 years ago
sarcasm. funny
webovisionca 3 years ago
Maybe you should learn how to debate and not just tell people "OH CHECK FOR YOURSELF"
sobernuts 3 years ago
I already know the answer - no.
thedman113 3 years ago
"WTC 7 exterior walls dropped 100m in a time equivalent to freefall in a vacuum."
So controlled demolition can make objects fall through the air at the same speed as in a vacuum?
thedman113 3 years ago
What an intelligent reply.
Still think Miller here wasn't talking about building 7?
thedman113 3 years ago
Your lack of understanding of gravity is even more astounding.
thedman113 3 years ago
"The firefighter is not talking about WTC 7."
Yes he is:
watch?v=3HLDgjYuRHk
He's looking right at it.
"They took the path of MOST resistance."
Because buildings can't decide to go fall over in central park where there's less resistance.
thedman113 3 years ago