This aint rocket science, ya'll - 2

Part 2

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• 9/11
• truth
• jet
• fuel
• structural
• steel
• aluminum
• open
• fire
• collapse

[ALITL8]

@ZhugeNaut "playlist so called 911 truth"

i'm not finding that playlist on your page. your playlists include "If Ye Truth" and "Whitebox".

[ALITL8]

@ZhugeNaut believe it or not, i believed the official story about how the buildings collapsed until i actually looked at the evidence for myself. like i said earlier in this conversation, i spent most of my life in the construction industry and nearly 10 yrs of it in gas and oil construction (Google: A+B Licensed On Site Supervisor and look up the qualifications needed for acquiring that license). i'll look at your playlist but it's quite likely i've already seen and considered the info.

[ZhugeNaut]

@ALITL8

Buildings 3,4,5, and 6 all had to be demolished.

You know what? You want to see how the debris affected 7. Go watch my playlist so called 911 truth. It is always better to demonstrate.

7 had big smoking holes in it and parts of 7 were collapsing early in the morning.

You only see the face of the building that was facing away from the WTC in all the videos.

Why dont you take a look at the play list and see how the other side, inside and the street full of debris.

[ALITL8]

@ALITL8 "office fires" typo

[ALITL8]

@ZhugeNaut yep, floors did collapse and some steel probably weakened too but i didnt say anything about explosions (which were reported by many witnesses), i said NIST did not test for explosives residue.

i doubt that plane impacts, localized structural damage and office can completely destroy 3 buildings (super-structures) on the same day... especially when one of them wasn't even hit by a plane.

ever consider that part of the plan was to make a huge mess in the financial center of the world?

[ALITL8]

@ZhugeNaut how much is a lot? during my career in construction, i spent nearly 10 yrs as an A+B licensed on-site supervisor in the gas and oil industry. you can trust that i've considered it thoroughly (or not). the buildings designer actually said that the buildings could withstand up to 2 airliner impacts and remain standing. you dont have to duplicate the exact same conditions to say that this event couldn't happen the way it's been suggested. it matters cause someone had to be on the inside

[ZhugeNaut]

@AL

I am pretty certain they did not need explosives in the building. floors collapsing,....yea floors collapsing, debris and bodies hitting cars were called explosions that day.

Not bombs. Explosion is just a sound..

I doubt the people that planned that expected the buildings to fall the way they did. It is not likely.

Not that I think they care about the people, but it made a huge mess in the financial center of the world.

They even lied to ppl and told them it was safe to get help cleaning

[ZhugeNaut]

@ALITL8

You can say that. I have no doubt you believe what you are saying but I dont think you have considered this thoroughly.

How many buildings have been hit with high speed 767s with a lot of jet fuel.

Even the buildings designer emphasize they made it to withstand a slow flying lost aircraft.

Unless you can duplicate the exact same conditions it is hard to say that this event couldn't happen the way is suggested.

What does it matter how it happened? Its no excuse for whats being done.