WTC 7 if you watch the building collapse you see it collapsed on its own in fact there are two penthouses on top of WTC 7 that collapse before the rest of the building collapses leading to the conclusion that it wasn't a controlled demolition at all. Also on 9/11 truth websites I have never seen any of the pictures of the rear of building 7 if you look at those pictures you'll see the building was much more damanged than what it appeared in the front.
Exactly, the problem with the truth movement is we actually give people a platform to stand on and debate on the side of the original BS story told by main stream media...STOP!! It's not even debatable. 911 is anything but what they say happened...JUST STOP!! Don't even give people that support the original story the time of day. Want PROOF? Simply look at any video of the twin towers or building 7 falling, that's all the proof we need.
it was just co-incidence . It was co-incidence that Rumsfeld went to congress one day before 9/11 and told that pentagon is missing some 2,3 trillion , A FUCKIN TRILLLLLLION and they cant trace where the money went . No surprise next day event made this to forget . Larry Silverstein the owner of WTC buildings filed TWO insurance claims for the maximum amount of the policy, payout just 6 months prior . Pay out $7.1 billion . What a coincidence....
Sure , and it fell down at a rate of free fall in it own footprint completely pulverized from few office fires and damaged corners . You sir are pure genius !
@resistance0311 Because of the fact that there is conspiracy theorists in a modern society, I'm beginning to realize that religion in of itself is a colossal conspiracy theory for fucktards who will believe in anything that they're told.
Believing in government and politicians does not make you so bright , does it ? I mean politicians and government never lies , just only truth and pure truth ... . But wait a minute , wait a minute , do you know the incident that started Vietnam war ? officially released documents and government officially admitted that attack on US ship was a lie . Never happened .
@resistance0311 Yes I'm aware that humans make mistakes however 911 was not a conspiracy theory!!! First of all, if it was, what would that accomplish exactly? Why did they select only four buildings? Why did flight 93 crash in Shanksville, Pa? And why aren't people protesting against our government ten years later if this really was a conspiracy theory? Everyone by now would know the truth. So don't give me anymore bullshit. I've heard it all before.
there so many people (mainstream media dosent count that are not people that are companies and their only by law a person..) who can explain you why 9/11 has happened just try to listen. the story is so paranoid that you will need to take some time. so relax a little and investigate what people are trying to tell you.
No it didnt mysteriously catch on fire, thats silly. it cought on fire because the whole area around it was on fire, and the heat was high, and pieces was falling down on it. Ok where are the buildings that burned for days? that has never happened, its a lie you made up. There are in fact buildings that burned for a short time and fell down. But you know what, its fine. The war on terror is important anyways. The difference isnt on weather or not we should go to war, but what to do after thewar
@gulbirk u sound really glib. it caught fire cuz pieces was falling down on it? so steel n concrete falling on stell n concrete causes a fire? that's silly. serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/other_fires.htm i didnt lie n make up nothing. The War OF terror is fine? more ppl die from slipping in the bathtub than by terrorists attacks. we spend billions if not trillions on wars. yea lets keep those perpetual wars going bro. yee-haw!
@gulbirk It was on fire. BARELY!!! You should look up the pictures. The fires were minuscule compared to the building. I swear to fucking god, it was like 3 fires on fire. PITIFUL!!! But people like you think that was enough fire to have a building fall like London Bridge, also, Pitiful. It never exploded. In controlled demolitions building don't 'exploded'. They implode. If you can't look up the photos, I'd be glad to show you the pics.
@omarlives It certainly didnt implode, LOL. I I NEVER CLAIMED ANYTHING. Im objecting to the idea that it was an inside job. What a narrow view """""Either it was down by the planes, or an inside job""". sorry, there isnt any evidence EITHER way.
@gulbirk i go for the realistic view. what would make a 47 story steel structured building fall like a pancake. Not fire! but definitely something else was afoot.
@omarlives NO it didnt do that either, thats also a lie. None of the towers did. Google it, wikipedia, anywhere. THey all covered at least 3 times their footprint.
@gulbirk ur takin shit too literally. no controled demo collapses exactly on their footprint u reject. are u in high school or just a high school drop out? EXPLAIN HOW THE FUCK A 47 STORY STEEL STRUCTURED BUILDING COLLAPSES FROM FIRE ALONE!!? ITS RIDICULOUS!
@omarlives I dont know, but at least im honest enough to say that. Your claim is that explosives were used, which is another claim that needs to be proven. Actually, implosions are suposed to do EXACTLY that, make the building fall without hitting things that are close. Some times they almost cover LESS then their footprint. They certainly dont fill 3 times their footprint. That would be a failure.
@gulbirk its not proven fact, but by deduction u tell me what sounds more like a conspiracy theory and what sounds more like reality: "fire takes out 47 story steel structured building" and "building taken down by demolition". the "reality" u live in where fire takes out steel structured buildings is hilarious.
@omarlives Did I say that? No I did not. Again, your mind must be really simple. You cant think of more then two possibilities. And if one is wrong then the other is right?
No, this is my position """I dont know""" I dont know either way. Argument from igorance is what you are using here. Ignore the fire, whats the evidence that explosives were used?
@montrealwatcher since ur such a non-moron maybe u can simply tell me prophecies that haven't come true then. but maybe its too much for ya. i could understand u not giving me even one example!
@montrealwatcher couldn't rebut anything i said, could you? blame god for all the good n bad i do? lol nah i take all the credit n full responsibility for everything i do. LMAO ITS CALLED FREE WILL! yikes! too easy! over n over again? u hear religious ppl over n over again say the bible has alot of crap in it!? lol! tell me all brainy-one, how the fuck does the bible accurately predict a coming world govt?! since i dont know how to think for myself, i wanna know how an independent thinker does.
@montrealwatcher are u kidding? i know the bible has alot of crap. but "turning the other cheek"? "love thy enemy". u'll never find wisdom like that for urself in a trillion lifetimes. "don't resist evil"? u probably never heard of the concept. but enough belittling you. it says we're heading for a one world government. IS THAT NOT WHAT THE UNITED NATIONS BASICALLY IS!!!! WORLD COURT!! HELLO!! ARE U IGNORANT TO REALITY!?!?! ur ridiculous. BYE BYE!! LMAO
@montrealwatcher maybe there is no global conspiracy. ur rite. i dont think china likes any westerns at all. u must not be christian, though. the bible talks about a one world government coming into place. they talk alot about having a one world currency on tv alot these days. aren't seeing that? how did the bible know 2000 years ago?
@montrealwatcher Yea, that's what i am leaning towards now. they let it happen. if u dont think that's just as bad...god help you. thats like saying no i didnt hire the robbers to come n kill my family, but i knew they were coming n didnt do anything to prevent it. that's even worse, because the guy who let it happen if even more psychotic than the guy who hired the killers.
@montrealwatcher yea u rite they how to fly planes... at our US Military bases! lol but to be perfectly honest, i'm not too sure about 9/11 being an inside job anymore. there are more clear cut conspiracies out there that there can be no debate about. trying to convince ppl is a waste of time.
@omarlives I did I made it up myself, kind of like what the loose change loosers did with their silly flawed films, and like Gage and his crony Jones, and the silly fellow Griffen, just made up stuff. Like the whole moronic and silly truth movement, based on flimsy bullshit, and when confronted with real truth and real facts, back pedals into repeating more moronic bullshit
@omarlives sounding sincere has nothing to do with being correct. And for the record Ron Paul is opposed to the truth movemnt. He thinks that y'all are dead wrong, and is 100% convinced that 19 muslim fantatics did 911, and he thinks that because it is the real truth, and he is brillant enough to see through the flimsy illogic of the religion of the ( misnamed) truth movement.
Instead of being reasonable and actually learning about an issue before making a decision, you decided to follow the words of some charlatan scam artists who are selling you ridiculous opinions in the hopes that you will never escape, that you will never think for yourself. In this way I find that most conspiracy theorists are guilty of their own accusations of "you're a sheep! OPEN YOUR EYES!"
No, friend, open your own fucking eyes. And grow up.
Third, I think it is people like you, those who refuse to think critically, who refuse to do research, who refuse to read peer-reviewed scientific journals, that ruin this country and this world. A simple search for "WTC7 conspiracy debunked" will answer every single question you have and more. To not do so demonstrates your laziness and lack of ability to think for yourself. As stated above, you can even read peer-reviewed science about it. But you chose not to.
@DrLoonatic Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions. I always look at debunked and exposed videos. They look to me like a crock of shit. WTC7 losing a corner of one side of the building, n u wanna tell me yea that building is coming down. Ruins the country and the world? Dissent is the highest form of patriotism my friend. I could teach you a few things about making the country and the world a much better place.
Second, I pity you for buying into these sad conspiracies. You have been fed lies without critically thinking about any of it. WTC7 was built in such a way that if a key support beam were to take damage, the whole building would collapse. The debris from the first tower did just such damage and the extensive fires afterward were enough to soften the metal, making it less structurally sound. The beam collapsed because of the weight of 40 stories above it.
Even if you assert "WTC7's collapse is unexplainable" (completely false), you are still presenting a false dichotomy. You are saying, "Either terrorists did it or our own government did it." There are thousands of other possible explanations. Why do you irrationally leap to the conclusion that "The US government conspired with the Jews to kill 3,000 of its own people by placing explosives in WTC7 (which no one noticed, by the way) so they could start a holy war and enslave earth"? What a joke.
@DrLoonatic The Jews? Who said anything about the Jews? Dr. Loonatic, I presume! How did WTC7 catch fire to begin with? The reason has changed numerous times. (You didn't know that) OK we do see a fire there regardless. but its so minor, you can't tell me fire makes buildings fall in its footprint, boy! Other building have been on fire for days and not collapse!! Oblivious to the fact, I'm sure.
@omarlives Just like all conspiracy theorists, you rely on people not knowing exactly what happened with 100% certainty to fuel your "better explanation" of NWO planted explosives. Have you read any peer-reviewed scientific journals about WTC7? Do you know any of the facts at all? Can you name 1 credible source that's giving you this information? No, Alex Jones is not a credible source, he's a loony crock pot. And no I'm not an "NWO operative", I just have common sense.
@DrLoonatic Their 'facts' are "facts". I don't believe them. But maybe I'm paranoid. I know what you're saying though, and I'm starting to realize since I can't prove none of this, I need to move into other conspiracies that can be proven. And believe me, there are conspiracies within the American govt like Gulf of Tonkin and Operation Northwoods. I don't know if you think that's not how a real American thinks, but again I'm a real patriot not becuz i join the army but bcuz I practice dissent.
@omarlives Yes, the government has covered up atrocious things in the past. The CIA is, for all intents and purposes, a fucking terrorist organization. But there is no worldwide NWO plot. 911 was an emotional event, but we cannot let ourselves stray from the true enemy; 19 Muslim operatives acting under the order of Fatwah. Don't you think that out of all the papers Assange leaked, he would have gotten SOMETHING on the NWO plot if it were at all true? I encourage dissent, but stay reasonable.
@taledarkside lol darkside sums u up accurately. I'm actually half arab, but maybe that is a racist statement that I got from white man Alex Jones. but don't al-qadea hide in caves as their headquarters??
how many caves do you think there are in afghanistan? Alex jones uses a racist remark to say middle eastern people are stupid and poor. And they only live in caves.
if that was true, the US wouldn't be outsourcing jobs to the middle east if these people were so dumb.
@taledarkside saying u live in a cave means ur stupid and poor? i thought al-qadea wasn't poor or stupid. that's like where Cobra Commander and Shredder hides his Technodrome because they're terrorists organizations. Not that all Arabs live in caves. Just Al-C.I.A.-da. Duh!
this video has made me realize that im not allergic to stupid people, i just cant watch there stupid ass videos a second time....i owe it all to you homeslice
@Zero2Legend check this out. i used to be just like u! one day i said let me see what kinda stupid bullshit these conspiracy ppl think. cuz i said if its not main stream media it has to be bullshit. didnt read anything. and i already had a biased opinion about them just like u. then i actually researched what they was saying. and all the shit is verifiable facts! now i know better. but u gotta have an open mind like i did. even though i was like this is all bs n i had a bias. how u like me now?
So let me get this straight. Anyone who has an alternate or different view than yours is stupid? A view that science, evidence and logic supports as much or possible more than your own? Wow. You must really get along well with other people. Before you can recognize truth, you have to recognize the various paths that may lead to the truth. Follow just one path and the truth may never be found.
@zabukazar u gotta be stupid if u wanna tell me fire alone made building 7 go down the way it did. i was like u. i was like let me see what kinda stupid shit dumb conspiracies are out there. I ALREADY HAD A BIASED against them just like u. bcuz i thought, if its not on main stream media it cant be valid. but i researched and learned the facts, n now i think ppl are stupid that don't see what's in front of them. buildings coming down due to fire. what a load of shit!!
@omarlives Wow you completley missed the point of my post. I feel bad that you are unable to grasp the point. I was not attacking your view point on 9/11. I was only advising you to explore other avenues. Doing this may change your mind or it may strengthen your argument. I've never said fire alone made WTC7 fall down. In fact I never said anything in my post regarding 9/11 at all. I only said that you shouldn't call people stupid for disagreeing with you.
@zabukazar u dont think i want to believe otherwise? u dont think i looked at stuff to try to debunk what i found out about 911? i didnt just see 911 was an inside job n said ok case closed. i'm always open to facts. but there's no facts that can prove to me that wtc7 came down from fire alone. i feel bad for u if u think i just read about one side of the argument and drew a conclusion. but ppl are stupid when i know for a fact the majority of ppl never even heard of wtc7!
As I am sure you are aware, the largest steel structured building demolished by explosives to date, was the 27 story J L Hudson building in Detroit. It didn't go well. Based on your research of that demolition, how do you feel CDI, or anyone else, could have then so neatly and easily brought down WTC 7?
OK u cleared things up for me. firefighters were in wtc7 i can admit when im wrong about something. but u wanna tell me that those fires (link above) took out wtc 7? there's no way you can convince me of that. WTC 5 now thats what you call a fire! check it out! watch?v=41OCQvu7ULQ&feature=related
@omarlives - The first thing I need you to do is to look up, study, and understand they way WTC 7 was designed and built and the engineering implications involved. There were some very unique features that likely contributed to the collapse. We really can't discuss much until you do that, but... You will then need to consider the massive structural damage WTC 7 suffered when hit by the collapsing tower. You also now know fire *does* cause failure of steel structures. ...
WTC 7 burned, uncontrolled, for over 5 hours. There was no firefighting effort. Do I *want* to tell you the fires and severe structural damage brought down WTC 7? No. What I want to tell you is the truth based on facts and evidence. The facts and evidence point towards the fires and structural damage being the cause. There are zero facts and no evidence point to anything else.
@omarlives I checked out that link. It provides nothing to indicate something other than planes being crashed into buildings, buildings collapsing on other buildings, and raging fires were the cause of what happened. What did you see in that link which would make you feel otherwise?
@JohnP6617 There you go again with the raging fires. Where in this link,
watch?v=XICqbxLVuSY&feature=related
of WTC7, do you see "raging fires"? The fire looks like it's not enough to take out a BBQ grill.
From this link however,
watch?v=41OCQvu7ULQ&feature=related
we can see WTC5, which I'll consider had a raging fire. And what happens to this building with a real raging fire, that has had WTC 1 & 2 collapse on it? Does it collapse? No. WTC7 only had tower 1 fall on it n it collapses?
@omarlives The building was on fire. There were no firefighters attempting to control or put out the fires. It was on fire for over 5 hours. What would you imagine would have kept that fire from being anything but raging? Flashover occurs in minutes. I don't know what you think either video is telling you. What matters is what happened to WTC 7. There is evidence it was brought down by fires and massive structural damage from the collapsing tower. There is no evidence to suggest anything else.
A video showing a couple of snapshots provides no evidence of anything. A video of another building on fire provides no evidence of anything. The firefighters statements of the building leaning hours before it collapsed would indicate structural damage. Demolition is something done all at once. It doesn't cause a building to lean hours before it collapses. Do you have *any* evidence showing something other than fires and structural damage caused the collapse?
@JohnP6617 The "fact" that it was 'leaning' is completely a perspective form of circumstantial evidence. There are *zero* video which shows anything remotely to what you claim. If it was leaning, you would think it would fall over to one side or the other. Not come straight down because one corner was damaged more than the other 3 corners. watch?v=cm7aGzubz9A here along the right side you can see demo chargers. There are better vids that I have seen but can't seem to find them rite now.evidence?
@omarlives The fact that it was leaning was measured and determined by the firefighters on the scene. Whether or not you can measure that lean using the Mark I Eyeball looking at a Youtube video is irrelevant. To understand why the building fell the way it did, you would want to know how it was designed and built. There are no demo charges seen going off in any 9/11 videos. Look at videos of actual demolitions to see what they would really look like.
@JohnP6617 what do u call these? and i can show others that you see the side that is opposite where the sun light is and u see FLASHES OF LIGHT. WHITE FLASHES. watch?v=2EadoxWXpgY&feature=related
@omarlives What would the point be of setting off demolition charges on consecutive upper floors when the building is already collapsing? That looks *nothing* like a demolition, in which the charges are set off on an entire floor, several floors apart, in succession, from the bottom up. They are extremely loud and distinct. They can be heard and felt from some distance from the building. Look and listen, to what it takes to demolish this completely stripped out building watch?v=fMLvFmMf5-0
@JohnP6617 Could be forced out. But what happens when you see flashes of light? just like u do at all control demos. i gotta find that vid. u can see flash points going all the way down in a straight line.
@omarlives If you watch demolition videos, you'll note there is no case where you see explosives used on 6 or 7 consecutive upper floors, which go off after the building is already collapsing. You will also note the explosions are loud and distinct. There are no WTC 7 videos in which any explosions are heard just prior to the collapse. There are no WTC 7 videos in which you see anything that looks like the explosions you see in a demolition.
There you go. A small sample of firefighter statements regarding what was going on with WTC 7. Fires that raged out of control (there was no firefighting effort going on in WTC 7) for over 5 hours, in a heavily damaged building, the unique design of WTC 7 (look it up), indications, hours before the collapse, that the building was leaning, the mechanical penthouse collapsing down through the building prior to the rest of the building collapsing...
...In addition to ZERO evidence of controlled demolition (no explosions, no explosives, no months of preparing the building, including stripping out all non-structural elements...) ... it all adds up to ANOTHER steel structured building which collapsed due to fire and, in this case, massive structural damage from a collapsing 110 story building.
Your knowledge of structural engineering and fire need some work. Steel structured buildings have and *do* collapse due to fires. Would you care to hazard a guess as to why most municipalities require the steel structure of buildings be fireproofed? In your countless microseconds of research, did you happen to come across anything about the fire resistant material on the WTC towers being compromised? Why do you suppose that material was there in the first place?
@JohnP6617 Actually, someone who holds your position showed me a photo of the fire resistant material. What it showed was one small, isolated spot where there was no FR material. The majority of the steel girders were insulated, however. I believe it was a photo of WTC 1 or 2 and was taken in 1993. So, who knows if the problem was rectified since then. WTC 7, however, has no evidence of this sort of problem. I can believe WTC 1&2 came down from the impact n fire, but WTC7 from fire alone? sorry
@omarlives Your claim is steel structured buildings don't collapse from fire. They do. They have. That's why building codes requiring fire resistant coatings on steel structures were created. You made the claim without doing the research.
@JohnP6617 Also, the claim that steel structed buildings have and do collapse due to fires, IS COMPLETELY FALSE. I think I may know which building you may be thinking of, show me one just one where this is true. I guarantee you can not!
@omarlives One of the earliest steel structured buildings in NY, a bank, collapsed due to fire - not in the bank, in the building next to it. Much more recently, in 1997, the steel structured Sight & Sound theater in Lancaster PA collapsed due to fire. "That building I may be thinking of..." .... the Windsor Tower, a steel and concrete structured building - the steel structure collapsed due to the fire. The collapsed stopped at the heavily reinforced concrete transfer structure at the 17th floor
Good job genius! Do you think the 110 story building falling on it may have been a factor, is was the case with *every single* building in the WTC complex? Do you think the fires raging in the building might have played a role, or the large chunk of building that was torn out by the collapsing Tower 1? Firefighters noted WTC 7 leaning 5 hours before it collapsed! What type of controlled demo causes that??
@JohnP6617 OK. time to break you down. WTC 7 was furthest from WTC 1 & 2. WTC7 came down later that day. WTC 6 was extremely closer to WTC 1&2. What happened to WTC 6? Stood erect for days later. Engineers had to use machinery to tear it down. Raging fires? From all the photos of WTC 7 you can see literally 2 windows that have fire coming from it. That's it! Tell me how when a building falls on another building = raging fires? As for leaning buildings. You'll have to show me a source, rapido!
@omarlives A source? What's your opinion after reading all the firefighters statements? They were there. You did read the firefighter's statements as part of your research, right?
Don't worry, I won't leave you hanging. I'll help you.
"From there, we looked out at 7 World Trade Center again. You could see smoke, but no visible fire, and some damage to the south face. You couldn't really see from where we were on the west face of the building, but at the edge of the south face you could see that it was very heavily damaged."
- FDNY Battalion Chief John Norman (Special Operations Command - 22 years)
"But they had a hoseline operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too. Then we received an order from Fellini, we're going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn't look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn't really keen on the idea.
Then this other officer I'm standing next to said, that building doesn't look straight. So I'm standing there. I'm looking at the building. It didn't look right, but, well, we'll go in, we'll see.
So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody's going into 7, there's creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped.
And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.
Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?
Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we'll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day."
"The next thing I did was we saw a fire starting to show at windows in 7 World Trade Center, decided to go in and try and see if there was anybody in the building and/or put out the fires, and we did a search from floor to floor of 7 World Trade Center
passing fire on floors 3, 7, 9. The standpipes had no water. We tried to extinguish a few fires with cans.
When we got to 11, there was just too much smoke and we decided that, without water, if we went any higher, we'd be on fool's mission. So we left 7 World Trade Center, back down to the street, where I ran into Chief Coloe from the 1st Division, Captain Varriale, Engine 24, and Captain Varriale told Chief Coloe and myself that 7 World Trade Center was badly damaged on the south side and definitely in danger of collapse.
"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street.
It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue
operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we wouldn't lose any more people."
"Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse.
Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o'clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.
Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that's probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn't make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there.
We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety." - FDNY Deputy Chief Peter Hayden (Division 1 - 33 years) -
@clarity023 This video isn't even working. No comments about me debunking your attempt to debunk the collapse of WTC 7? Over stimulation of the nerves I guess. Also, is this what you do? After I completely literally hand ur ass back to you, u just completely ignore what I say like it didn't even happen, no, "you're right omarlives"?, no refuting what I said whatsoever huh? You know, one of their goals is annihilation of consciousness. Lost like mission accomplished when it comes to you huh?
@clarity023 That music from that vid should be the soundtrack to your life that centers around that one Obama BC video.You should have it playing before, during and after you go monitor those comments like you've been doing for past 12 months and counting.As for the Kader Toy Factory."The factory was poorly designed and built.","the building was reinforced with un-insulated steel girders which quickly weakened and collapsed.","the factory were full of raw materials which also burned very fast."!
@clarity023 What happened? I thought you got me debunked in one minute and always have to have the last word or something to say? Truth got you hurting? Maybe 'I hit a nerve'! The truth and fact nerve definitely hurts the most. ; )
If you have an valid argument, publish a paper and let it go though the peer review process. Since you have no flaws with your theory it should go though without problems, right?
@madichelp0 You're right. I should. Like the Oklahoma City Bombing where half the building is destroyed somehow in the building stays erect. Or when other buildings have burned for literally days and the building's insides are completely gutted out from the fire but somehow the steel structure columns stays erect and there's no pancake theories. I mean I'm no scientist or engineer major, but when it looks too good to be true, it probably isn't.
@omarlives Now don't just say it, DO IT! It's not as hard as it seems. You will be world famous! What all those constructional engineers have failed to notice you have! I mean you have PROOF! That means that no logical being can refuse it. As soon as you present your paper, the whole scientific community will melt like butter in front of you, what a feeling, i envy you...
@madichelp0 "I have proof"? No, I'm far from having proof. Just a hunch. Like when someone steals something from your house and you only had one person come over and then your item is gone you know who did it, but there's no proof. So, if you tried to take the person to court, it won't hold up in a court of law. That's kinda like what this is. We can't prove a controlled demo cause the crime scene along with all the evidence of proving it was a controlled demo was destroyed almost immediately.
@omarlives I admit that i was trolling you in the last post, but on a second try to be serious: What would convince you that it wasn't an inside job?
We can probably both agree that it's possible that a steel structure can fall only by fire alone. "On Jan 16, 1967, the steel roof of the McCormick Place in Chicago collapsed due to fire" to name one. And that wasn't by jet fuel in a skyscraper.
So what would convince you otherwise, or have you chosen an unbeatable subject of debate?(that's low)
@madichelp0 Only the roof fell, I'm sure. I'm sure the roof didn't collapse and then take down the whole entire building after that. We can both agree that only happened 3 times (WTC 1, 2 & 7) in modern structural engineering history and those occurrences some how happened all on the same day. That raised a red flag for me. Maybe it's just another day at the office in our war OF terror. How 'bout if I told you 5 of the hijackers are alive, well and they show this on CBS? Would that convince you?
@omarlives You must be trolling... A floor can't just fall and then the rest of the building will stay intact, it's a domino effect!
Funny how every time i argue with a conspiracy theorist like you there is a different story. In one case there is explosions and the next there is termite. Now the hijackers are alive? I mean really, come on, isn't that to fall for whatever suits your story? Why don't you think as critically about them as the government? Those "hijackers" can just be some Arabs!
@madichelp0 What about buildings that have burned for days and there is no collapse? The entire building would be gutted out from the flames, and the structural support columns remain intact. "The steel roof collapsed." I didn't even have to research and I knew there was no "domino effect" cause you specifically said "roof". Well, I did look it up: "The fire was extinguished by 10 AM". How do you extinguish a fire of a completely collapsed building? Talk about trolling!
Thank you for responding to that idiotic video of people who only make jokes and lack facts/proof. Sadly, many people have rated it high - there are too many ignorant people who don't research for themselves. If you don't think 9/11 was an "inside job", talk to me and I'll provide sources which scientifically proof that it wasn't only planes and fires.
all yall yelling bout facts need to shut the fuck up. the indications, is what you should be talking about. and i agree with omar, on the point that it was an 'inside job'.
Ooooo shit this building is gonna cost a fortune 2 fix!! ooorrr I can cash a billion $ insurance check?? Hmmmmm. PULL IT BOYS!!!(Building crashes 2 the ground). Hey man wtf y did u blow that building up?? What u talkin about Willis?? You said pull it! Oh I ugh......um......I....I meant pull the firefighters out! Ya thats what I meant! There were no fire fighters??? EPIC FAIL!!!!!!FINISH HIM
It was 1005 demolition. There's audio evidence that obviously shows that it was a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION. On the audio some man, I believe its the fire chief says "OK, pull it..." and BOOM, WTC#7 comes down.
I can see the dissapointment in your face, and I feel your pain..The media is killing people's brains, getting them preoccupied with inferior side acts clearing the scene for people pulling the strings get to do whatever they want, and the best part is nobody will believe the truth no more. Speaking the truth will get you called a conspiracy theorist or a lunatic, indoctrination is annihilating the youth and turning people to blind idiots lobotomizing common sense from their minds.
dude dont listen to these fucking puppets and haters. nothing wrong with asking questions. wtc7 is a huge mystery and nobody wants to adress the questions we have. honestly im a truther and i never even knew about building 7 until 2005 so it goes to show you that most people still dont even know what building 7 was!! but i guess thats the way they want it
@juneausucks hell yea kid they will say all types of shit like, "oh yea the tower fell on building 7 thats why it fell" or "u dont hear explosions like a controlled demo", but they'll never be able to explain the pools of molten steel located at the base of wtc 1, 2, & 7. found WEEKS LATER!!!!!!
@juneausucks First of all, there was no MOLTEN metal. Molten means it was so hot it was a liquid.(Look it up) I've seen the photos of the machinery picking up orange-hot steel, sure. Have you ever tried to pick up water with your fingertips? It doesn't work because it's a liquid. so obviously that metal was NOT molten, it was simply HOT. How did it get so hot? Well, how about massive fires ignited by jet fuel and fed by a building full of combustible materials?
@showmeanedge "its a liquid. its not molten it was simply hot." whats ur saying make no damn sense. liquid seems molten to me. a pool of hot steel is a pool. wtc7 didnt get hit wit no plane wit no jet fuel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@juneausucks Furthermore, there is a lot of SCIENTIFIC data that shows that it's not unreasonable to assume that burying a fire under millions of tons of debris will allow said fire (Remember the fire?????) to not only retain it's heat, but also GAIN heat, it can even GAIN heat by having water poured on it, which releases steam, and feeds the heat-cycle. Furnaces operate on the basic principle that if you CONTAIN a fire, it will get hotter than if you left it in open air. Do your homework.
@omarlives I did explain it. The molten steel didn't exist. Where's your proof of this? can you link me to a website with pictures? I only know of one picture that shows orange-hot metal being picked out of the ground, and as I clearly explained: If it was molten (type define molten into google if you need clarification) it couldn't be PICKED out of the ground. It would have to be brought out inside a container, like any liquid. Do you understand that?
@showmeanedge i sent u the link to the site as a personal message because for some god awful reason youtube won't let me post the link to the molten steel found at wtc 7. lets hope u get this message. u probably have family members that work at youtube that u don't even know about. cuz WHY THE FUCK I CANT POST THAT LINK!!!!
@omarlives Like I've said, being a reformed truther, I'm see all of this evidence before. So let's do this one real quick. It says the hottest recorded temperature was 1377F. Fair enough. Just google 'melting point of steel' and you'll be treated to a page which lists the melting point of steel as somwhere between 2500F and 2750F depending on the specific composition of the steel in question. (Steel is iron with differeing amounts of carbon content). So 1377 = Half the melting point of steel.
@showmeanedge i hope we're talkin about wtc7 cuz u got the towers i'll give u that one. but wtc 7 now u'll have to apply some real creative thinking to just explain that away.
@omarlives I'm talking about YOUR evidence for "molten" steel, which clearly shows that it was NOT molten.(1377F Not hot enough to melt steel) WTC7 had two massive buildings collapse right next to it. Google "St. Nicholas Cathedral ground zero" to see some images of a church that was partially demolish by falling debris. Big things fell out of the sky, hit things around them, caused massive damage and fires, fires led to weakening of steel, weakening led to collapse of WTC7. Simple as that.
This temperature of 1377F was recorded *after* the demolition, so it's not really evidence of the temperatures of the steel in the fire zones *before* the towers were brought down.
This is the same old bait-and-switch would-be debunkers try to pull to smother the facts.
@proudfootz Alright, gramps. You go on thinking that the government is out to get you, and die paranoid and insecure in the 'knowledge' that the whole world is your enemy. I have seen all the videos and supposed evidence you could care to point me to, I just disagree with the conclusions, after learning about the many different logical fallacies and how to apply them to critical thinking to come to concrete conclusions about the veracity of claims made by the tinfoil hat brigade.
@proudfootz You, sir, are an intellectual cancer. You're actually kind of internets-famous for being completely deluded, and essentially either one of the most purposefully ignorant people around, or just plain dumb. Now, I don't think you're beign ignorant on purpose. I think you believe in all of this nonsense, and I believe you honestly have no way of vetting your own mental processes. This in no way makes you an less reprehensible or pathetic, but I guess that's just the way it goes.
I cited facts about the temperatures found at WTC after demolition and the temps indicated by steel samples recovered from WTC (not hot enough to even weaken let alone melt steel).
Since none of the work of science apparently qualifies as a 'fact' in your little universe, it seems you are the one who is 'mentally incapable' of carrying on a rational conversation.
@omarlives Half the melting point of steel is certainly enough to weaken steel, I'm not sure at which point it starts to glow, but some quick research on my part just turned up some impartial information that proves that you've been misled here. Now, as for what caused temperatures to reach 1377F (Which is pretty hot, all things considered), I'm going to have to mention the furnace effect again. Covering a fire (And there were fires, lots) will cause it to get hotter. No mysteries here.
/watch?v=uFJa9WUy5QI
sfm073 2 months ago
WTC 7 if you watch the building collapse you see it collapsed on its own in fact there are two penthouses on top of WTC 7 that collapse before the rest of the building collapses leading to the conclusion that it wasn't a controlled demolition at all. Also on 9/11 truth websites I have never seen any of the pictures of the rear of building 7 if you look at those pictures you'll see the building was much more damanged than what it appeared in the front.
jetmemphis83 3 months ago
Exactly, the problem with the truth movement is we actually give people a platform to stand on and debate on the side of the original BS story told by main stream media...STOP!! It's not even debatable. 911 is anything but what they say happened...JUST STOP!! Don't even give people that support the original story the time of day. Want PROOF? Simply look at any video of the twin towers or building 7 falling, that's all the proof we need.
911theinsidejob 4 months ago
Absolutely!
ButterflyStorms 5 months ago
it was just co-incidence . It was co-incidence that Rumsfeld went to congress one day before 9/11 and told that pentagon is missing some 2,3 trillion , A FUCKIN TRILLLLLLION and they cant trace where the money went . No surprise next day event made this to forget . Larry Silverstein the owner of WTC buildings filed TWO insurance claims for the maximum amount of the policy, payout just 6 months prior . Pay out $7.1 billion . What a coincidence....
Did Larry went to psychic ?
resistance0311 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you look stupid
DSRvmv111 7 months ago
debunking911 (dot) com (slash) pull (dot) htm
go there and read the fucking thing and quit being a retard! the goddamn wtc7 building was only two blocks away from the twin towers, stupid fucker.
FallofDarkness55 8 months ago
Comment removed
resistance0311 6 months ago
@FallofDarkness55
Sure , and it fell down at a rate of free fall in it own footprint completely pulverized from few office fires and damaged corners . You sir are pure genius !
resistance0311 6 months ago
@resistance0311 Because of the fact that there is conspiracy theorists in a modern society, I'm beginning to realize that religion in of itself is a colossal conspiracy theory for fucktards who will believe in anything that they're told.
FallofDarkness55 6 months ago
@FallofDarkness55
Believing in government and politicians does not make you so bright , does it ? I mean politicians and government never lies , just only truth and pure truth ... . But wait a minute , wait a minute , do you know the incident that started Vietnam war ? officially released documents and government officially admitted that attack on US ship was a lie . Never happened .
resistance0311 6 months ago
@resistance0311 Yes I'm aware that humans make mistakes however 911 was not a conspiracy theory!!! First of all, if it was, what would that accomplish exactly? Why did they select only four buildings? Why did flight 93 crash in Shanksville, Pa? And why aren't people protesting against our government ten years later if this really was a conspiracy theory? Everyone by now would know the truth. So don't give me anymore bullshit. I've heard it all before.
FallofDarkness55 6 months ago
there so many people (mainstream media dosent count that are not people that are companies and their only by law a person..) who can explain you why 9/11 has happened just try to listen. the story is so paranoid that you will need to take some time. so relax a little and investigate what people are trying to tell you.
headsocketpills 8 months ago
@headsocketpills Mass media don't talk about building 7 because they know better.
omarlives 8 months ago
No it didnt mysteriously catch on fire, thats silly. it cought on fire because the whole area around it was on fire, and the heat was high, and pieces was falling down on it. Ok where are the buildings that burned for days? that has never happened, its a lie you made up. There are in fact buildings that burned for a short time and fell down. But you know what, its fine. The war on terror is important anyways. The difference isnt on weather or not we should go to war, but what to do after thewar
gulbirk 9 months ago
@gulbirk u sound really glib. it caught fire cuz pieces was falling down on it? so steel n concrete falling on stell n concrete causes a fire? that's silly. serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/other_fires.htm i didnt lie n make up nothing. The War OF terror is fine? more ppl die from slipping in the bathtub than by terrorists attacks. we spend billions if not trillions on wars. yea lets keep those perpetual wars going bro. yee-haw!
omarlives 9 months ago
@omarlives It caught on fire because of the heat, not the falling piecies, the falling piecies just helped it falling down.
gulbirk 9 months ago
@gulbirk what heat?
omarlives 9 months ago
@omarlives You remember the day? As I remember if building 7 was ON FIRE. I dont know how it caught on fire, but it never exploded.
gulbirk 9 months ago
@gulbirk It was on fire. BARELY!!! You should look up the pictures. The fires were minuscule compared to the building. I swear to fucking god, it was like 3 fires on fire. PITIFUL!!! But people like you think that was enough fire to have a building fall like London Bridge, also, Pitiful. It never exploded. In controlled demolitions building don't 'exploded'. They implode. If you can't look up the photos, I'd be glad to show you the pics.
omarlives 9 months ago
@omarlives It certainly didnt implode, LOL. I I NEVER CLAIMED ANYTHING. Im objecting to the idea that it was an inside job. What a narrow view """""Either it was down by the planes, or an inside job""". sorry, there isnt any evidence EITHER way.
gulbirk 9 months ago
@gulbirk i go for the realistic view. what would make a 47 story steel structured building fall like a pancake. Not fire! but definitely something else was afoot.
omarlives 9 months ago
@omarlives a pancake? Are you serious? Have you bought into the lie that it was flat afterwards? LOL.
gulbirk 9 months ago
@gulbirk not a literal pancake. but u know collapsed on its footprint.
omarlives 9 months ago
@omarlives NO it didnt do that either, thats also a lie. None of the towers did. Google it, wikipedia, anywhere. THey all covered at least 3 times their footprint.
gulbirk 9 months ago
@gulbirk ur takin shit too literally. no controled demo collapses exactly on their footprint u reject. are u in high school or just a high school drop out? EXPLAIN HOW THE FUCK A 47 STORY STEEL STRUCTURED BUILDING COLLAPSES FROM FIRE ALONE!!? ITS RIDICULOUS!
omarlives 9 months ago
@omarlives I dont know, but at least im honest enough to say that. Your claim is that explosives were used, which is another claim that needs to be proven. Actually, implosions are suposed to do EXACTLY that, make the building fall without hitting things that are close. Some times they almost cover LESS then their footprint. They certainly dont fill 3 times their footprint. That would be a failure.
gulbirk 9 months ago
@gulbirk its not proven fact, but by deduction u tell me what sounds more like a conspiracy theory and what sounds more like reality: "fire takes out 47 story steel structured building" and "building taken down by demolition". the "reality" u live in where fire takes out steel structured buildings is hilarious.
omarlives 8 months ago
@omarlives Did I say that? No I did not. Again, your mind must be really simple. You cant think of more then two possibilities. And if one is wrong then the other is right?
No, this is my position """I dont know""" I dont know either way. Argument from igorance is what you are using here. Ignore the fire, whats the evidence that explosives were used?
gulbirk 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@omarlives Thumbs Up if you are a Conspiracy Nut!!!
romans52345 7 months ago
good work
mHalfLife 10 months ago
Yes! You're crazy and absolutely out of your minds!
gd44 10 months ago
@gd44 Lmao! Merry Christmas!
omarlives 10 months ago
@montrealwatcher since ur such a non-moron maybe u can simply tell me prophecies that haven't come true then. but maybe its too much for ya. i could understand u not giving me even one example!
omarlives 10 months ago
@montrealwatcher brillant!. (applause) i never been so owned like that in my entire life.
omarlives 10 months ago
@montrealwatcher couldn't rebut anything i said, could you? blame god for all the good n bad i do? lol nah i take all the credit n full responsibility for everything i do. LMAO ITS CALLED FREE WILL! yikes! too easy! over n over again? u hear religious ppl over n over again say the bible has alot of crap in it!? lol! tell me all brainy-one, how the fuck does the bible accurately predict a coming world govt?! since i dont know how to think for myself, i wanna know how an independent thinker does.
omarlives 10 months ago
@montrealwatcher are u kidding? i know the bible has alot of crap. but "turning the other cheek"? "love thy enemy". u'll never find wisdom like that for urself in a trillion lifetimes. "don't resist evil"? u probably never heard of the concept. but enough belittling you. it says we're heading for a one world government. IS THAT NOT WHAT THE UNITED NATIONS BASICALLY IS!!!! WORLD COURT!! HELLO!! ARE U IGNORANT TO REALITY!?!?! ur ridiculous. BYE BYE!! LMAO
omarlives 10 months ago
@montrealwatcher maybe there is no global conspiracy. ur rite. i dont think china likes any westerns at all. u must not be christian, though. the bible talks about a one world government coming into place. they talk alot about having a one world currency on tv alot these days. aren't seeing that? how did the bible know 2000 years ago?
omarlives 10 months ago
@montrealwatcher Yea, that's what i am leaning towards now. they let it happen. if u dont think that's just as bad...god help you. thats like saying no i didnt hire the robbers to come n kill my family, but i knew they were coming n didnt do anything to prevent it. that's even worse, because the guy who let it happen if even more psychotic than the guy who hired the killers.
omarlives 10 months ago
@montrealwatcher yea u rite they how to fly planes... at our US Military bases! lol but to be perfectly honest, i'm not too sure about 9/11 being an inside job anymore. there are more clear cut conspiracies out there that there can be no debate about. trying to convince ppl is a waste of time.
omarlives 10 months ago
Wow if you are allergic to stupid people, you must take a ton of benadryl just to be around yourself and other moronic truthers
guitarspeare 11 months ago
@guitarspeare Brilliant. Did you come up with that yourself? Wow. LOL. Undoubtedly, one of the earth's greatest minds.
omarlives 11 months ago
@omarlives I did I made it up myself, kind of like what the loose change loosers did with their silly flawed films, and like Gage and his crony Jones, and the silly fellow Griffen, just made up stuff. Like the whole moronic and silly truth movement, based on flimsy bullshit, and when confronted with real truth and real facts, back pedals into repeating more moronic bullshit
guitarspeare 10 months ago
@guitarspeare Don't they look and sound so sincere though like Ron Paul, a real American hero!?
omarlives 10 months ago
@omarlives sounding sincere has nothing to do with being correct. And for the record Ron Paul is opposed to the truth movemnt. He thinks that y'all are dead wrong, and is 100% convinced that 19 muslim fantatics did 911, and he thinks that because it is the real truth, and he is brillant enough to see through the flimsy illogic of the religion of the ( misnamed) truth movement.
guitarspeare 10 months ago
@guitarspeare u know what, as long as u know ron paul is a real american patriot, u're ok in my book!
omarlives 10 months ago
Instead of being reasonable and actually learning about an issue before making a decision, you decided to follow the words of some charlatan scam artists who are selling you ridiculous opinions in the hopes that you will never escape, that you will never think for yourself. In this way I find that most conspiracy theorists are guilty of their own accusations of "you're a sheep! OPEN YOUR EYES!"
No, friend, open your own fucking eyes. And grow up.
DrLoonatic 1 year ago
Third, I think it is people like you, those who refuse to think critically, who refuse to do research, who refuse to read peer-reviewed scientific journals, that ruin this country and this world. A simple search for "WTC7 conspiracy debunked" will answer every single question you have and more. To not do so demonstrates your laziness and lack of ability to think for yourself. As stated above, you can even read peer-reviewed science about it. But you chose not to.
DrLoonatic 1 year ago
@DrLoonatic Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions. I always look at debunked and exposed videos. They look to me like a crock of shit. WTC7 losing a corner of one side of the building, n u wanna tell me yea that building is coming down. Ruins the country and the world? Dissent is the highest form of patriotism my friend. I could teach you a few things about making the country and the world a much better place.
omarlives 1 year ago
Second, I pity you for buying into these sad conspiracies. You have been fed lies without critically thinking about any of it. WTC7 was built in such a way that if a key support beam were to take damage, the whole building would collapse. The debris from the first tower did just such damage and the extensive fires afterward were enough to soften the metal, making it less structurally sound. The beam collapsed because of the weight of 40 stories above it.
DrLoonatic 1 year ago
Even if you assert "WTC7's collapse is unexplainable" (completely false), you are still presenting a false dichotomy. You are saying, "Either terrorists did it or our own government did it." There are thousands of other possible explanations. Why do you irrationally leap to the conclusion that "The US government conspired with the Jews to kill 3,000 of its own people by placing explosives in WTC7 (which no one noticed, by the way) so they could start a holy war and enslave earth"? What a joke.
DrLoonatic 1 year ago
@DrLoonatic The Jews? Who said anything about the Jews? Dr. Loonatic, I presume! How did WTC7 catch fire to begin with? The reason has changed numerous times. (You didn't know that) OK we do see a fire there regardless. but its so minor, you can't tell me fire makes buildings fall in its footprint, boy! Other building have been on fire for days and not collapse!! Oblivious to the fact, I'm sure.
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives Just like all conspiracy theorists, you rely on people not knowing exactly what happened with 100% certainty to fuel your "better explanation" of NWO planted explosives. Have you read any peer-reviewed scientific journals about WTC7? Do you know any of the facts at all? Can you name 1 credible source that's giving you this information? No, Alex Jones is not a credible source, he's a loony crock pot. And no I'm not an "NWO operative", I just have common sense.
DrLoonatic 1 year ago
@DrLoonatic Their 'facts' are "facts". I don't believe them. But maybe I'm paranoid. I know what you're saying though, and I'm starting to realize since I can't prove none of this, I need to move into other conspiracies that can be proven. And believe me, there are conspiracies within the American govt like Gulf of Tonkin and Operation Northwoods. I don't know if you think that's not how a real American thinks, but again I'm a real patriot not becuz i join the army but bcuz I practice dissent.
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives Yes, the government has covered up atrocious things in the past. The CIA is, for all intents and purposes, a fucking terrorist organization. But there is no worldwide NWO plot. 911 was an emotional event, but we cannot let ourselves stray from the true enemy; 19 Muslim operatives acting under the order of Fatwah. Don't you think that out of all the papers Assange leaked, he would have gotten SOMETHING on the NWO plot if it were at all true? I encourage dissent, but stay reasonable.
DrLoonatic 1 year ago
what a racist, claiming sand niggers live in caves
taledarkside 1 year ago
@taledarkside lol darkside sums u up accurately. I'm actually half arab, but maybe that is a racist statement that I got from white man Alex Jones. but don't al-qadea hide in caves as their headquarters??
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives
how many caves do you think there are in afghanistan? Alex jones uses a racist remark to say middle eastern people are stupid and poor. And they only live in caves.
if that was true, the US wouldn't be outsourcing jobs to the middle east if these people were so dumb.
taledarkside 1 year ago
@taledarkside saying u live in a cave means ur stupid and poor? i thought al-qadea wasn't poor or stupid. that's like where Cobra Commander and Shredder hides his Technodrome because they're terrorists organizations. Not that all Arabs live in caves. Just Al-C.I.A.-da. Duh!
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives
alex jones says people who are afghanistans are stupid and poor, therefore, they live in caves.
get it yet? this is the truth movement, conspiracy theorists that claim middle easterns are all cave dwellers.
truth movement believes middle easterns are too dumb to go to school
taledarkside 1 year ago
this video has made me realize that im not allergic to stupid people, i just cant watch there stupid ass videos a second time....i owe it all to you homeslice
Zero2Legend 1 year ago
@Zero2Legend trust me if u think wtc7 came down by just fire, u're stupid.
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives trust ,e, if you given in to all that conspiracy bullshit...yeah you have more problems then just being stupid guy. for real
Zero2Legend 1 year ago
@Zero2Legend check this out. i used to be just like u! one day i said let me see what kinda stupid bullshit these conspiracy ppl think. cuz i said if its not main stream media it has to be bullshit. didnt read anything. and i already had a biased opinion about them just like u. then i actually researched what they was saying. and all the shit is verifiable facts! now i know better. but u gotta have an open mind like i did. even though i was like this is all bs n i had a bias. how u like me now?
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives naw, now your getting me to think that you have irrefutable when you dont. lay it out for me, and ill show you why your wrong.
Zero2Legend 1 year ago
@Zero2Legend they say building 7 came down by fire. no plane hit it. that's wrong. u tell me how that's not wrong.
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives atleast fire weakens steel and over time the structure will lose integrity, if you have a better explanation i would love to hear it
Zero2Legend 1 year ago
@Zero2Legend how in the world did that building catch fire in the first place when no plane hit it???
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives falling debris from the other towers. its like i said though, if you have a better explanation then i would love to here it
Zero2Legend 1 year ago
So let me get this straight. Anyone who has an alternate or different view than yours is stupid? A view that science, evidence and logic supports as much or possible more than your own? Wow. You must really get along well with other people. Before you can recognize truth, you have to recognize the various paths that may lead to the truth. Follow just one path and the truth may never be found.
zabukazar 1 year ago
@zabukazar u gotta be stupid if u wanna tell me fire alone made building 7 go down the way it did. i was like u. i was like let me see what kinda stupid shit dumb conspiracies are out there. I ALREADY HAD A BIASED against them just like u. bcuz i thought, if its not on main stream media it cant be valid. but i researched and learned the facts, n now i think ppl are stupid that don't see what's in front of them. buildings coming down due to fire. what a load of shit!!
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives Wow you completley missed the point of my post. I feel bad that you are unable to grasp the point. I was not attacking your view point on 9/11. I was only advising you to explore other avenues. Doing this may change your mind or it may strengthen your argument. I've never said fire alone made WTC7 fall down. In fact I never said anything in my post regarding 9/11 at all. I only said that you shouldn't call people stupid for disagreeing with you.
zabukazar 1 year ago
@zabukazar u dont think i want to believe otherwise? u dont think i looked at stuff to try to debunk what i found out about 911? i didnt just see 911 was an inside job n said ok case closed. i'm always open to facts. but there's no facts that can prove to me that wtc7 came down from fire alone. i feel bad for u if u think i just read about one side of the argument and drew a conclusion. but ppl are stupid when i know for a fact the majority of ppl never even heard of wtc7!
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives
can you tell me how WTC 3 collapsed
the one that conspiracy theorists don't talk about, and makes them liars about all their brainwashed claims
taledarkside 1 year ago
Yeah, you can manage. You can manage to delete my comments, thus proving yourself to be a cowardly cunt.
PhilipEbanks 1 year ago
Good work my man.
TheGriffness 1 year ago
As I am sure you are aware, the largest steel structured building demolished by explosives to date, was the 27 story J L Hudson building in Detroit. It didn't go well. Based on your research of that demolition, how do you feel CDI, or anyone else, could have then so neatly and easily brought down WTC 7?
JohnP6617 1 year ago
@JohnP6617 /watch?v=XICqbxLVuSY&feature=related
OK u cleared things up for me. firefighters were in wtc7 i can admit when im wrong about something. but u wanna tell me that those fires (link above) took out wtc 7? there's no way you can convince me of that. WTC 5 now thats what you call a fire! check it out! watch?v=41OCQvu7ULQ&feature=related
now u get back to me and explain that.
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives - The first thing I need you to do is to look up, study, and understand they way WTC 7 was designed and built and the engineering implications involved. There were some very unique features that likely contributed to the collapse. We really can't discuss much until you do that, but... You will then need to consider the massive structural damage WTC 7 suffered when hit by the collapsing tower. You also now know fire *does* cause failure of steel structures. ...
JohnP6617 1 year ago
WTC 7 burned, uncontrolled, for over 5 hours. There was no firefighting effort. Do I *want* to tell you the fires and severe structural damage brought down WTC 7? No. What I want to tell you is the truth based on facts and evidence. The facts and evidence point towards the fires and structural damage being the cause. There are zero facts and no evidence point to anything else.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
@omarlives I checked out that link. It provides nothing to indicate something other than planes being crashed into buildings, buildings collapsing on other buildings, and raging fires were the cause of what happened. What did you see in that link which would make you feel otherwise?
JohnP6617 1 year ago
@JohnP6617 There you go again with the raging fires. Where in this link,
watch?v=XICqbxLVuSY&feature=related
of WTC7, do you see "raging fires"? The fire looks like it's not enough to take out a BBQ grill.
From this link however,
watch?v=41OCQvu7ULQ&feature=related
we can see WTC5, which I'll consider had a raging fire. And what happens to this building with a real raging fire, that has had WTC 1 & 2 collapse on it? Does it collapse? No. WTC7 only had tower 1 fall on it n it collapses?
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives The building was on fire. There were no firefighters attempting to control or put out the fires. It was on fire for over 5 hours. What would you imagine would have kept that fire from being anything but raging? Flashover occurs in minutes. I don't know what you think either video is telling you. What matters is what happened to WTC 7. There is evidence it was brought down by fires and massive structural damage from the collapsing tower. There is no evidence to suggest anything else.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
A video showing a couple of snapshots provides no evidence of anything. A video of another building on fire provides no evidence of anything. The firefighters statements of the building leaning hours before it collapsed would indicate structural damage. Demolition is something done all at once. It doesn't cause a building to lean hours before it collapses. Do you have *any* evidence showing something other than fires and structural damage caused the collapse?
JohnP6617 1 year ago
@JohnP6617 The "fact" that it was 'leaning' is completely a perspective form of circumstantial evidence. There are *zero* video which shows anything remotely to what you claim. If it was leaning, you would think it would fall over to one side or the other. Not come straight down because one corner was damaged more than the other 3 corners. watch?v=cm7aGzubz9A here along the right side you can see demo chargers. There are better vids that I have seen but can't seem to find them rite now.evidence?
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives The fact that it was leaning was measured and determined by the firefighters on the scene. Whether or not you can measure that lean using the Mark I Eyeball looking at a Youtube video is irrelevant. To understand why the building fell the way it did, you would want to know how it was designed and built. There are no demo charges seen going off in any 9/11 videos. Look at videos of actual demolitions to see what they would really look like.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
@JohnP6617 what do u call these? and i can show others that you see the side that is opposite where the sun light is and u see FLASHES OF LIGHT. WHITE FLASHES. watch?v=2EadoxWXpgY&feature=related
just like control demos have em.
omarlives 1 year ago
Comment removed
JohnP6617 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@omarlives What would the point be of setting off demolition charges on consecutive upper floors when the building is already collapsing? That looks *nothing* like a demolition, in which the charges are set off on an entire floor, several floors apart, in succession, from the bottom up. They are extremely loud and distinct. They can be heard and felt from some distance from the building. Look and listen, to what it takes to demolish this completely stripped out building watch?v=fMLvFmMf5-0
JohnP6617 1 year ago
Beyond that, what do you suppose happens to all the air inside a building as it is compressed by the collapsing floors?
JohnP6617 1 year ago
@JohnP6617 Could be forced out. But what happens when you see flashes of light? just like u do at all control demos. i gotta find that vid. u can see flash points going all the way down in a straight line.
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives If you watch demolition videos, you'll note there is no case where you see explosives used on 6 or 7 consecutive upper floors, which go off after the building is already collapsing. You will also note the explosions are loud and distinct. There are no WTC 7 videos in which any explosions are heard just prior to the collapse. There are no WTC 7 videos in which you see anything that looks like the explosions you see in a demolition.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
There you go. A small sample of firefighter statements regarding what was going on with WTC 7. Fires that raged out of control (there was no firefighting effort going on in WTC 7) for over 5 hours, in a heavily damaged building, the unique design of WTC 7 (look it up), indications, hours before the collapse, that the building was leaning, the mechanical penthouse collapsing down through the building prior to the rest of the building collapsing...
JohnP6617 1 year ago
...In addition to ZERO evidence of controlled demolition (no explosions, no explosives, no months of preparing the building, including stripping out all non-structural elements...) ... it all adds up to ANOTHER steel structured building which collapsed due to fire and, in this case, massive structural damage from a collapsing 110 story building.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
Your knowledge of structural engineering and fire need some work. Steel structured buildings have and *do* collapse due to fires. Would you care to hazard a guess as to why most municipalities require the steel structure of buildings be fireproofed? In your countless microseconds of research, did you happen to come across anything about the fire resistant material on the WTC towers being compromised? Why do you suppose that material was there in the first place?
JohnP6617 1 year ago
@JohnP6617 Actually, someone who holds your position showed me a photo of the fire resistant material. What it showed was one small, isolated spot where there was no FR material. The majority of the steel girders were insulated, however. I believe it was a photo of WTC 1 or 2 and was taken in 1993. So, who knows if the problem was rectified since then. WTC 7, however, has no evidence of this sort of problem. I can believe WTC 1&2 came down from the impact n fire, but WTC7 from fire alone? sorry
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives Your claim is steel structured buildings don't collapse from fire. They do. They have. That's why building codes requiring fire resistant coatings on steel structures were created. You made the claim without doing the research.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
@JohnP6617 Also, the claim that steel structed buildings have and do collapse due to fires, IS COMPLETELY FALSE. I think I may know which building you may be thinking of, show me one just one where this is true. I guarantee you can not!
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives One of the earliest steel structured buildings in NY, a bank, collapsed due to fire - not in the bank, in the building next to it. Much more recently, in 1997, the steel structured Sight & Sound theater in Lancaster PA collapsed due to fire. "That building I may be thinking of..." .... the Windsor Tower, a steel and concrete structured building - the steel structure collapsed due to the fire. The collapsed stopped at the heavily reinforced concrete transfer structure at the 17th floor
JohnP6617 1 year ago
Good job genius! Do you think the 110 story building falling on it may have been a factor, is was the case with *every single* building in the WTC complex? Do you think the fires raging in the building might have played a role, or the large chunk of building that was torn out by the collapsing Tower 1? Firefighters noted WTC 7 leaning 5 hours before it collapsed! What type of controlled demo causes that??
JohnP6617 1 year ago
@JohnP6617 OK. time to break you down. WTC 7 was furthest from WTC 1 & 2. WTC7 came down later that day. WTC 6 was extremely closer to WTC 1&2. What happened to WTC 6? Stood erect for days later. Engineers had to use machinery to tear it down. Raging fires? From all the photos of WTC 7 you can see literally 2 windows that have fire coming from it. That's it! Tell me how when a building falls on another building = raging fires? As for leaning buildings. You'll have to show me a source, rapido!
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives A source? What's your opinion after reading all the firefighters statements? They were there. You did read the firefighter's statements as part of your research, right?
JohnP6617 1 year ago
Don't worry, I won't leave you hanging. I'll help you.
"From there, we looked out at 7 World Trade Center again. You could see smoke, but no visible fire, and some damage to the south face. You couldn't really see from where we were on the west face of the building, but at the edge of the south face you could see that it was very heavily damaged."
- FDNY Battalion Chief John Norman (Special Operations Command - 22 years)
JohnP6617 1 year ago
"But they had a hoseline operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too. Then we received an order from Fellini, we're going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn't look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn't really keen on the idea.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
Then this other officer I'm standing next to said, that building doesn't look straight. So I'm standing there. I'm looking at the building. It didn't look right, but, well, we'll go in, we'll see.
So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody's going into 7, there's creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?
Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we'll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day."
- FDNY Captain Chris Boyle (Engine 94 - 18 years)
JohnP6617 1 year ago
"The next thing I did was we saw a fire starting to show at windows in 7 World Trade Center, decided to go in and try and see if there was anybody in the building and/or put out the fires, and we did a search from floor to floor of 7 World Trade Center
passing fire on floors 3, 7, 9. The standpipes had no water. We tried to extinguish a few fires with cans.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
When we got to 11, there was just too much smoke and we decided that, without water, if we went any higher, we'd be on fool's mission. So we left 7 World Trade Center, back down to the street, where I ran into Chief Coloe from the 1st Division, Captain Varriale, Engine 24, and Captain Varriale told Chief Coloe and myself that 7 World Trade Center was badly damaged on the south side and definitely in danger of collapse.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
Chief Coloe said we were going to evacuate the collapse zone around 7 World Trade Center, which we did."
- FDNY Lieutenant Rudolf Weindler -
JohnP6617 1 year ago
"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue
operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we wouldn't lose any more people."
- FDNY Chief of the Department Daniel Nigro -
JohnP6617 1 year ago
"Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o'clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.
Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
JohnP6617 1 year ago
Hayden: No, not right away, and that's probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn't make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there.
JohnP6617 1 year ago
We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety." - FDNY Deputy Chief Peter Hayden (Division 1 - 33 years) -
JohnP6617 1 year ago
No comments about your "divo" Pauly not believing in this stupid conspiracy?
Did I hit a nerve again?
clarity023 1 year ago
Look even "your divo" doesn't believe in this conspiracy! lol.
/watch?v=hGyhlNY0y1k
clarity023 1 year ago
@clarity023 This video isn't even working. No comments about me debunking your attempt to debunk the collapse of WTC 7? Over stimulation of the nerves I guess. Also, is this what you do? After I completely literally hand ur ass back to you, u just completely ignore what I say like it didn't even happen, no, "you're right omarlives"?, no refuting what I said whatsoever huh? You know, one of their goals is annihilation of consciousness. Lost like mission accomplished when it comes to you huh?
omarlives 1 year ago
Your conspiracy theory about the 911 have been debunked, in one minute!
/watch?v=Jb-OFhxvEo8
clarity023 1 year ago
@clarity023 That music from that vid should be the soundtrack to your life that centers around that one Obama BC video.You should have it playing before, during and after you go monitor those comments like you've been doing for past 12 months and counting.As for the Kader Toy Factory."The factory was poorly designed and built.","the building was reinforced with un-insulated steel girders which quickly weakened and collapsed.","the factory were full of raw materials which also burned very fast."!
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives
You're just a moron I bet you believe in chemtrails too!
clarity023 1 year ago
@clarity023 What happened? I thought you got me debunked in one minute and always have to have the last word or something to say? Truth got you hurting? Maybe 'I hit a nerve'! The truth and fact nerve definitely hurts the most. ; )
omarlives 1 year ago
You must be allergic to yourself then!
clarity023 1 year ago
@clarity023 You must be, undoubtedly, one of the Earth's greatest minds here.
omarlives 1 year ago
Why where the tapes of the pentagon hit not released until later... a lot later and it was only 5 frames? Why where the tapes from the hotel taken?
HELLISHHANDZ 1 year ago
@HELLISHHANDZ yea the pentagon u would think would have better cameras set up.
omarlives 1 year ago
If you have an valid argument, publish a paper and let it go though the peer review process. Since you have no flaws with your theory it should go though without problems, right?
madichelp0 1 year ago
@madichelp0 You're right. I should. Like the Oklahoma City Bombing where half the building is destroyed somehow in the building stays erect. Or when other buildings have burned for literally days and the building's insides are completely gutted out from the fire but somehow the steel structure columns stays erect and there's no pancake theories. I mean I'm no scientist or engineer major, but when it looks too good to be true, it probably isn't.
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives Now don't just say it, DO IT! It's not as hard as it seems. You will be world famous! What all those constructional engineers have failed to notice you have! I mean you have PROOF! That means that no logical being can refuse it. As soon as you present your paper, the whole scientific community will melt like butter in front of you, what a feeling, i envy you...
madichelp0 1 year ago
@madichelp0 "I have proof"? No, I'm far from having proof. Just a hunch. Like when someone steals something from your house and you only had one person come over and then your item is gone you know who did it, but there's no proof. So, if you tried to take the person to court, it won't hold up in a court of law. That's kinda like what this is. We can't prove a controlled demo cause the crime scene along with all the evidence of proving it was a controlled demo was destroyed almost immediately.
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives I admit that i was trolling you in the last post, but on a second try to be serious: What would convince you that it wasn't an inside job?
We can probably both agree that it's possible that a steel structure can fall only by fire alone. "On Jan 16, 1967, the steel roof of the McCormick Place in Chicago collapsed due to fire" to name one. And that wasn't by jet fuel in a skyscraper.
So what would convince you otherwise, or have you chosen an unbeatable subject of debate?(that's low)
madichelp0 1 year ago
@madichelp0 Only the roof fell, I'm sure. I'm sure the roof didn't collapse and then take down the whole entire building after that. We can both agree that only happened 3 times (WTC 1, 2 & 7) in modern structural engineering history and those occurrences some how happened all on the same day. That raised a red flag for me. Maybe it's just another day at the office in our war OF terror. How 'bout if I told you 5 of the hijackers are alive, well and they show this on CBS? Would that convince you?
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives You must be trolling... A floor can't just fall and then the rest of the building will stay intact, it's a domino effect!
Funny how every time i argue with a conspiracy theorist like you there is a different story. In one case there is explosions and the next there is termite. Now the hijackers are alive? I mean really, come on, isn't that to fall for whatever suits your story? Why don't you think as critically about them as the government? Those "hijackers" can just be some Arabs!
madichelp0 1 year ago
@madichelp0 What about buildings that have burned for days and there is no collapse? The entire building would be gutted out from the flames, and the structural support columns remain intact. "The steel roof collapsed." I didn't even have to research and I knew there was no "domino effect" cause you specifically said "roof". Well, I did look it up: "The fire was extinguished by 10 AM". How do you extinguish a fire of a completely collapsed building? Talk about trolling!
omarlives 1 year ago
Thank you for responding to that idiotic video of people who only make jokes and lack facts/proof. Sadly, many people have rated it high - there are too many ignorant people who don't research for themselves. If you don't think 9/11 was an "inside job", talk to me and I'll provide sources which scientifically proof that it wasn't only planes and fires.
Navolt 1 year ago
all yall yelling bout facts need to shut the fuck up. the indications, is what you should be talking about. and i agree with omar, on the point that it was an 'inside job'.
gatskillz 1 year ago
Ooooo shit this building is gonna cost a fortune 2 fix!! ooorrr I can cash a billion $ insurance check?? Hmmmmm. PULL IT BOYS!!!(Building crashes 2 the ground). Hey man wtf y did u blow that building up?? What u talkin about Willis?? You said pull it! Oh I ugh......um......I....I meant pull the firefighters out! Ya thats what I meant! There were no fire fighters??? EPIC FAIL!!!!!!FINISH HIM
lamiac2411 1 year ago
@lamiac2411 pull it sounds alot more like pull the building than pull the firemen out. but who knows i'm open to anything.
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives Of course it does lmao. The reason being is that there were no firefighters in the damn place 2 begin with
lamiac2411 1 year ago
@lamiac2411 makes sense to me!
omarlives 1 year ago
It was 1005 demolition. There's audio evidence that obviously shows that it was a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION. On the audio some man, I believe its the fire chief says "OK, pull it..." and BOOM, WTC#7 comes down.
MilanKingz 1 year ago
I can see the dissapointment in your face, and I feel your pain..The media is killing people's brains, getting them preoccupied with inferior side acts clearing the scene for people pulling the strings get to do whatever they want, and the best part is nobody will believe the truth no more. Speaking the truth will get you called a conspiracy theorist or a lunatic, indoctrination is annihilating the youth and turning people to blind idiots lobotomizing common sense from their minds.
Sickens me!
farestabs 1 year ago
dude dont listen to these fucking puppets and haters. nothing wrong with asking questions. wtc7 is a huge mystery and nobody wants to adress the questions we have. honestly im a truther and i never even knew about building 7 until 2005 so it goes to show you that most people still dont even know what building 7 was!! but i guess thats the way they want it
juneausucks 1 year ago
@juneausucks hell yea kid they will say all types of shit like, "oh yea the tower fell on building 7 thats why it fell" or "u dont hear explosions like a controlled demo", but they'll never be able to explain the pools of molten steel located at the base of wtc 1, 2, & 7. found WEEKS LATER!!!!!!
omarlives 1 year ago
@juneausucks First of all, there was no MOLTEN metal. Molten means it was so hot it was a liquid.(Look it up) I've seen the photos of the machinery picking up orange-hot steel, sure. Have you ever tried to pick up water with your fingertips? It doesn't work because it's a liquid. so obviously that metal was NOT molten, it was simply HOT. How did it get so hot? Well, how about massive fires ignited by jet fuel and fed by a building full of combustible materials?
showmeanedge 1 year ago
@showmeanedge "its a liquid. its not molten it was simply hot." whats ur saying make no damn sense. liquid seems molten to me. a pool of hot steel is a pool. wtc7 didnt get hit wit no plane wit no jet fuel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
omarlives 1 year ago
@juneausucks Furthermore, there is a lot of SCIENTIFIC data that shows that it's not unreasonable to assume that burying a fire under millions of tons of debris will allow said fire (Remember the fire?????) to not only retain it's heat, but also GAIN heat, it can even GAIN heat by having water poured on it, which releases steam, and feeds the heat-cycle. Furnaces operate on the basic principle that if you CONTAIN a fire, it will get hotter than if you left it in open air. Do your homework.
showmeanedge 1 year ago
@showmeanedge do ur homework no plane wit no jet fuel hit wtc7 . explain the molten steel now.
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives I did explain it. The molten steel didn't exist. Where's your proof of this? can you link me to a website with pictures? I only know of one picture that shows orange-hot metal being picked out of the ground, and as I clearly explained: If it was molten (type define molten into google if you need clarification) it couldn't be PICKED out of the ground. It would have to be brought out inside a container, like any liquid. Do you understand that?
showmeanedge 1 year ago
@showmeanedge i sent u the link to the site as a personal message because for some god awful reason youtube won't let me post the link to the molten steel found at wtc 7. lets hope u get this message. u probably have family members that work at youtube that u don't even know about. cuz WHY THE FUCK I CANT POST THAT LINK!!!!
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives Like I've said, being a reformed truther, I'm see all of this evidence before. So let's do this one real quick. It says the hottest recorded temperature was 1377F. Fair enough. Just google 'melting point of steel' and you'll be treated to a page which lists the melting point of steel as somwhere between 2500F and 2750F depending on the specific composition of the steel in question. (Steel is iron with differeing amounts of carbon content). So 1377 = Half the melting point of steel.
showmeanedge 1 year ago
@showmeanedge i hope we're talkin about wtc7 cuz u got the towers i'll give u that one. but wtc 7 now u'll have to apply some real creative thinking to just explain that away.
omarlives 1 year ago
@omarlives I'm talking about YOUR evidence for "molten" steel, which clearly shows that it was NOT molten.(1377F Not hot enough to melt steel) WTC7 had two massive buildings collapse right next to it. Google "St. Nicholas Cathedral ground zero" to see some images of a church that was partially demolish by falling debris. Big things fell out of the sky, hit things around them, caused massive damage and fires, fires led to weakening of steel, weakening led to collapse of WTC7. Simple as that.
showmeanedge 1 year ago
@omarlives
This temperature of 1377F was recorded *after* the demolition, so it's not really evidence of the temperatures of the steel in the fire zones *before* the towers were brought down.
This is the same old bait-and-switch would-be debunkers try to pull to smother the facts.
proudfootz 1 year ago
@proudfootz Alright, gramps. You go on thinking that the government is out to get you, and die paranoid and insecure in the 'knowledge' that the whole world is your enemy. I have seen all the videos and supposed evidence you could care to point me to, I just disagree with the conclusions, after learning about the many different logical fallacies and how to apply them to critical thinking to come to concrete conclusions about the veracity of claims made by the tinfoil hat brigade.
showmeanedge 1 year ago
@showmeanedge
You continue to just make stuff up instead of sticking to the facts. That's the only weapon you would-be debunkers seem to have.
Since you have no logical or scientific basis to counter my citation of facts it seems you're simply going to resort to baseless insults instead.
Why can't you folks ever lose gracefully and simply admit you're wrong?
proudfootz 1 year ago
@proudfootz You, sir, are an intellectual cancer. You're actually kind of internets-famous for being completely deluded, and essentially either one of the most purposefully ignorant people around, or just plain dumb. Now, I don't think you're beign ignorant on purpose. I think you believe in all of this nonsense, and I believe you honestly have no way of vetting your own mental processes. This in no way makes you an less reprehensible or pathetic, but I guess that's just the way it goes.
showmeanedge 1 year ago
@showmeanedge
Well, I suppose name-calling is your strong suit since you can't win the argument on the facts.
I suppose we could similary 'disprove' Einstein's theories by calling him names - saves a lot of work doesn't it?
proudfootz 1 year ago
And you haven't cited a single fact here. Not one, and you never will. I think you're actually mentally incapable of recognizing a fact.
showmeanedge 1 year ago
@showmeanedge
I cited facts about the temperatures found at WTC after demolition and the temps indicated by steel samples recovered from WTC (not hot enough to even weaken let alone melt steel).
Since none of the work of science apparently qualifies as a 'fact' in your little universe, it seems you are the one who is 'mentally incapable' of carrying on a rational conversation.
proudfootz 1 year ago
@omarlives Half the melting point of steel is certainly enough to weaken steel, I'm not sure at which point it starts to glow, but some quick research on my part just turned up some impartial information that proves that you've been misled here. Now, as for what caused temperatures to reach 1377F (Which is pretty hot, all things considered), I'm going to have to mention the furnace effect again. Covering a fire (And there were fires, lots) will cause it to get hotter. No mysteries here.
showmeanedge 1 year ago