Building 7 was the most obvious example of the 3 that fell

Still having comprehension difficulties I see.

You cannot compare different things going at different speeds and made of different materials and say..."LOOK! THAT is what would have happened but it didn't!!!"

 

THAT...is what I am telling YOU!!! LOL!!!

In the video you presented you have a different aircraft with a different wing with a different design and size going at a different rate of speed impacting a Wooden Pole at a different angle using Water not Jet Fuel in the wing...etc...etc...etc....

Them's Apples and Oranges....thus the video is worthless.

AboveAlpha

 

with directly comparable design requirements, but then any one into particle physics would have known that aint that right.

 

Comparable Design? LOL!!!

The aircraft in the video has a fixed almost perpendicular to the aircraft's nose to tail wing design as a commercail jet liner has a swept back airfoil.

Also....the way a wing is swept will determine the effect of any AIR COLUMN that exists in front of a wing upon any impacted object.

Your statements and argument have ZERO MERIT and you cannot even provide a specific point of argument.

AboveAlpha

 

Comparable Design? LOL!!!
Yeh! Comparable DESIGN REQUIREMENTS, look you really need to work out your comprehension issues, is english your second language or dont you have an excuse?
The aircraft in the video has a fixed almost perpendicular to the aircraft's nose to tail wing design as a commercail jet liner has a swept back airfoil.
So?
Also....the way a wing is swept will determine the effect of any AIR COLUMN that exists in front of a wing upon any impacted object.
So?
Your statements and argument have ZERO MERIT and you cannot even provide a specific point of argument.
Not my fault your whole premise is (*)(*)(*)(*)ed.

 

I will not even bother to comment on your posted reply above as I cannot believe anyone would allow themselves to look this Bad....but hey....as other's read your post....how it makes you look is your problem...not mine.

AboveAlpha

 

you dodged every point and completely failed to support yours!

 

a wooden post will do more damage than a steel pole...a post is a solid object that is imbedded into the ground,,where a pole has a seperate footing and is attached to the footing using fasteners

 

LoL oh yeah, this other thread that koko's being fed. Look guys:

Look at that quote guys. (*)(*)(*)(*)ing take a second from feeding him, and look at it. He doesn't even know the difference between commercial airplanes, and others. Not only doesn't he know, BUT HE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S RELATED TO 9/11.

Why? Why would you engage someone who actively refuses to acknowledge facts? I've said this like 8 times? It's beginning to look like koko isn't the moron here. No offense, but this is getting retarded. What do any of you possibly think you're gaining by speaking with him? Why are you wasting your time? You've made your point, he doesn't care. Move on.

 

Here's the problem:

It has been proven, through empirical study, that conspiracy theorists are not concerned with consistency or being contradictory. In fact they are very apt to equally believe in multiple contradictory explanations as long as they perceive the explanation to support their broader views and feelings.

You can witness it time and time again here on this forum. They'll assert that 90% of the steel in the towers was turned to dust one day, and then the next day they show you photos of massive piles of steel that they think were never properly studied. They'll argue that planes should have bounced off the towers one day, that they poked a hole through the tower like a screen door the next, continue by arguing that the planes were a red herring that never existed, and finish up by saying that the planes landed in a secret base. They'll argue that the terrorists were a figment of Karl Rove's imagination, that they were real people trained by the CIA, that they were untrained to fly a passenger airliner so the planes must have been remote controlled into the buildings, and that the hijackers are still alive to this day. They don't care about the specifics. They care about the concept that they believe. And that concept is something that's very generalized. Like: People in power always lie.

That's why you see the same people here in the moon landing thread, in the JFK thread, etc.

So anyway, the person you're arguing with isn't going to suddenly realize his delusion when you point out that each specific point of his argument is fantasy. It's all mashed together in his head anyway. You can't have a rational discussion with someone who's not rational.

And people who believe multiple completely contradictory things certainly aren't thinking rationally.

 

another baseless presumption

 

and you stand off on the side lines yelling neener neener nah nah LOL

Wel have pictures of your ilk in fact its the chief engineer of nist, gross, standing on this really funny looking steel. He is the one who didnt see or hear of any molten stuff.





yeh too bad its not so easy for troughers now days, now that so many facts that your criminal friends kept hidden are exposed.

 

Thats not the issue at hand here now is it.

So back to where we were before CandyCorn dropped by;

So you think you are going to make some hay today do ya?

This is whats at 6.40 LOL
The tanks were filled with water so they could not ignite.


Well take your best shot, mean time here is a couple things for you.

Its not obvious to the casual viewer but see if you can find the load of bricks that are about to come crashing down on your head.

 

scientific fact..moron

 

no, scientific facts generally are not baseless presumptions.

Looks like fang seen that load of bricks waiting for him

the silence is deafening LOL

 

No thermite/thermate was used or ever detected. Never tested for.
No controlled demolitioin every took place. Prove it. Did you see the pillars?
The planes that crashed into the WTC, Pentagon and Shanksville, were commercial airliners filled with real passengers. Many MANY MANY witnesses said they were NOT airliners nor marked.
No high energy weapon was used to take down the WTC. What are you? stupid?? high energy weapons... (*)(*)(*)(*) that (*)(*)(*)(*) is not even possible.
No one gave the command to demolish WTC 7. Yeah, WTC 7 is only the first and only steel building to collapse into it's footprint at near free-fall speed with only the fires of paper, toilet paper and the (*)(*)(*)(*) the CIA had stored on their floor lol.
The WTC was not empty. Umm WTC 7 was empty **** face
Real people jumped and lost their lives.once again pull your finger out of your sphincter and smell the surprise

 

Another ill mannered sock?

 

wow, you'll believe anything huh?

 

Are you familiar with the architect or any of his other buildings? Did you know that NJ changed the specs?

 

the insane crap people believe never ceases to amaze me!

This is the first one that aired showing the plane the next day.

 

specs constantly change on projects why do you bother bringing it up?

 

This is categorically untrue. There were, in fact, two independent studies that were done on the dust from the WTC. Both of them showed that there was absolutely no explosive residue found in the dust. However, there was a lot of red paint. Couple this with the fact that the explosive hunting dogs never came up with anything, there was no det cord, no timers, etc. All the evidence points towards no explosives.

WTF? Pillars? What pillars? What are you talking about? The proof that there was no demolition is everywhere. The buildings started to collapse AT THE IMPACT ZONE. Controlled demolitions don't start in the middle, it doesn't make any sense. (Unless you're not using explosives, there are some other forms of controlled demo that can start in the middle, but it would be impossible on the Twins due to their height) ETA: Also, it is absolutely impossible for explosives to live in a burning fire for an hour before being let loose. It's just not an option.

Can you provide any sources that would be able to over throw the massive amounts of pictures, and footage we have of the planes flying into the towers? Not to mention the fact, if the government was going to do something like this, why wouldn't they just use the actual planes? Why would they swap them out? What would the point in that be? It would be a stupid and unneeded risk in this entire plan.

It didn't collapse into it's own footprint, it collapsed over multiple roads, covering a massive area. Your facts are wrong. Also, "free-fall speed" is a moronic truther phrase. Continuing on, it wasn't just toilet paper and paper. There were office desks, carpet, diesel fuel, and several other things. Maybe the reason why you believe it was a black op job is because you don't understand how this all worked? You should investigate more, maybe with the proper explanations you'd be able to figure some of this stuff out.

You know damn well that he wasn't talking about WTC 7, he was referring to the stupid truther meme that the Twins were empty. That there was no one working inside of them, as if the Port Authority is (*)(*)(*)(*)ing stupid enough to leave 2 of the worlds' tallest office spaces completely empty so they can pull off a black op mission.

This sums it up, the motto of the truth movement.

 

Listen, the 911 report was done by the government, with members selected by the government and the administration. The very people who headed the report are on record stating that the report was hampered from day 1 by over 900 lies and countless delays. Bush himself has never revealed any statements regarding interviews by the commission. WTC7 and all supporting columns are not going to fall in a perfect implosion fashion synchronously mind you from books and furniture and a little bit of diesel fuel. Sorry it does not work that way and you know it.

Witnesses identifying aircraft as NON COMMERCIAL

[video=youtube;FGQypnKa_6A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGQypnKa_6A[/video]

Huge gaping holes in your "version" of the incident.

[video=youtube;5PY_qM28rnA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PY_qM28rnA&feature=c4-overview&list=UUEHsSWvrGVSIA63OV3J6vhA[/video]

And you believe every words the government tells you, despite the fact that the government had EXCLUSIVE plans for an event just like this to be carried out in the Caribbean. OH and Vietnam war... yeah completely fabricated by the false Gulf of Tonkin attack. Please grow a brain.

 

This woman is an expert on commercial and military airplanes.

 

Umm there are MULTIPLE witnesses in that video you disingenuous crank!