The NFPA has no power, nor does it undertake, to police or enforce compliance with the contents of this document... Users of this document should consult applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. NFPA does not, by the publication of this document, intend to urge action that is not in compliance with applicable laws, and this document may not be construed as doing so.
Erik Lawyer has been slamed by the FDNY. He is not one of them and is not welcome, he does not speak for them and he is dishonest or just plane stupid
Another deluded, paranoid asshole. You lot make me sick. Just because 9/11 happened in your lifetime doesn't mean there's some conspiracy. Why doesn't anybody ever make a fuss of the 1993 bombing of WTC? Why does not one want an investigation into that? Oh, because it happened during another and more sane, less internet-addicted generation. Go fuck yourselves and your copies of Loose Change. PS: The truth from a guy named Erik Lawyer... irony!
@DaWickerMan you're probably one of those who are paid to throw shade on the truth. and if not, why are you so against at least being open to a reinvestigation? they are obviously covering something up. why would a tower collapse with nothing hitting it? you're sounding like a total moron.
Nist report, is a joke, anyone with a brain can tell that a demolition was used in all three buildings, that includes building 7 which was never hit and did not have the airplain fuel that the 1st two had... it was obviously a pretext for the invasion of Iraq and the Patriot act, which is being used against the US citizens.
The 9/11 Commission Report & the NIST Report have been completely debunked. Time for a proper investigation. The attack poodles on these comments sections are a distraction. Their role is to just raise the background noise & stifle any progress towards unearthing the truth. Don't waste your time debating with them.
The 9/11 Commission Report & the NIST Report have been completely debunked. Time for a proper investigation. The attack poodles on these comments sections are a distraction. Their role is to just raise the background noise & stifle any progress towards unearthing the truth. Don't waste your time debating with them.
@MsJK21, if the towers collapsing just from the impact of the planes and the ensuing fires doesn't surprise you, why didn't you call and tell them to get out of the buildings? No one else seemed to know. Hundreds of firefighters were in the buildings when they collapsed. No architect who designed the buildings warned anyone that they would collapse. Doesn't it seem strange to you that no one predicted their collapses but now it makes so much sense that they collapsed?
@mdmguyon And If the WTC towers 1,2 and 3 collapsed purely because of fire, why aren't all of the other high rise steel framed buildings condemned by fire safety officers and new standards drawn up regarding fire protection and fire insulation all over the world. Why has the US government not released the blueprints for the wtc towers, these could help to save lives from learning from this disaster.
@MsJK21, I'd still like to know where you get your numbers. What is the minimum that it would take to demolish a building in a way that it won't look or sound like a controlled demolition?
@MsJK21, large debris staying within a collapsed building's footprint might be the whole point of a controlled demolition that's designed to not harm any other buildings near it, but that's obviously irrelevant. If "fell over" means anything but a perfectly vertical collapse, every building that has ever collapsed "fell over." You're being silly. Even Dan Rather commented that the collapse of building 7 looked like a controlled demolition.
@MsJK21, is all of that really necessary in order to implode such a building? On what do you base your "over a thousand locations?" Would 500 have sufficed? How about 100? Would it have to have been done on all 110 floors? Might 20 have sufficed? What is the minimum? What would a controlled demolition that's designed to look and sound like a collapse that resulted from fire look and sound like?
I didn't realize that thermite was in the form of a bomb. I thought it just burned.
@mdmguyon I was replying to mdmguyon's idea that charges were placed throughout the Twin Towers and only the ones where the planes hit were triggered. Since each tower had 80 support columns just on the outside and each was 110 stories, that would be 80 x 110 x 2 = 17,600. That's not taking into account the internal support columns.
Charges on half the columns might have done it, but we're still talking 8800 charges. "Bombs" is a technical term; one could also use the term "charge".
@mdmguyon wrote, "What would a controlled demolition that's designed to look and sound like a collapse that resulted from fire look and sound like?"
There's no such thing. That's why I find belief in the idea that the towers were brought down in a controlled demolition explosion absurd. Just for one, nobody heard the explosions going off as the collapse started and continued.
@MsJK21: Or would you also contend that since debris from the collapse of building 1 damaged building 7, that building 1 didn't fall into its footprint but fell to the north and destroyed building 7?
I've never seen a video of a "squib" remaining attached to the window frame. They all look like smoke to me.
@mdmguyon It's not a contention, it's a fact that the North Tower fell to the north. Debris from that collapse didn't "destroy" WTC7, but did damage it and start many fires which grew throughout the day. Both towers collapsing crushed water mains and standpipes, so there was little water pressure to fight the fires or make the WTC7 sprinkler system functional.
As for your "squibs", go here (remove extra spaces): debunking911 . com /overp.htm
@MsJK21 The NIST reports calls these "dust puffs" some of these "dust puffs" actually blow human bodies out of the building at great speed. NIST referred to them as "dust puffs" because it sounds less politically damaging than explosions!
@MsJK21, Fiterman Hall was actually to the north, not south, of building 7. I hope you didn't mean to imply that "falling to the south and destroying the Community College across the street" means that building 7 fell over and hit Fiterman Hall, since I'm sure you know better, as I'm sure you know that a building falling into its footprint doesn't mean that all debris from its collapse stays within its footprint.
@mdmguyon Sorry, I mistyped. Fiterman Hall was northeast of WTC7, at 30 W. Broadway. The Verizon Building to the west was also badly damaged from the WTC7 collapse.
I do mean WTC7 fell over, as is evident from photos after the collapse. One is here: debunking911 . com /wtc7pile . jpg (Fiterman Hall is at the bottom of the photo).
I'm sure you know that a building falling into its footprint means the large debris stay within its footprint. That's the whole point of controlled demolition!
If buildings collapse so easily from fire, why go to all the trouble of rigging them with explosives to do a controlled demolition? Wouldn't lighting a match to the building save a lot of trouble?
@mdmguyon LMAO!! Oh no, you didn't just propose that thermite bombs were placed throughout two 110 story buildings!!! LMAO!!
Since they would have had to be placed directly on the structural steel, holes would have had to have been knocked through walls without any of the thousands of office workers noticing!! In over a thousand locations!! On 110 floors!! Twice!!
LMAO!! I don't even know how dumb you have to be to believe that, much less state it in public! I'd buy a mental illness!
@MsJK21 In the nine months leading up to Sept 11th an elevator upgrade on the towers was taking place. If you had access to the elevator shafts,you had access to the core columns.Ace Elevator was the company undertaking the upgrade. Check it out for yourself.
@docupr The elevator shafts were all in the inner core of the building. In the North Tower collapse, the inner core survived for about a second after the structural facade began to fall, so the collapse could not have come from the inner core. In the South Tower collapse, the structural facade failed about the same time as the inner core and the failures of each of the structural columns was obvious from outside. How had elevator upgraders put charges on the structural columns on the facade?
@MsJK21, I find the argument that building 7 didn't collapse vertically or symmetrically rather silly. Maybe there was SOME deviation from it being perfectly vertical, but it wasn't much. If there were no controlled demolitions of the towers, how do you account for the "squibs," which were as many as 40 floors below the collapse at some points? I don't buy the argument that they were pockets of air that the collapse caused.
@mdmguyon If by SOME deviation from vertical you mean "falling to the south and destroying the Community College across the street", I'll agree with you. Search the web for aerial photos of the wreckage and you will see for yourself. The "squibs" were window blinds billowing out as windows broke from internal air pressure. If you focus on one, you can see it remains attached to the window frame after blowing out. I will agree that you are ignorant of the mechanics of bldg collapse!
@MsJK21 Correction, WTC-7 fell apart. Most of the building fell to the northeast, damaging the Community College, but some debris damaged the Verizon building to the west. Since controlled demolition is all about dropping the building straight down into its footprint, it wasn't a controlled demolition.
I'm pretty sure informed people didn't tell this guy to shut up until he proved he couldn't or wouldn't understand basic concepts!
The manual he cites is for fires of suspicious or unknown origin. We know what caused the WTC fires, so all that is bunk. He repeats the lie that the WTC7 fires were small & that WTC7 fell straight down. They weren't & it didn't. FEMA 's investigation was inconclusive, so they called in NIST. NIST investigated and found out.
Yes, because you are all more qualified to judge the statements made by firefighters who where actually AT the scene when the shit hit the fan.
The arrogance you guys got, its just incredible.
Freedom, democracy and liberty is based on an open community. Wich is impossible to obtain when many of it's nations people takes the word of the politicians to be of more worth than that of the people who are trying to tell the truth based on first hand experiences
@Lemuron01 When statements made by firefighters conflict with physical evidence, you bet I'm going to believe that evidence over the statements made by firefighters! And when firefighters make money by misusing an arson investigation manual to further insanity, you bet I'm going to be more qualified to judge their statements.
Look at video. The collapses begin at the areas where the planes sliced into the buildings. How could have explosives been placed in those exact spots before the day?
and with his dirty mouth Bush was saying 'our heroes who died' ..he might as well says all the heroes i KILLED !!! He surely deserves an Electric chair IMO
@WilliamAztech Steven Jones is a religious lunatic who thought 9/11 was the start of the end times. Don't believe anything he says unless he is talking about muon-catalyzed fusion and even then take what he says with a grain of salt!!
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. Several times during this video his says "We've never seen anything like this" We watched the planes crash into the bulidings. Grassy knowles, Ancient Aliens, Elivs is alive. Life is uncertain and we wnat so much to makes it all make sense to us. He uses a house fire manual as an example of what they should of followed. PEOPLE ARE CRAZY!!! COO COO
99.99% of architects and engineering community see no problems with analysis done by NIST. Small group of people, many of them not even qualified structural engineers (!) does not change anything.
Two main reasons why Erik Lawyer is wrong:
1. NFPA guideline he shows is just that: a guideline, not the law!
2. No evidence for controlled demolition was found, recorded, seen or heard, but conspiracy theorists clutch desperately at couple of samples of metal which does not prove it either.
@BlisterHiker How can you say that no evidence was seen or heard? I watch building #7 fall and I SEE a classic crimp, and emplosion...I SEE eyewitnesses say that there were explosions going off everywhere. You seem to be a well spoken person...but you live in a dream land! Molten metal and concreate being turned into dust is not cause by kerosene.
Explosive demolition on such scale would've made noise that million of people in city would've heard!
No such noise was heard. Compare footage of WTC 7 to controlled demolitions. Do you really hear charges going off in the WTC 7? Maybe you hear them, if you really want to hear them...
If thermal demolition of such building took place, sheer amount of material like thermate required to burn through all critical colums would be huge. Sounds and flashes would be seen everywhere!
Again, did anyone see such high temperature thermal reactions going on anywhere in the building? No, nobody saw or heard it!
WTC 7 started falling apart internally. Air pressure build-up and mechanical stress was causing windows to break, but it does not look anywhere near effects of explosive charges.
Witnesses heard noises of the structure, floors crashing down, transformers blown because of high temperature and described it as "explosions", but that does not mean explosives. >
Finally, despite the fact that 806,000 tons of debris had been carefully screened (that does not include heavy steel parts), no piece of equipment, cabling, triggers etc which could suggest controlled demolition was found.
You, Conspiracy Theorists, are the best in misinterpreting facts, esp. reports of witnesses who experienced very emotional and stressful moments.
Judge the facts, if you are able to do that. That's what I do. There was no CD at the WTC site on 9/11.
@BlisterHiker You and your made up stats dont impress me...and nor does the fact that you sound like an informed person to a typical ignorant, under informed, person. I am trying to stay respectful towards you and I do respect your stance...but I know in my heart and mind that you are so far from the truth. Good day!
@BlisterHiker Your opinion of the "facts" is exactly what the Fed Govt told NIST to tell you to think. Oh God forbid that one dare to ask questions about the intent of those involved! You have said that the WITNESSES to the events of 911 were to wrapped up in their emotions to be believed...how the hell can I misinterpret a fireman saying "molten metal flowing like lava" "it sounded like bombs going off everwhere" you keep calling them liars not me...lets move this to PM in the future
1. No, my opinion are not what Govt told me. On the contrary, your research is poor and it is you who is like a sheep, following what your truthin' gurus told you without much of critical thinking.
2. Molten metal does not prove any controlled demolition either. In fact, there is very casual explanation known even to high school students who pay attention in class. After collapse, debris was sprayed with water which was turning to steam while penetrating deeper layers. >
At temperatures above 400°C, iron and steam react exothermically. This reaction produces Fe3O4 and hydrogen.
Those in turn, in contact with substances found in sheetrock, can produce SO2 and sulphuric acid in contact with water. Due to lack of oxygen, carbon monoxide was also produced which acts like a catalyst for those reactions.
There you have the circle which was not only able to maintain its high temperature, but even combine its chemical byproducts to create corrosive acid! >
3. When I wrote about witnesses, the context was "explosions", not "molten metal". Read my comments carefully. There were many things which could cause loud noises at the WTC site, and some of the reports actually describe the sound of actual collapse.
"It sounded like explosion" or "like bombs going off" does not equal "there were explosives going off"!
Again, people reported what the heard and saw under enormous stress.
Btw, I wonder how smart you would be in their place... >
None of them found any evidence for controlled demolition. Suggesting they were part of a cover-up, as some truthers claim, is the worst insult those brave people could hear!
You should be ashamed, not only because you are ignorant and biased, but also because directly or indirectly you insult people who were risking their lives and health during ten months of recovery operation.
I hope my comments will at least make you think for a moment.
Same goes to Mr. Erik Lawyer. Instead of waving his NFPA guideline, which is only that: a guideline, not the law (!) he should be ashamed for making such accusations not only against the Government, but also indirectly at thousands of people who worked at the WTC site, including firefighters.
@RandomMessiah no you fucktard i will not...aluminum from the planes...i can't take this many stupid people in the this short of time. alumuminum bahahaha...stupid!
@29render I write a simple statement that the material was melted aluminum and you call me stupid and a fucktard as a reply... That really shows your high level of knowledge and mental capacity...
You're talking about aluminum which melted at the WTC towers, but there were also chemical reactions taking place in the rubble long after buildings collapsed. I explained it in my comments.
Of course, conspiracy believers will interpret everything the way it fits their views, but facts are facts. They did not show even one bit of solid evidence for controlled demolitions on 9/11.
@BlisterHiker Thanks! I just wanted to add the the NFPA guidelines are for fires of unknown or suspicious origin. We know what caused the WTC fires, so there is no reason for anyone to have followed the guidelines.
Erik Lawyer should publically apologize for making such accusations. He offended all firemen and their families in particular. Like you said, he doesn't understand basic concepts and maybe he doesn't want to, just like 9/11 so-called truthers.
@BlisterHiker Amen! He is probably making a lot of money by making his false claims, which would go a long way toward explaining his passion. I agree with you about the firefighters and all the 9/11 families. It's incredibly sad and aggravating that they are being hurt by these people.
Even if something resembles controlled demolition, it does not mean it took place!
There is always a first time when something unexpected happens.
WTC 7 started disintegrating internally long before its outer shell collapsed.
Structure of WTC 7 was much different from typical high rise buildings because it was built on top of Con Edison structure and its supporting columns did not match location of the underground structure.
NIST explained the mechanism of collapse very accurately.
@BlisterHiker u know what after reading more of your posts i have come to the conclusion that you are a total fool and i am sorry that I wasted my time...good day!
First of all, the laws of criminal investigation was distorted about the crime scene of 9/11 because evidence was removed and never forensically chekced for e.g. explosives.
Second of all, the UN-scientific NIST Reports were set up to come up with fire HYPOTHESIS made by twisting and turning computers for months - not by explaining and investigating what truly happened to WTC 1, 2 and 7.
"... because evidence was removed and never forensically chekced for e.g. explosives."
That comment is not only a blatant lie, but also one of the most stupid things that could be said to support 9/11 Conspiracy Theory.
Sure, some secret agents penetrated all debris at the WTC site among hundreds of firefighters and volunteers and removed all traces of controlled demolition, down to the last piece of cable or trigger...
Now you are resorting to support your Osama & the 19 Li'l Hijackers CT with lies about the WTC debris having been forensically checked for explosives; sorry dude, it never happened. But unexplained proof of excendiaries have been reported by both FEMA, USGS and RJ Lee Group in form of the iron rich micro spheres - that's true.
"some secret agents penetrated all debris at the WTC site among hundreds of firefighters and volunteers and removed all traces of controlled demolition"
Of course they could't remove all of it. That's why AE911Truth is up and running:
15,000 people had been through WTC debris screening. Thousands more worked at Ground Zero!
Claiming that the evidence for alleged controlled demolition was magically removed or unnoticed, is as idiotic as claims made by Moon Hoax Conspiracy Theorists.
Get back in touch with reality, and get better education instead of trusting people like Gage, Griffin or Harrit who lost their credibility in the eyes of scientific community long ago.
It seems that you don't read what I said: The evidence - that the layman worker at GZ of course didn't know anything about and was never checked for - is presented in the vidoes i linked to.
Get in touch with your inner fears of what the inside job might make you feel, when it's one day obvious to the world; will you commit siucide? Go straight to the nuthouse? Or get mad as hell and demand that the guilty become investigated, charged and punished?
Please don't refer me to speculations and some crappy demonstrations which are as far from conditions in the WTC rubble as firing a model rocket is close to Space Shuttle launch! I've seen it all before.
Eutectic reactions in the rubble have been explained earlier by FEMA, and no evidence for explosive or thermal demolitions were ever found, recorded or heard. Do you realize how much energy would be needed for such scale thermate demolition? Which part of that you still can't get?
Wow - can you show me where FEMA explains the thermal reactions?
You're right; there's no evidence of explosives in the official reports - because they never checked for it. It's all in endependant research.
It's for a new investigation to show what forces besides NANO-thermite where used. Do you realise how much force it whould take to make an upper part of a steel framed high riser force it's way down through the lower? NIST never accounted for that, you know.
Wow. You're so full of step 2 in Shopenhauer's Three Stages of Truth. It's fascinating. What I refered to was the eutectic. Please explain how it occured. How about giving us a non-speculative and non-crappy demonstration?
Unless you reproduce exactly the same conditions, it's all speculations and suppositions. Every engineer will tell you that.
I am not a chemical engineer, but I trust the engineers who know how it works, and I'm sorry, conspiracy theory has no base.
Even if a result looks similar to what you suspect, it does not mean you theory is what actually happened, and again, no signs of large scale thermal demolition were seen, heard, recorded or found. No amount of truthin' will change that.
The NIST Report is all about biased "scince" and computer speculations. The conditions set up by physicsandreasson is to make some points clear to those who are not terrified about the inside job claim - which means you simply don't/won't get it.
You mix up the term "conspiracy theory" ONCE again by stating that the critics of the NIST Report and the claims of controlled demolition, findings of nano-thermite, eutectic and iron rich micro spheres equals "conspiracy theory."
You are lying. NIST report is not about biased science. It's based on data which is available.
As you know, WTC 7 could not be inspected because it was becoming unstable hours before collapse and had to be evacuated. Therefore, nobody knows 100% of details of collapse sequence, but surely it was not a controlled demolition.
Forgive me, seeing truthers like Gage modeling WTC tower with cardboard boxes (!) I choose real science and NIST's report.
Claiming that I'm lying is your ongoing efforts of Shopenhauer's 2nd Step: NIST was hired to come up with a firehypothesis and not check for - with expertese and getting to the bottom - what happened. It's even emphazised on the splash page signed by George W. Bush.
As you know, the debris of WTC 7 could have been expected after the collapse. Who the hell has asked for it to be inspected while on fire?
I forgive you: You HAVE to resort to another "Shopenhauers 2nd Step" by laughing desperately at Gage's cardbox show - which is as obvious as the little boy who saw that the Emperor was naked.
"I trust the engineers who know how it works"
Who are they? Other than Sunder, Gross (let's keep them out for reasons of biased/paid interests) and about 10 experts(?) running amok on JREF? Let's see them argue live against these guys:
ae911truth. org/news/41-articles/425-45experts. html
That's why you fail so blatantly and simply just display your inner fears and Shopenhauer's Step 2; You simply cannot GRASP that the official fairy tale about Osama & His 19 Li'l Hijackers is an unproven and scientifically impossible conspiracy theory whilst pointing out the ommissions and errors of NIST is NOT.
You can just look at building 7's collapse - it's all sign of a CD. Compare that to the BS of NIST and connect the dots. But it's not possible for a Matrix Type like you.
It's you who ignore the annomalities of the collapses and denies what is obvious to numerous experts - who are at the same time not afraid to go public with their views and thereby risk ridiculing, firing, losing "friends" and marrige etc.
The debunker scientists don't have all those risks - they have the sheepleness of the "educated" America to back them up. Why are they so FEW, then?
1. That's quibbling; Lawyer explains why a real, criminal investigation was blocked. THAT's what counts.
1. Err, sure, now I have to repeat: THEY WERE NEVER CHECKED FOR EXPLOSIVES AND EXOTIC ACCELERANTS! But they showed unexplainable iron rich micro spheres - that NIST does not want t o discuss. Besides that, the dust contains NANO-thermite and you forgot to explain to me how the eutectic has occured.
3. Now YOU repeat a totally non-argument - yet a fact - over and over; You're so right - because it was NEVER officially checked for. But the evidence has been found: Go to Chandlers analysis of the footage. Go to the PEER REVIEWED report of the nano-thermitical compounds. Just look at WTC 7 and you see something that resembles 99,9999% a CD and like 0,00001% a "fire enduced, global collapse." (Total made up crap fantasies.)
FEMA's recommendation to further study samples from WTC site was made with buildings safety in mind, not because there were any conspiracy scenarios, but you "truthers" take even that fact out of context.
Nobody knows what exact chemical composition surrounded those metal samples, what was the temperature, how much oxygen was present etc. It's all very complicated, but you "truthers" think your gurus like Jones or Harrit have found all the answers... No, they have not!
What smells like "conspiracy" is the way a real investigation was distorted - just like Lawyer points out. It seems you need to miss out on that to maintain your world view. Well, I can't blame you.
"Nobody knows what exact chemical composition surrounded those metal samples, what was the temperature, how much oxygen was present etc."
Excactly - because the investigation of it has been blocked for 9 1/2 years. But we're getting there; NANO-thermite etc.
"...who lost their credibility in the eyes of scientific community long ago."
Hah. Every time in history when scientists shows that what people are used to think is actually not like that, they are ridiculed to begin with. Take those who claimed that the earth turned around the sun and not the other way round for starters.
The debris were never investigated for explosives/exotic accelerants/incediaries. The point is that NIST did not prove what brought down 7. They were fraudulently hired to come up with a "magic bullit" fire hypothesis. Nothing scientific about that.
That's why your comment is hypocritical and a little out of context.
You are lying. There is no hypocrisy or straying out of context in my comment. I addressed his arguments and presented simple, verifiable facts.
Hundreds of thousands of tons of material and debris from WTC site were carefully screened, and no evidence for any types of controlled demolition was found.
If there was any controlled demolition in WTC 1, 2 or 7, evidence would be overwhelming.
It's not a lie that WTC debris was never investigated to fully explain what happened, i.e. for explosives, and that the Reports are not scientifically correct, as science is about getting to the bottom of a disaster and crime scene. A cover-up is not "science."
The evidence is overwhelming - but not to the blind. You represent a good "Man Who Says "Naaaahhh...!" To the Little Boy Who Saw That the Emperor Was Naked" in The Emperor's New Clothes.
If a controlled demolition (thermal of explosive) took place in structures as large as WTC 1, 2 or 7, there would be obvious traces of that, starting with pieces of triggers, cabling etc, and metal elements of the structure displaying effects of such demolition.
15,000 people worked had been through the screening of debris. 55,000 pieces of evidence were saved.
All you CTs offer is bad science and misinterpretations of samples. >
You still don't get it because it would sent you stright to the nuthouse to understand that 9/11 was an inside job to some extend:
Your 15,000 people still didn't check for explosives. And the NIST Reports are full of errors and ommissions. Besides that, their computer fantasies does not explain these "collapses." Real science takes EVERYTHING into account. It's just a fire HYPOTHESIS - just what they were ordered to produce.
Don't talk about "errors and omissions" of NIST. Pay attention to what your Conspiracy Theorists gurus are doing, how they model WTC tower with cardboard boxes (!) and misinterpret chemical changes in metal samples or paint residue.
Don't talk about fantasies either if you apparently do not understand what scale means.
Real buildings are not made of wooden blocks on a table.
Visit debunking911 . com and learn something real for a change.
I pay full attention to the fact that as long as noone are allowed to investigate what really happened, the science, claims and questions will remain "CT" in the eyes of sheep like you.
If you would acknowledge that there is a cover-up and that the truth has been distorted, I would have respect for your "oppinions"/brainwash. Obviously, it gives you comfort to to plug your fingers in your ears and scream "NA NA NA NA NAAA! at everything - even science - pointing to an inside job.
Keep arguments like "The Emperor's New Clothes" for other Conspiracy Theorists.
Real science does not work that way. 1,500 or so engineers and architects, many not even qualified structural engineers (!) who support so-called Truth Movement, means nothing against vast majority of scientific and engineering community who accepts analysis made by NIST.
If it makes you feel better, stick with your "overwhelming evidence". I prefer facts and real science.
It's you who endorse the conspiracy theory about Osama and his 19 Li'l hijackers. I'm not putting up a full theory about who did this and that. I just present the facts that turn your world view upside down - and you can't handle it.
NIST never checked for explosives or explained the nano-sized thermite compunds or the iron rich micro spheres reported by FEMA and USGS. If you were open minded and not terrified about the inside job you would understand that these were special CDs.
Are you a qualified chemical engineer? You are not, from what I see.
If you think those arguments are meaningful, go and submit them to any respected engineering forum and see what kind of reviews you get.
This has been done in the past already, and your truthin' experts proven wrong and ignorant.
Again, debunking911 . com. Go there and learn. Learn the other side of the story instead of feeding your brain with what you saw in some conspiracy videos.
I am a human being. The little boy who saw that the Emperor was naked wasn't a tailor either.
If you think it is meaningful to sit anonymously and argue on YouTube with a "twoofer" in stead of making the peer reviewed SCIENTIFIC report that expleined the ananswered questions about the WTC catastrophe without a doubt and thereby lay the rising number of Achitects and Engineers at AE911Truth. org, why don't you do so? Would make more sense.
"instead of feeding your brain with what you saw in some conspiracy videos."
Wow. What a come back from someone who fed his brain, without asking ANY questions, from MSM on 9/11-14/01 with the conspiracy theory about Osama and his 9/11 Li'l Hijackers that was poured down his sheeple throat.
Analysis done by NIST is the most detailed and accurate. None of pathetic speculations and pseudo-scientific suppositions of various conspiracy theorists, comes close to what NIST did.
Sorry, speculations do not constitute the evidence, no matter how well they seem to fit.
Erik you're a true American patriot. I try to spread the truth but I've encounter the biggest lack of interest on this topic than any other in society. The more I learn the more thirsty I become for truth as well and the more proud of people like you I am. Let's keep doing our part by telling people the FACTS and the TRUTH! It's the only way to stop whatever agenda that caused 9.11. Long Live FREEDOM in AMERICA!
Why are government investigations so thorough that they are compiled of pages and pages of nothing specific and not concise and not necessarily the truth. What are they hiding? What don't they want us to know. The 911 Commission report is deliberately long and wordy to discourage the reader from finding the truth in the omissions.
Okay, so I am AWAKE and I am AWARE of the lies from our government.
Joining groups usually ends up with a bunch of people sitting around bitching about what they've read and heard and getting fired up.......then what?? Nothing happens.
My political votes are a joke because it's all predone behind the scenes. What is left for a person to do to make changes???
They swiftly confiscated the evidence, and sent it to China to be melted down. Had to get rid of the evidence, y'know. There can be only one obvious perpetrator that could accomplish this dastardly deed: The Israeli Mossad, along with their CIA cohorts. Who else would have the ability to enter the structure with Nanothermite? Who else could squash an honest investigation? Who else could sway the major media outlets into silence? Look no further than Big Zio for the answer.
@kansasinnovember good point ..i am not an american..but i feel so angry for the thousands of innocent people who were killed by their own president who was supposed to be protecting them and not kill them.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety". Benjamin Franklin, you better wake up my friend...
Part 2 Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” Hermann Goering Hitlers # 2
Part 1 Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship,
Sure I believe everthing I'm told... And yes your right all throughout history false flag terror has never happed. Sure.... Now go back to sleep everyone...
CrazyRay, the truthers havn't made as much money as the weapons contractors, and bankers... These people do this because they are true patriots something you would not know anything about. They know in there hearts the official story is a big lie. I would say your a disinformation agent, and you probably get paid to try and debunk proof. Good luck buddy this is America and people are not buying all the unanswered ignored questions. Maybe you should study 911 : )
Any of you non-believers ever studied 911??? Thats what I thought... Some of you people are so conditioned by the controlled mainstream media is rediculous! Or your disinformation agents?? Anybody with half a brain can see that building 7 come down by controlled demo! Research for yourselves... Youtube building 7 and you be the judge. THink its patriotic!
@85Tourist Yes they've studied it! They're give the Omission Report and a Shilling for Dummies! Handbook, when they accept the minimum wage job! Oh yea, and a little Cassette Tape to play while they're asleep, that says stuff like "Truthers are Delusional!" real spooky, over and over and over and...
See there truly are "work from home jobs" in acting even. lol
But wait, there's more!
When your job is done... we'll show you some Magic! And You'll "Disappear!" yee haw!
@CrazyRay7979 And keep looking at the Paid Shills running around speading propaganda and saying Stupid Shit, for minimum wage! LOL @ de de de-bunkers!
@MeanMachine67 Let me guess. To be a big enough looser to run around pasting the same line of propaganda on 9-11 videos. You're making a whopping minimum wage to do it, because the people that are paying you, are the ones that are covering it up. Which makes you part of it too.
Don't think they'll just let you walk away, when they're done with you.
What fire department did Eric Lawyer serve in? What is his forensics background? If I am to believe in him I should be able to find his background and verify it.
Unless u can break through all the redundancy, the structure is still supported & will not easily fall.
kinda like playin jenga- u know, if u play it right, u can take out like half the tiles but it will still stand unless an outside force breaks the stack & causes it to fall. except there like a lot more tiles, far too many columns & supports, etc
however the buildin aint a piece of shit u see in china or in some third world country like nigeria. no offense to nigerian or chinese architecture- but the wtc7 & wtc1 & 2 were very well designed- very redundant & sound structures.
o and on top of showing how a gradual uncontrollable process may result in instantaneous precise damage, u also must show how such a process may in fact overcome the redundancy of the structure. Safety is all about redundancy- The stability of a good structure is really dependant just on redundancy & good design. And the 47 columns made the building extremely redundant- i think its what almost 10x redundancy? have to check later for exact specs
@swu880 just because it was well built, does not mean it cant fall. concrete and steel become weak in a fire, and maybe it was not built to the standards they say it was.
explosives remember are DIVERSE; fires are extremely limited (especially the wild ones). how can a uncontrollable mechanism produce controllable results?
ur trying to prove: Gradual = Instantaneous. never really been proven before 9/11, and hasnt been proven after 9/11. ur welcome to try- if u can prove it, i will give you 100 bucks. hell if u could do such a thing, u would be revolutionizing the mathematical & scientific world at large
But then again, judging by ur statements, ur physics understanding & analytical skills are severely lackin to begin with.
if the mechanism does not allow for freefall to occur, why are u even considering it? Unless u can show how fire can even allow for freefall acceleration of a building into itself, u logically shouldnt even consider it. Nist, even with its multimillion dollar computer simulations, has not even been able to show it
You would have to prove a CONTRADICTION- (99% of the time its impossible to prove a contradiction- still lookin for that 1%)
You would somehow be saying that a black smoked fire which we know to be very inefficient random & organic process(meaning it dont stay in 1 place for too long) and causes gradual uneven assymetric damage- ur saying such a mechanism is able to cause instantaneous SYMMETRICAL & PRECISE damage such that all columns literally disintegrate to ALLOW for freefall to occur
that means all 47 columns must be cut on 8+ floors within tenths of a second of each other. What could do that? uncontrolled fire? or well placed explosives which are meant to cause instantaneous & controllable damage? Unless u can show me how fire may even cause such precise damage & be able to instantly disintegrate ALL the steel support on multiple floors simultaneously, fire is not a valid causal factor at all! And by the scientific process, it should be eliminated as being a major cause
see only those who dont even know basic physics & history or seriously lack any analytical skills- would continue to "Cling" to the official bullshit. Anyone who studies physics, knows the laws of conservation, knows newton's principles & has at least a basic REAL understanding for things like acceleration, velocity, time, distance & gravity & the difference between Instantaneous change vs an arbitrary avg quantity- those people already realize the govt deceit behind the attacks
@swu880 using physics, you can debunk all evidence that the conspiracy puts forward. and you, you "Cling" to your bs just as much as you claim i do to mine. but, here is were we differ, if real evidence can be produced to show that, for example, tower 7 didn't fall as a result of its proximity to the collapsing twin towers, i will change my mind. but with you, no amount of evidence will ever sway you. you'll right it off as more lies. you'll only except things that support your case.
uh wtc5, wtc6 these 2 towers were much closer to the twin towers(wtc1&2), and wtc5 & wtc6 suffered damage hundreds of times greater than wtc7- the fires themselves were much bigger- the debris damage much greater. yet guess what- neither wtc5 nor 6 fell at all! but somehow the gigantic wtc7 which was not only the furthest away from the towers but also reinforced to be made into an emergency bunker(which was never used on 911), fell into freefall acceleration. And u know how
u even know how difficult it is to get a building to go into freefall in a controlled demolition? u MUST time it precisely so that each & every column is cut within tenths of a second or else the energy of the buildin is consumed in crushing & crushin energy is not available for gravitational energy -vice versa. If a buildin consumes energy through crushin & smashing, then we see an immediate DECELERATION- that is called impact. But what we c instead on wtc7 is 2.5seconds of freefall
Who's got the power to catch the ones responsible? whats next?
pot5678 3 weeks ago
the 13 people who "dislike" this are treasonous, cowards and just as criminally insane as the people complicit in the attacks of 9/11
RCPCTermite 3 weeks ago
The NFPA has no power, nor does it undertake, to police or enforce compliance with the contents of this document... Users of this document should consult applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. NFPA does not, by the publication of this document, intend to urge action that is not in compliance with applicable laws, and this document may not be construed as doing so.
Denierbud11 1 month ago
Erik Lawyer has been slamed by the FDNY. He is not one of them and is not welcome, he does not speak for them and he is dishonest or just plane stupid
Denierbud11 1 month ago
@Denierbud11..... Its PLAIN stupid not PLANE!!!! Who looks stupid now?
wibble637 3 weeks ago
@wibble637
lol - thanks for the spell check
Denierbud11 3 weeks ago
Another deluded, paranoid asshole. You lot make me sick. Just because 9/11 happened in your lifetime doesn't mean there's some conspiracy. Why doesn't anybody ever make a fuss of the 1993 bombing of WTC? Why does not one want an investigation into that? Oh, because it happened during another and more sane, less internet-addicted generation. Go fuck yourselves and your copies of Loose Change. PS: The truth from a guy named Erik Lawyer... irony!
DaWickerMan 2 months ago
@DaWickerMan you're probably one of those who are paid to throw shade on the truth. and if not, why are you so against at least being open to a reinvestigation? they are obviously covering something up. why would a tower collapse with nothing hitting it? you're sounding like a total moron.
gerardo523 1 month ago
@gerardo523 Oh wow, thanks for not addressing any of my points directly. I'll extend you the same courtesy.
DaWickerMan 1 month ago
Nist report, is a joke, anyone with a brain can tell that a demolition was used in all three buildings, that includes building 7 which was never hit and did not have the airplain fuel that the 1st two had... it was obviously a pretext for the invasion of Iraq and the Patriot act, which is being used against the US citizens.
Freeme2742 3 months ago
ARREST GEORGE W. BUSH AND DICK CHENEY
EthanA1122 4 months ago 7
The 9/11 Commission Report & the NIST Report have been completely debunked. Time for a proper investigation. The attack poodles on these comments sections are a distraction. Their role is to just raise the background noise & stifle any progress towards unearthing the truth. Don't waste your time debating with them.
Cabronosidad 5 months ago 6
The 9/11 Commission Report & the NIST Report have been completely debunked. Time for a proper investigation. The attack poodles on these comments sections are a distraction. Their role is to just raise the background noise & stifle any progress towards unearthing the truth. Don't waste your time debating with them.
Cabronosidad 5 months ago 2
yep... 10 years.
WilliamAztech 5 months ago
obvious government trolls making bitchass excuses are obvious.
derekhugh 5 months ago
@MsJK21, if the towers collapsing just from the impact of the planes and the ensuing fires doesn't surprise you, why didn't you call and tell them to get out of the buildings? No one else seemed to know. Hundreds of firefighters were in the buildings when they collapsed. No architect who designed the buildings warned anyone that they would collapse. Doesn't it seem strange to you that no one predicted their collapses but now it makes so much sense that they collapsed?
mdmguyon 5 months ago
@mdmguyon And If the WTC towers 1,2 and 3 collapsed purely because of fire, why aren't all of the other high rise steel framed buildings condemned by fire safety officers and new standards drawn up regarding fire protection and fire insulation all over the world. Why has the US government not released the blueprints for the wtc towers, these could help to save lives from learning from this disaster.
apbriggs07 3 months ago
@apbriggs07
"Why has the US government not released the blueprints for the wtc towers,"
they have been released, for many years now -- catch up with the program
Denierbud11 3 weeks ago
@MsJK21, I'd still like to know where you get your numbers. What is the minimum that it would take to demolish a building in a way that it won't look or sound like a controlled demolition?
mdmguyon 5 months ago
@MsJK21, large debris staying within a collapsed building's footprint might be the whole point of a controlled demolition that's designed to not harm any other buildings near it, but that's obviously irrelevant. If "fell over" means anything but a perfectly vertical collapse, every building that has ever collapsed "fell over." You're being silly. Even Dan Rather commented that the collapse of building 7 looked like a controlled demolition.
mdmguyon 5 months ago
@MsJK21, is all of that really necessary in order to implode such a building? On what do you base your "over a thousand locations?" Would 500 have sufficed? How about 100? Would it have to have been done on all 110 floors? Might 20 have sufficed? What is the minimum? What would a controlled demolition that's designed to look and sound like a collapse that resulted from fire look and sound like?
I didn't realize that thermite was in the form of a bomb. I thought it just burned.
mdmguyon 5 months ago
@mdmguyon I was replying to mdmguyon's idea that charges were placed throughout the Twin Towers and only the ones where the planes hit were triggered. Since each tower had 80 support columns just on the outside and each was 110 stories, that would be 80 x 110 x 2 = 17,600. That's not taking into account the internal support columns.
Charges on half the columns might have done it, but we're still talking 8800 charges. "Bombs" is a technical term; one could also use the term "charge".
MsJK21 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mdmguyon wrote, "What would a controlled demolition that's designed to look and sound like a collapse that resulted from fire look and sound like?"
There's no such thing. That's why I find belief in the idea that the towers were brought down in a controlled demolition explosion absurd. Just for one, nobody heard the explosions going off as the collapse started and continued.
MsJK21 5 months ago
@MsJK21: Or would you also contend that since debris from the collapse of building 1 damaged building 7, that building 1 didn't fall into its footprint but fell to the north and destroyed building 7?
I've never seen a video of a "squib" remaining attached to the window frame. They all look like smoke to me.
mdmguyon 5 months ago
@mdmguyon It's not a contention, it's a fact that the North Tower fell to the north. Debris from that collapse didn't "destroy" WTC7, but did damage it and start many fires which grew throughout the day. Both towers collapsing crushed water mains and standpipes, so there was little water pressure to fight the fires or make the WTC7 sprinkler system functional.
As for your "squibs", go here (remove extra spaces): debunking911 . com /overp.htm
MsJK21 5 months ago
@MsJK21 The NIST reports calls these "dust puffs" some of these "dust puffs" actually blow human bodies out of the building at great speed. NIST referred to them as "dust puffs" because it sounds less politically damaging than explosions!
apbriggs07 3 months ago
@MsJK21, Fiterman Hall was actually to the north, not south, of building 7. I hope you didn't mean to imply that "falling to the south and destroying the Community College across the street" means that building 7 fell over and hit Fiterman Hall, since I'm sure you know better, as I'm sure you know that a building falling into its footprint doesn't mean that all debris from its collapse stays within its footprint.
mdmguyon 5 months ago
@mdmguyon Sorry, I mistyped. Fiterman Hall was northeast of WTC7, at 30 W. Broadway. The Verizon Building to the west was also badly damaged from the WTC7 collapse.
I do mean WTC7 fell over, as is evident from photos after the collapse. One is here: debunking911 . com /wtc7pile . jpg (Fiterman Hall is at the bottom of the photo).
I'm sure you know that a building falling into its footprint means the large debris stay within its footprint. That's the whole point of controlled demolition!
MsJK21 5 months ago
If buildings collapse so easily from fire, why go to all the trouble of rigging them with explosives to do a controlled demolition? Wouldn't lighting a match to the building save a lot of trouble?
mdmguyon 5 months ago
@MsJK21, If explosives or thermite were placed throughout the buildings, that would include the exact spots where the planes hit.
mdmguyon 5 months ago
@mdmguyon LMAO!! Oh no, you didn't just propose that thermite bombs were placed throughout two 110 story buildings!!! LMAO!!
Since they would have had to be placed directly on the structural steel, holes would have had to have been knocked through walls without any of the thousands of office workers noticing!! In over a thousand locations!! On 110 floors!! Twice!!
LMAO!! I don't even know how dumb you have to be to believe that, much less state it in public! I'd buy a mental illness!
MsJK21 5 months ago
@MsJK21 In the nine months leading up to Sept 11th an elevator upgrade on the towers was taking place. If you had access to the elevator shafts,you had access to the core columns.Ace Elevator was the company undertaking the upgrade. Check it out for yourself.
docupr 5 months ago
@docupr The elevator shafts were all in the inner core of the building. In the North Tower collapse, the inner core survived for about a second after the structural facade began to fall, so the collapse could not have come from the inner core. In the South Tower collapse, the structural facade failed about the same time as the inner core and the failures of each of the structural columns was obvious from outside. How had elevator upgraders put charges on the structural columns on the facade?
MsJK21 5 months ago
@MsJK21, I find the argument that building 7 didn't collapse vertically or symmetrically rather silly. Maybe there was SOME deviation from it being perfectly vertical, but it wasn't much. If there were no controlled demolitions of the towers, how do you account for the "squibs," which were as many as 40 floors below the collapse at some points? I don't buy the argument that they were pockets of air that the collapse caused.
mdmguyon 5 months ago
@mdmguyon If by SOME deviation from vertical you mean "falling to the south and destroying the Community College across the street", I'll agree with you. Search the web for aerial photos of the wreckage and you will see for yourself. The "squibs" were window blinds billowing out as windows broke from internal air pressure. If you focus on one, you can see it remains attached to the window frame after blowing out. I will agree that you are ignorant of the mechanics of bldg collapse!
MsJK21 5 months ago
@MsJK21 Correction, WTC-7 fell apart. Most of the building fell to the northeast, damaging the Community College, but some debris damaged the Verizon building to the west. Since controlled demolition is all about dropping the building straight down into its footprint, it wasn't a controlled demolition.
MsJK21 5 months ago
I'm pretty sure informed people didn't tell this guy to shut up until he proved he couldn't or wouldn't understand basic concepts!
The manual he cites is for fires of suspicious or unknown origin. We know what caused the WTC fires, so all that is bunk. He repeats the lie that the WTC7 fires were small & that WTC7 fell straight down. They weren't & it didn't. FEMA 's investigation was inconclusive, so they called in NIST. NIST investigated and found out.
The lies in this video are criminal!!
MsJK21 5 months ago
Comment removed
MsJK21 5 months ago
Comment removed
MsJK21 5 months ago
Yes, because you are all more qualified to judge the statements made by firefighters who where actually AT the scene when the shit hit the fan.
The arrogance you guys got, its just incredible.
Freedom, democracy and liberty is based on an open community. Wich is impossible to obtain when many of it's nations people takes the word of the politicians to be of more worth than that of the people who are trying to tell the truth based on first hand experiences
Lemuron01 7 months ago
@Lemuron01 When statements made by firefighters conflict with physical evidence, you bet I'm going to believe that evidence over the statements made by firefighters! And when firefighters make money by misusing an arson investigation manual to further insanity, you bet I'm going to be more qualified to judge their statements.
Look at video. The collapses begin at the areas where the planes sliced into the buildings. How could have explosives been placed in those exact spots before the day?
MsJK21 5 months ago
and with his dirty mouth Bush was saying 'our heroes who died' ..he might as well says all the heroes i KILLED !!! He surely deserves an Electric chair IMO
brian2010lal 7 months ago
Steven Jones didn't test shit for explosives. Read his paper.
WilliamAztech 8 months ago 2
@WilliamAztech Steven Jones is a religious lunatic who thought 9/11 was the start of the end times. Don't believe anything he says unless he is talking about muon-catalyzed fusion and even then take what he says with a grain of salt!!
MsJK21 5 months ago
Too much time on his hands
maxmax1 9 months ago
@maxmax1 He's making good money from this!
MsJK21 5 months ago
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. Several times during this video his says "We've never seen anything like this" We watched the planes crash into the bulidings. Grassy knowles, Ancient Aliens, Elivs is alive. Life is uncertain and we wnat so much to makes it all make sense to us. He uses a house fire manual as an example of what they should of followed. PEOPLE ARE CRAZY!!! COO COO
maxmax1 9 months ago
99.99% of architects and engineering community see no problems with analysis done by NIST. Small group of people, many of them not even qualified structural engineers (!) does not change anything.
Two main reasons why Erik Lawyer is wrong:
1. NFPA guideline he shows is just that: a guideline, not the law!
2. No evidence for controlled demolition was found, recorded, seen or heard, but conspiracy theorists clutch desperately at couple of samples of metal which does not prove it either.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker How can you say that no evidence was seen or heard? I watch building #7 fall and I SEE a classic crimp, and emplosion...I SEE eyewitnesses say that there were explosions going off everywhere. You seem to be a well spoken person...but you live in a dream land! Molten metal and concreate being turned into dust is not cause by kerosene.
29render 9 months ago
@29render
Explosive demolition on such scale would've made noise that million of people in city would've heard!
No such noise was heard. Compare footage of WTC 7 to controlled demolitions. Do you really hear charges going off in the WTC 7? Maybe you hear them, if you really want to hear them...
If thermal demolition of such building took place, sheer amount of material like thermate required to burn through all critical colums would be huge. Sounds and flashes would be seen everywhere!
>
BlisterHiker 9 months ago 2
@29render > 2
Again, did anyone see such high temperature thermal reactions going on anywhere in the building? No, nobody saw or heard it!
WTC 7 started falling apart internally. Air pressure build-up and mechanical stress was causing windows to break, but it does not look anywhere near effects of explosive charges.
Witnesses heard noises of the structure, floors crashing down, transformers blown because of high temperature and described it as "explosions", but that does not mean explosives. >
BlisterHiker 9 months ago 2
@29render > 3
Finally, despite the fact that 806,000 tons of debris had been carefully screened (that does not include heavy steel parts), no piece of equipment, cabling, triggers etc which could suggest controlled demolition was found.
You, Conspiracy Theorists, are the best in misinterpreting facts, esp. reports of witnesses who experienced very emotional and stressful moments.
Judge the facts, if you are able to do that. That's what I do. There was no CD at the WTC site on 9/11.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker You and your made up stats dont impress me...and nor does the fact that you sound like an informed person to a typical ignorant, under informed, person. I am trying to stay respectful towards you and I do respect your stance...but I know in my heart and mind that you are so far from the truth. Good day!
29render 9 months ago
@29render
Trying to impress you, as you imply, is the last thing on my mind.
I comment for all viewers because I'm tired of all speculations and ignorance presented by Conspiracy Theorists of various sorts.
I listed simple facts. You in turn just try to "politely" insult me. You really offer nothing more than that.
Good day to you too.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker Your opinion of the "facts" is exactly what the Fed Govt told NIST to tell you to think. Oh God forbid that one dare to ask questions about the intent of those involved! You have said that the WITNESSES to the events of 911 were to wrapped up in their emotions to be believed...how the hell can I misinterpret a fireman saying "molten metal flowing like lava" "it sounded like bombs going off everwhere" you keep calling them liars not me...lets move this to PM in the future
29render 9 months ago
@29render
1. No, my opinion are not what Govt told me. On the contrary, your research is poor and it is you who is like a sheep, following what your truthin' gurus told you without much of critical thinking.
2. Molten metal does not prove any controlled demolition either. In fact, there is very casual explanation known even to high school students who pay attention in class. After collapse, debris was sprayed with water which was turning to steam while penetrating deeper layers. >
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@29render >2
At temperatures above 400°C, iron and steam react exothermically. This reaction produces Fe3O4 and hydrogen.
Those in turn, in contact with substances found in sheetrock, can produce SO2 and sulphuric acid in contact with water. Due to lack of oxygen, carbon monoxide was also produced which acts like a catalyst for those reactions.
There you have the circle which was not only able to maintain its high temperature, but even combine its chemical byproducts to create corrosive acid! >
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@29render >3
3. When I wrote about witnesses, the context was "explosions", not "molten metal". Read my comments carefully. There were many things which could cause loud noises at the WTC site, and some of the reports actually describe the sound of actual collapse.
"It sounded like explosion" or "like bombs going off" does not equal "there were explosives going off"!
Again, people reported what the heard and saw under enormous stress.
Btw, I wonder how smart you would be in their place... >
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@29render >4
4. Finally, about your cheap accusations against me, the information about screening of WTC debris does not even come from Government!
Forensic Recovery and Debris Screening operation was managed by contractor: Phillips and Jordan, Inc.
Here is their website. Go there and learn something real for a change: w w w . pandj . com
Nearly 15,000 (!) people had been through that operation, not including firefighters and hundreds of volunteers who worked at Ground Zero.
>
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@29render >5
None of them found any evidence for controlled demolition. Suggesting they were part of a cover-up, as some truthers claim, is the worst insult those brave people could hear!
You should be ashamed, not only because you are ignorant and biased, but also because directly or indirectly you insult people who were risking their lives and health during ten months of recovery operation.
I hope my comments will at least make you think for a moment.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@29render >6
Same goes to Mr. Erik Lawyer. Instead of waving his NFPA guideline, which is only that: a guideline, not the law (!) he should be ashamed for making such accusations not only against the Government, but also indirectly at thousands of people who worked at the WTC site, including firefighters.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@29render >7
Just to clarify one thing before you jump in with another of your "gotcha" arguments.
Instead of "was not only able to maintain its high temperature" I should've written:
"was not only able to increase its high temperature".
Exothermic reactions produce heat, and that what was going on in some places in WTC debris, which was hot already when towers were collapsing.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@29render the molten metal was aluminum from the aircraft, not steel from the building.
RandomMessiah 9 months ago
@RandomMessiah omg! stay the fuck away from my channel you retarded fuckers!
29render 9 months ago
@29render hahaha, or what? you gonna rig my house with explosives and thermite?? hahah
RandomMessiah 9 months ago
@RandomMessiah no you fucktard i will not...aluminum from the planes...i can't take this many stupid people in the this short of time. alumuminum bahahaha...stupid!
29render 9 months ago
@29render I write a simple statement that the material was melted aluminum and you call me stupid and a fucktard as a reply... That really shows your high level of knowledge and mental capacity...
bitch.
RandomMessiah 8 months ago
@RandomMessiah i totally disagree with your original statement...however, i completely over reacted and for that i am sorry. good day
29render 8 months ago
@RandomMessiah
You're talking about aluminum which melted at the WTC towers, but there were also chemical reactions taking place in the rubble long after buildings collapsed. I explained it in my comments.
Of course, conspiracy believers will interpret everything the way it fits their views, but facts are facts. They did not show even one bit of solid evidence for controlled demolitions on 9/11.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker Thanks! I just wanted to add the the NFPA guidelines are for fires of unknown or suspicious origin. We know what caused the WTC fires, so there is no reason for anyone to have followed the guidelines.
MsJK21 5 months ago 2
@MsJK21
Erik Lawyer should publically apologize for making such accusations. He offended all firemen and their families in particular. Like you said, he doesn't understand basic concepts and maybe he doesn't want to, just like 9/11 so-called truthers.
BlisterHiker 5 months ago
@BlisterHiker Amen! He is probably making a lot of money by making his false claims, which would go a long way toward explaining his passion. I agree with you about the firefighters and all the 9/11 families. It's incredibly sad and aggravating that they are being hurt by these people.
Keep fighting the good fight and I will too!
MsJK21 5 months ago
Even if something resembles controlled demolition, it does not mean it took place!
There is always a first time when something unexpected happens.
WTC 7 started disintegrating internally long before its outer shell collapsed.
Structure of WTC 7 was much different from typical high rise buildings because it was built on top of Con Edison structure and its supporting columns did not match location of the underground structure.
NIST explained the mechanism of collapse very accurately.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker u know what after reading more of your posts i have come to the conclusion that you are a total fool and i am sorry that I wasted my time...good day!
29render 9 months ago
BlisterHiker is wrong for many reasons:
First of all, the laws of criminal investigation was distorted about the crime scene of 9/11 because evidence was removed and never forensically chekced for e.g. explosives.
Second of all, the UN-scientific NIST Reports were set up to come up with fire HYPOTHESIS made by twisting and turning computers for months - not by explaining and investigating what truly happened to WTC 1, 2 and 7.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
"... because evidence was removed and never forensically chekced for e.g. explosives."
That comment is not only a blatant lie, but also one of the most stupid things that could be said to support 9/11 Conspiracy Theory.
Sure, some secret agents penetrated all debris at the WTC site among hundreds of firefighters and volunteers and removed all traces of controlled demolition, down to the last piece of cable or trigger...
Wow, why didn't I think about that...
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
Now you are resorting to support your Osama & the 19 Li'l Hijackers CT with lies about the WTC debris having been forensically checked for explosives; sorry dude, it never happened. But unexplained proof of excendiaries have been reported by both FEMA, USGS and RJ Lee Group in form of the iron rich micro spheres - that's true.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
"some secret agents penetrated all debris at the WTC site among hundreds of firefighters and volunteers and removed all traces of controlled demolition"
Of course they could't remove all of it. That's why AE911Truth is up and running:
watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o
watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw&feature=channel_video_title
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@Thetan1974
15,000 people had been through WTC debris screening. Thousands more worked at Ground Zero!
Claiming that the evidence for alleged controlled demolition was magically removed or unnoticed, is as idiotic as claims made by Moon Hoax Conspiracy Theorists.
Get back in touch with reality, and get better education instead of trusting people like Gage, Griffin or Harrit who lost their credibility in the eyes of scientific community long ago.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
It seems that you don't read what I said: The evidence - that the layman worker at GZ of course didn't know anything about and was never checked for - is presented in the vidoes i linked to.
Get in touch with your inner fears of what the inside job might make you feel, when it's one day obvious to the world; will you commit siucide? Go straight to the nuthouse? Or get mad as hell and demand that the guilty become investigated, charged and punished?
Only time will tell.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@Thetan1974
Please don't refer me to speculations and some crappy demonstrations which are as far from conditions in the WTC rubble as firing a model rocket is close to Space Shuttle launch! I've seen it all before.
Eutectic reactions in the rubble have been explained earlier by FEMA, and no evidence for explosive or thermal demolitions were ever found, recorded or heard. Do you realize how much energy would be needed for such scale thermate demolition? Which part of that you still can't get?
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
Wow - can you show me where FEMA explains the thermal reactions?
You're right; there's no evidence of explosives in the official reports - because they never checked for it. It's all in endependant research.
It's for a new investigation to show what forces besides NANO-thermite where used. Do you realise how much force it whould take to make an upper part of a steel framed high riser force it's way down through the lower? NIST never accounted for that, you know.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
"speculations and some crappy demonstrations"
Wow. You're so full of step 2 in Shopenhauer's Three Stages of Truth. It's fascinating. What I refered to was the eutectic. Please explain how it occured. How about giving us a non-speculative and non-crappy demonstration?
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@Thetan1974
Unless you reproduce exactly the same conditions, it's all speculations and suppositions. Every engineer will tell you that.
I am not a chemical engineer, but I trust the engineers who know how it works, and I'm sorry, conspiracy theory has no base.
Even if a result looks similar to what you suspect, it does not mean you theory is what actually happened, and again, no signs of large scale thermal demolition were seen, heard, recorded or found. No amount of truthin' will change that.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
The NIST Report is all about biased "scince" and computer speculations. The conditions set up by physicsandreasson is to make some points clear to those who are not terrified about the inside job claim - which means you simply don't/won't get it.
You mix up the term "conspiracy theory" ONCE again by stating that the critics of the NIST Report and the claims of controlled demolition, findings of nano-thermite, eutectic and iron rich micro spheres equals "conspiracy theory."
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@Thetan1974
You are lying. NIST report is not about biased science. It's based on data which is available.
As you know, WTC 7 could not be inspected because it was becoming unstable hours before collapse and had to be evacuated. Therefore, nobody knows 100% of details of collapse sequence, but surely it was not a controlled demolition.
Forgive me, seeing truthers like Gage modeling WTC tower with cardboard boxes (!) I choose real science and NIST's report.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
Claiming that I'm lying is your ongoing efforts of Shopenhauer's 2nd Step: NIST was hired to come up with a firehypothesis and not check for - with expertese and getting to the bottom - what happened. It's even emphazised on the splash page signed by George W. Bush.
As you know, the debris of WTC 7 could have been expected after the collapse. Who the hell has asked for it to be inspected while on fire?
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
I forgive you: You HAVE to resort to another "Shopenhauers 2nd Step" by laughing desperately at Gage's cardbox show - which is as obvious as the little boy who saw that the Emperor was naked.
"I trust the engineers who know how it works"
Who are they? Other than Sunder, Gross (let's keep them out for reasons of biased/paid interests) and about 10 experts(?) running amok on JREF? Let's see them argue live against these guys:
ae911truth. org/news/41-articles/425-45experts. html
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
That's why you fail so blatantly and simply just display your inner fears and Shopenhauer's Step 2; You simply cannot GRASP that the official fairy tale about Osama & His 19 Li'l Hijackers is an unproven and scientifically impossible conspiracy theory whilst pointing out the ommissions and errors of NIST is NOT.
You can just look at building 7's collapse - it's all sign of a CD. Compare that to the BS of NIST and connect the dots. But it's not possible for a Matrix Type like you.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@Thetan1974
I don't have time for commenting on your bs anymore.
You just repeat the same speculations over and over again, and apparently don't even understand the difference between speculations and facts.
Again, on the subject of this video: Erik Laywer is wrong.
1. NFPA guideline he shows is not the law.
2. Thousands of samples from WTC site were examined and saved.
3. No evidence for large scale controlled demolition was found.
4. NIST's analysis is very accurate and based on science.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
It's you who ignore the annomalities of the collapses and denies what is obvious to numerous experts - who are at the same time not afraid to go public with their views and thereby risk ridiculing, firing, losing "friends" and marrige etc.
The debunker scientists don't have all those risks - they have the sheepleness of the "educated" America to back them up. Why are they so FEW, then?
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
1. That's quibbling; Lawyer explains why a real, criminal investigation was blocked. THAT's what counts.
1. Err, sure, now I have to repeat: THEY WERE NEVER CHECKED FOR EXPLOSIVES AND EXOTIC ACCELERANTS! But they showed unexplainable iron rich micro spheres - that NIST does not want t o discuss. Besides that, the dust contains NANO-thermite and you forgot to explain to me how the eutectic has occured.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
3. Now YOU repeat a totally non-argument - yet a fact - over and over; You're so right - because it was NEVER officially checked for. But the evidence has been found: Go to Chandlers analysis of the footage. Go to the PEER REVIEWED report of the nano-thermitical compounds. Just look at WTC 7 and you see something that resembles 99,9999% a CD and like 0,00001% a "fire enduced, global collapse." (Total made up crap fantasies.)
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
4. Wow. What a claim. Should that make all the distortions and made up computer stuff by NIST suddenly disappear like PUFF?
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@Thetan1974
FEMA's recommendation to further study samples from WTC site was made with buildings safety in mind, not because there were any conspiracy scenarios, but you "truthers" take even that fact out of context.
Nobody knows what exact chemical composition surrounded those metal samples, what was the temperature, how much oxygen was present etc. It's all very complicated, but you "truthers" think your gurus like Jones or Harrit have found all the answers... No, they have not!
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
What smells like "conspiracy" is the way a real investigation was distorted - just like Lawyer points out. It seems you need to miss out on that to maintain your world view. Well, I can't blame you.
"Nobody knows what exact chemical composition surrounded those metal samples, what was the temperature, how much oxygen was present etc."
Excactly - because the investigation of it has been blocked for 9 1/2 years. But we're getting there; NANO-thermite etc.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
"...who lost their credibility in the eyes of scientific community long ago."
Hah. Every time in history when scientists shows that what people are used to think is actually not like that, they are ridiculed to begin with. Take those who claimed that the earth turned around the sun and not the other way round for starters.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
This man is wrong. Two main reasons:
- NFPA guidelines he shows as the reference is not the law!
- the evidence from WTC was collected, sampled and analyzed during World Trade Center/Staten Island Landfill Recovery Operation!
55,000 pieces of evidence have been recovered and saved. No evidence of controlled demolition (thermal or explosive) was ever found at the WTC site!
End of story. He should apologize to all people who risked their health during 9/11 investigation at the WTC site.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
There almost nothing that Erik Lawyer got right in his speech.
I think he has good intentions, but he is largely ignorant of some basic facts, including:
- NFPA guidelines he shows as the reference is not the law!
- the evidence from WTC was collected, sampled and analyzed during World Trade Center/Staten Island Landfill Recovery Operation!
These two facts alone show how wrong he is in his accusations.
The rest of his speech is usual twoofin' which has been debunked already.
BlisterHiker 10 months ago
@BlisterHiker
The debris were never investigated for explosives/exotic accelerants/incediaries. The point is that NIST did not prove what brought down 7. They were fraudulently hired to come up with a "magic bullit" fire hypothesis. Nothing scientific about that.
That's why your comment is hypocritical and a little out of context.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@Thetan1974
You are lying. There is no hypocrisy or straying out of context in my comment. I addressed his arguments and presented simple, verifiable facts.
Hundreds of thousands of tons of material and debris from WTC site were carefully screened, and no evidence for any types of controlled demolition was found.
If there was any controlled demolition in WTC 1, 2 or 7, evidence would be overwhelming.
Read my comment again. Check the facts yourself.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
It's not a lie that WTC debris was never investigated to fully explain what happened, i.e. for explosives, and that the Reports are not scientifically correct, as science is about getting to the bottom of a disaster and crime scene. A cover-up is not "science."
The evidence is overwhelming - but not to the blind. You represent a good "Man Who Says "Naaaahhh...!" To the Little Boy Who Saw That the Emperor Was Naked" in The Emperor's New Clothes.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@Thetan1974
You still don't get it because you don't want to.
If a controlled demolition (thermal of explosive) took place in structures as large as WTC 1, 2 or 7, there would be obvious traces of that, starting with pieces of triggers, cabling etc, and metal elements of the structure displaying effects of such demolition.
15,000 people worked had been through the screening of debris. 55,000 pieces of evidence were saved.
All you CTs offer is bad science and misinterpretations of samples. >
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
You still don't get it because it would sent you stright to the nuthouse to understand that 9/11 was an inside job to some extend:
Your 15,000 people still didn't check for explosives. And the NIST Reports are full of errors and ommissions. Besides that, their computer fantasies does not explain these "collapses." Real science takes EVERYTHING into account. It's just a fire HYPOTHESIS - just what they were ordered to produce.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@Thetan1974
Don't talk about "errors and omissions" of NIST. Pay attention to what your Conspiracy Theorists gurus are doing, how they model WTC tower with cardboard boxes (!) and misinterpret chemical changes in metal samples or paint residue.
Don't talk about fantasies either if you apparently do not understand what scale means.
Real buildings are not made of wooden blocks on a table.
Visit debunking911 . com and learn something real for a change.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
I pay full attention to the fact that as long as noone are allowed to investigate what really happened, the science, claims and questions will remain "CT" in the eyes of sheep like you.
If you would acknowledge that there is a cover-up and that the truth has been distorted, I would have respect for your "oppinions"/brainwash. Obviously, it gives you comfort to to plug your fingers in your ears and scream "NA NA NA NA NAAA! at everything - even science - pointing to an inside job.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@Thetan1974 >
Keep arguments like "The Emperor's New Clothes" for other Conspiracy Theorists.
Real science does not work that way. 1,500 or so engineers and architects, many not even qualified structural engineers (!) who support so-called Truth Movement, means nothing against vast majority of scientific and engineering community who accepts analysis made by NIST.
If it makes you feel better, stick with your "overwhelming evidence". I prefer facts and real science.
Bye.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
It's you who endorse the conspiracy theory about Osama and his 19 Li'l hijackers. I'm not putting up a full theory about who did this and that. I just present the facts that turn your world view upside down - and you can't handle it.
NIST never checked for explosives or explained the nano-sized thermite compunds or the iron rich micro spheres reported by FEMA and USGS. If you were open minded and not terrified about the inside job you would understand that these were special CDs.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@Thetan1974
Are you a qualified chemical engineer? You are not, from what I see.
If you think those arguments are meaningful, go and submit them to any respected engineering forum and see what kind of reviews you get.
This has been done in the past already, and your truthin' experts proven wrong and ignorant.
Again, debunking911 . com. Go there and learn. Learn the other side of the story instead of feeding your brain with what you saw in some conspiracy videos.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
I am a human being. The little boy who saw that the Emperor was naked wasn't a tailor either.
If you think it is meaningful to sit anonymously and argue on YouTube with a "twoofer" in stead of making the peer reviewed SCIENTIFIC report that expleined the ananswered questions about the WTC catastrophe without a doubt and thereby lay the rising number of Achitects and Engineers at AE911Truth. org, why don't you do so? Would make more sense.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@BlisterHiker
"instead of feeding your brain with what you saw in some conspiracy videos."
Wow. What a come back from someone who fed his brain, without asking ANY questions, from MSM on 9/11-14/01 with the conspiracy theory about Osama and his 9/11 Li'l Hijackers that was poured down his sheeple throat.
Thetan1974 9 months ago
@Thetan1974 cont >
Analysis done by NIST is the most detailed and accurate. None of pathetic speculations and pseudo-scientific suppositions of various conspiracy theorists, comes close to what NIST did.
Sorry, speculations do not constitute the evidence, no matter how well they seem to fit.
BlisterHiker 9 months ago
Erik you're a true American patriot. I try to spread the truth but I've encounter the biggest lack of interest on this topic than any other in society. The more I learn the more thirsty I become for truth as well and the more proud of people like you I am. Let's keep doing our part by telling people the FACTS and the TRUTH! It's the only way to stop whatever agenda that caused 9.11. Long Live FREEDOM in AMERICA!
IKilledMe 11 months ago
erm what does a flag have to do with anything?? really.. our loyalty lies with ourselves =)
zillahnoir 1 year ago
Why are government investigations so thorough that they are compiled of pages and pages of nothing specific and not concise and not necessarily the truth. What are they hiding? What don't they want us to know. The 911 Commission report is deliberately long and wordy to discourage the reader from finding the truth in the omissions.
TheDano1947 1 year ago
Building 7 looks exactly like a demolition. There is a very stong probability that there were bombs in thse buildings.
Your loyalty should be to the flag of the US, not to George Bush
thearmin 1 year ago
Currently this video has a 98.3% approval rating (At 300 likes and 5 dislikes). Why aren't our voices being heard?
jeffedinboro09 1 year ago
@jeffedinboro09
"Why aren't our voices being heard?"
Because the owners of the mass media are involved in the crime, that's why!
Sockpuppet2012 1 year ago
Okay, so I am AWAKE and I am AWARE of the lies from our government.
Joining groups usually ends up with a bunch of people sitting around bitching about what they've read and heard and getting fired up.......then what?? Nothing happens.
My political votes are a joke because it's all predone behind the scenes. What is left for a person to do to make changes???
001pembroke 1 year ago
The People of Oklahoma City should join with the People of New York City in the pursuit of truth.
How nice, they spend 15 MONTHS and easily a MILLION dollars entrapping a 19 year old idiot that "WANTED" to do harm ......
but they could not spend 15 DAYS investigating the actual "WORST ACT OF ACTUAL DOMESTIC TERRORISM IN HISTORY".
johnbbbs 1 year ago
To everyone believing this thermite-story (I don't really do):
I have a vid on showing aluminum powder burning in ordinary plaster powder.
Plaster for filling spaces in drywall panels.
v=FXc6-uXslHM
Do U know what a lot of pieces of interior structures in WTC were made of?
-Plaster...
wasn't there a story of a cleaning staffs guy who "hammered" himself thru a wall
just using a window wiper?
I think its quite possible that many kinds of metal debris and plaster can react in the same way.
desinfector 1 year ago
They swiftly confiscated the evidence, and sent it to China to be melted down. Had to get rid of the evidence, y'know. There can be only one obvious perpetrator that could accomplish this dastardly deed: The Israeli Mossad, along with their CIA cohorts. Who else would have the ability to enter the structure with Nanothermite? Who else could squash an honest investigation? Who else could sway the major media outlets into silence? Look no further than Big Zio for the answer.
joe80dman 1 year ago
AMERICA WAKE UP
YOUR LOYALTY IS TO THE FLAG
NOT THE GOVERNMENT
kansasinnovember 1 year ago 12
@kansasinnovember good point ..i am not an american..but i feel so angry for the thousands of innocent people who were killed by their own president who was supposed to be protecting them and not kill them.
brian2010lal 7 months ago
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety". Benjamin Franklin, you better wake up my friend...
85Tourist 1 year ago 5
Part 2 Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” Hermann Goering Hitlers # 2
85Tourist 1 year ago
Part 1 Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship,
85Tourist 1 year ago
Sure I believe everthing I'm told... And yes your right all throughout history false flag terror has never happed. Sure.... Now go back to sleep everyone...
85Tourist 1 year ago
Hey Crazy, youtube this (9/11 Truth: The 9/11 Commission Was Set Up To Fail)
85Tourist 1 year ago
CrazyRay, the truthers havn't made as much money as the weapons contractors, and bankers... These people do this because they are true patriots something you would not know anything about. They know in there hearts the official story is a big lie. I would say your a disinformation agent, and you probably get paid to try and debunk proof. Good luck buddy this is America and people are not buying all the unanswered ignored questions. Maybe you should study 911 : )
85Tourist 1 year ago
@85Tourist "Probably get Paid"?
Do you know anyone that would come around day after day, all day, saying the stupid shit that they do.
And do it for Free?
I sure as hell don't!
AlmightyJerk 1 year ago
If I had an "organization", website, or video about 9/11 that made me as much money as those guys make, I'd lie about 9/11 being an inside job too
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 Or just lie about it for a minimum wage check! Because thats the best you can do.
Why else would you come around videos saying the stupid shit you do, day after day.
I just can't see Anybody going around to videos that they despise so much. Day after day, for years. Just because.
You people make it quite clear that you are PAID, to "Act" Stupid!
AlmightyJerk 1 year ago
Any of you non-believers ever studied 911??? Thats what I thought... Some of you people are so conditioned by the controlled mainstream media is rediculous! Or your disinformation agents?? Anybody with half a brain can see that building 7 come down by controlled demo! Research for yourselves... Youtube building 7 and you be the judge. THink its patriotic!
85Tourist 1 year ago
@85Tourist
Too bad WTC7 wasn't a controlled demolition
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@85Tourist Yes they've studied it! They're give the Omission Report and a Shilling for Dummies! Handbook, when they accept the minimum wage job! Oh yea, and a little Cassette Tape to play while they're asleep, that says stuff like "Truthers are Delusional!" real spooky, over and over and over and...
See there truly are "work from home jobs" in acting even. lol
But wait, there's more!
When your job is done... we'll show you some Magic! And You'll "Disappear!" yee haw!
AlmightyJerk 1 year ago
@AlmightyJerk
"But wait, there's more!"
Ha ha ha.....sounds like Billy Mays, the info-mercial guy!
"When your job is done... we'll show you some Magic! And You'll "Disappear"
Yeah, by a "freak accident", or "suicide"!
Sockpuppet2012 1 year ago
9-11 IS AN INSIDE JOB!
Still!
Look at all the paid shills running around the 9-11 videos spreading propaganda!
AlmightyJerk 1 year ago
@AlmightyJerk
Look at all the Truthers that don't understand simple physics or science
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 And keep looking at the Paid Shills running around speading propaganda and saying Stupid Shit, for minimum wage! LOL @ de de de-bunkers!
AlmightyJerk 1 year ago
What a bunch of sad losers that believe this conspiracy nonsense, thank God for YouTube so you all have a place to display your ignorance.
MeanMachine67 1 year ago
@MeanMachine67 Let me guess. To be a big enough looser to run around pasting the same line of propaganda on 9-11 videos. You're making a whopping minimum wage to do it, because the people that are paying you, are the ones that are covering it up. Which makes you part of it too.
Don't think they'll just let you walk away, when they're done with you.
You've done fucked up!
AlmightyJerk 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MeanMachine67
What a bunch of sad losers that believe that 19 cavemen defeated the US Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, CIA, and FBI!
Dude, that's what I call an outrageous conspiracy theory!
Sockpuppet2012 1 year ago
What fire department did Eric Lawyer serve in? What is his forensics background? If I am to believe in him I should be able to find his background and verify it.
proximajoe 1 year ago
Unless u can break through all the redundancy, the structure is still supported & will not easily fall.
kinda like playin jenga- u know, if u play it right, u can take out like half the tiles but it will still stand unless an outside force breaks the stack & causes it to fall. except there like a lot more tiles, far too many columns & supports, etc
swu880 1 year ago
And now ur twisting ur own minds to cling onto more govt lies & bullshit? chance & coincidence? get real
swu880 1 year ago
however the buildin aint a piece of shit u see in china or in some third world country like nigeria. no offense to nigerian or chinese architecture- but the wtc7 & wtc1 & 2 were very well designed- very redundant & sound structures.
swu880 1 year ago
@swu880 they weren't built to be hit by a 747.
iissamiam 1 year ago
o and on top of showing how a gradual uncontrollable process may result in instantaneous precise damage, u also must show how such a process may in fact overcome the redundancy of the structure. Safety is all about redundancy- The stability of a good structure is really dependant just on redundancy & good design. And the 47 columns made the building extremely redundant- i think its what almost 10x redundancy? have to check later for exact specs
swu880 1 year ago
@swu880 just because it was well built, does not mean it cant fall. concrete and steel become weak in a fire, and maybe it was not built to the standards they say it was.
iissamiam 1 year ago
i mean how can an uncontrollable wild random organic mechanism produce the results of a controlled & precise non-organic mechanism?
swu880 1 year ago
explosives remember are DIVERSE; fires are extremely limited (especially the wild ones). how can a uncontrollable mechanism produce controllable results?
swu880 1 year ago
ur trying to prove: Gradual = Instantaneous. never really been proven before 9/11, and hasnt been proven after 9/11. ur welcome to try- if u can prove it, i will give you 100 bucks. hell if u could do such a thing, u would be revolutionizing the mathematical & scientific world at large
But then again, judging by ur statements, ur physics understanding & analytical skills are severely lackin to begin with.
swu880 1 year ago
@swu880
if the mechanism does not allow for freefall to occur, why are u even considering it? Unless u can show how fire can even allow for freefall acceleration of a building into itself, u logically shouldnt even consider it. Nist, even with its multimillion dollar computer simulations, has not even been able to show it
swu880 1 year ago
You would have to prove a CONTRADICTION- (99% of the time its impossible to prove a contradiction- still lookin for that 1%)
You would somehow be saying that a black smoked fire which we know to be very inefficient random & organic process(meaning it dont stay in 1 place for too long) and causes gradual uneven assymetric damage- ur saying such a mechanism is able to cause instantaneous SYMMETRICAL & PRECISE damage such that all columns literally disintegrate to ALLOW for freefall to occur
swu880 1 year ago
that means all 47 columns must be cut on 8+ floors within tenths of a second of each other. What could do that? uncontrolled fire? or well placed explosives which are meant to cause instantaneous & controllable damage? Unless u can show me how fire may even cause such precise damage & be able to instantly disintegrate ALL the steel support on multiple floors simultaneously, fire is not a valid causal factor at all! And by the scientific process, it should be eliminated as being a major cause
swu880 1 year ago
see only those who dont even know basic physics & history or seriously lack any analytical skills- would continue to "Cling" to the official bullshit. Anyone who studies physics, knows the laws of conservation, knows newton's principles & has at least a basic REAL understanding for things like acceleration, velocity, time, distance & gravity & the difference between Instantaneous change vs an arbitrary avg quantity- those people already realize the govt deceit behind the attacks
swu880 1 year ago
@swu880 using physics, you can debunk all evidence that the conspiracy puts forward. and you, you "Cling" to your bs just as much as you claim i do to mine. but, here is were we differ, if real evidence can be produced to show that, for example, tower 7 didn't fall as a result of its proximity to the collapsing twin towers, i will change my mind. but with you, no amount of evidence will ever sway you. you'll right it off as more lies. you'll only except things that support your case.
iissamiam 1 year ago
@iissamiam
uh wtc5, wtc6 these 2 towers were much closer to the twin towers(wtc1&2), and wtc5 & wtc6 suffered damage hundreds of times greater than wtc7- the fires themselves were much bigger- the debris damage much greater. yet guess what- neither wtc5 nor 6 fell at all! but somehow the gigantic wtc7 which was not only the furthest away from the towers but also reinforced to be made into an emergency bunker(which was never used on 911), fell into freefall acceleration. And u know how
swu880 1 year ago
@swu880
u even know how difficult it is to get a building to go into freefall in a controlled demolition? u MUST time it precisely so that each & every column is cut within tenths of a second or else the energy of the buildin is consumed in crushing & crushin energy is not available for gravitational energy -vice versa. If a buildin consumes energy through crushin & smashing, then we see an immediate DECELERATION- that is called impact. But what we c instead on wtc7 is 2.5seconds of freefall
swu880 1 year ago