911 Mr Demo says: Will the REAL COLLAPSE please stand up

garbage

all garbage, not one fact

How to shut up a trougher in 3 words;

Substantial material fact.

Thank you for agreeing with and pointing out troughers use of fraud as a SOP

 

yeh I manually time it so best average is 7.7 seconds. I dont have the same software chandler and others who can get "absolutely" precise measurements have, hence the averaging technique.

Since you have proven that you do not know the difference between a red herring and finding, seriously I would be shocked if you woudl say anything diiferent.

7.7 seconds initial movement due to structural failure to ground, wtc7

 

Since you 'don't have the software',and not being able to see the rest of the collapse,you guessed.......thanks for clearing that up.

 

I said the software, you only need a stop watch to ime something. the rest you made up, ANOTHER FAIL

 

I made up nothing mr 'expert'

<sarcasm (*)(*)(*)(*) well intended>


Expert at obsfuscation,maybe.

 

How about telling me what the collapse time is here






oh thats part 1

part 2 is why did it not crush down?

I mean since troughers want to answer everyones questions out here and it laughingly obvious that they are not up to the op challenge maybe some 101 for beginners like the challenge in this post.

Major simple (*)(*)(*)(*) but I bet the troughers cant get it right.

 

The truther scientific method at work.

1. Observation.
2. Conclusion.
3. Non falsifiable experiment to confirm 2.
4. Publish on internet forum.

 

Anyone that attempts to answer these questions just by looking at an animated GIF is a moron. Where is that building located, and when did this take place?

 

The whole point is to determine what can be determined from that gif, but thats ok if you are incapable you flunk. Location when and place are completely irrelevant.

You go!



Dance!


(oh and btw I know you want to cheat and see if you can find a write up on it. I dont know where it is either what time or anything about it any more than you do but what I can OBSERVE.

If you need an "instruction manual" you flunk you lose.)

In other words you have just proven you cannot make valid determinations by observation.

 

You must have me confused with someone who forms CONCLUSIONS by looking at pictures alone.

 

I didnt stutter, and you again prove yourself incapable of making determinations by observation. That means you are on you own with no one to parrot.

\



See experts make determinations by observation. This whole thread is based on that premise.

You and your ilk continue to fail miserably.

 

Observation is not just looking at the silly pictures you've posted.

 

Its looking at the available data whatever that may be and making determinations accordingly.

YOu too failed.

None of you would get a job in assessment much less intelligence thats for sure.

 

No indication at all that you've done that koko

So you can stop falsely claiming others have shared in your 'failure'

 

So the NIST website containing the information relevant to WTC 7 is "all garbage, not one fact"?

What about this part?

Isn't that what NIST did?

Or did they just look at crappy animated GIFs and sit around with stop watches?

 

you all made it perfectly clear that you are not qualified to assess something the status of your toilet seats without having some gubafia agency to parrot. Its not possible to have a discussion with a parrot.

 

try reading for comprehension next time.

yeh well those crappy gifs convicted the cop that murdered that innocent kid.



how silly





Your just whining because it shows the dirty deeds and because I can PROVE the time to within a tenth of a second that 7 fell making impossible for troughers to obfuscate their way into endless quagmires of bull(*)(*)(*)(*).


.

 

It's plain to see it's impossible to discuss anyting with you ,when you keep making excuses and making up words to cover your lack of facts,knowledge, and common sense.......

IOW skippy,it ain't US.

 

Well see I asked the ridiculously simple 101 COLLAPSE question:

and rather than getting an answer I get a ridiculously simpleton dodge:

Like you

and the 101 collapse question remains unanswered because the troughers have no (*)(*)(*)(*)ing clue what they are doing and are incapable of answering anything. All they are capable of doing is parroting what the gubbermint said.

NOTHING in this thread has been directly responded to by any trougher.

I dont expect that ANYTHING ever will be directly responded to by any trougher.

Hell this (*)(*)(*)(*) is as simple as 1+1=2

 

That's because your original question was irrelevant,the mechanics of the different collapses are the same as are the end results,if not the trigger

As for your other animation,the building didn't collapse,did it?

And you STILL use troughers wrong....no one here lives off the government trough...

 

now that just plain good ole fashioned fraud, claiming its an animation when its a real event.

shame shame

so according to you if you were standing in it you would still be alive LOL

 

It did not ,crush down because the load above the 3 or four floors that did go,because of the way typical steel framed buildings are built

And yes,as it appears no explosives went off in the surviving floors a person would still be alive if they were standing almost anywhere inside...though maybe a bit bruised,providing of course the building didn't finish collapsing after the video ended..

 

It did collapse,

crush down requires no explosives,

I suppose if the inside did not have any floors to fall on you, you might have survived, and

are you saying that crush down does not work with steel buildings?

 

Here's a link thaty proves explosives were used and that it wasn't a 'crush down'

It didn't just collapse,it had help,though obviously,not enough[video]http://crashrepository.com/?en/Post158[/video]

 

People inside the WTC survived the collapse.