National Geographic's Professional Hit Job on 9/11 Truth

And get ridiculed!

 

Since when has that stopped troothers?

 

So did I but it was residential.. and small strip shopping centers.. not skyscrapers.

 

It is the truth that sets us free.

 

so why do you deny the truth about 9-11?

 

You must be tired of walking around in shackles then.

 

If you don't know, then why'd you say this?

Why do you keep going around in circles?

I'll ask you yet again. You think it was explosives. Cole says it was thermite. Do you disagree with Cole then?

 

either it was brought down by thermite or it was brought down by explosives.

the truthers need to make up their damn minds.

 

I think we should focus more on who was behind these attacks and for what reason. Not being a scientist or an aeronautical engineer, I am not sure exactly what happened to cause all of the death and destruction on 911. However, it seems highly unlikely to me that there was not some cooperation from some high level people within the power structure here in the US and abroad that allowed this unprecedented. attack to occur. Also the action taken right after these attacks which is still going on over a decade later has been a financial blessing to many members of the Bush Administration. I believe that there is much credible evidence that many of the neo-cons like Pearle, Wolfowitz, Cheney, old man Bush and others were complicit in these attacks. In my opinion, it is really pointless to go round and round regarding thermite, bombs and such.

Cheers

 

You got (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) slapped and just do not have the scientific back ground to realize it.

 

The National Geographic experiments are completely bogus. It was a professional hit job on the truth. Anyone can see that. A piece of steel balanced on concrete blocks will fall over if it is heated hot enough. Big deal. Buildings are complex structures. Office fires can't cause a global collapse of a modern steel building.

 

Yeah, you'd probably also need a plane to crash into them at 400+ mph doing structural damage as well.

Hey, wait ..

 

The airplane damage was to the upper structure. What damaged the lower structure?

 

What was the ability of the first floor impacted by mass of the 20 floors above, to stop the momentum?

 

You said it's possible for the buildings to have collapsed without the use of explosives. What did you imagine it was that could cause such a collapse?

 

You did not answer my question. I'll answer it for you because I don't want to do the 9/11 shill dance right now.

There was no structural damage to the lower section of the building. Therefore, it is impossible for the upper section to have acted as a piledriver on the lower section because Newton's third law of motion proves it impossible. That is the truth that 30 & 40 year professional high rise building "Experts Speak Out" are telling. That is 9/11 truth. The official story is physically impossible.

 

Again,no it's not...that is if you understand the way mass and inertia work

 

You have proof of that?

Do you have proof of a building built like WTC7, trapezoidal in shape, long floor spans, 3 moment trusses, using structural elemants of a pre-existing building, that had unfought fires in it, and reamined standing? Or are you one of those truthers who think all buildings are the same would react the same to fire?

What about WTC1 and WTC2? Do you have an example of a 208' x 208' x 1300', tube in tube design, steel framed building, that was hit by a 767 in the upper third, caught fire, and remained standing?

 

What was the mass of the 20 floors compared to the mass of the first floor impacted?...Newton's 3rd, you're doing it wrong.

 

Yes, the high rise building experts and engineers do understand how mass and inertia work. Jonathan Cole demonstrates how mass and inertia work with his scientific experiments for anyone who is interested in the truth of the physical world. The World Needs Truth

 

The upper structure.

 

*sigh*

Why do you keep spewing the piledriver/crushing garbage when it is abslutely clear that is NOT what happened? The debris tore/sheared the building apart at it's connections. There is no way that the force/load of the descending debris would have been resisted by floor connections designed to hold up it's own weight and loads placed upon it, not the structure above. That is a FACT. It's engineering 101.

You have been asked multiple times to provide the math showing that it WOULD have resisted, but you fail to do so. You have been asked to provide an explanation of how the impact force/load of the upper potion upon the lower portion would have propagated through the components of the lower portion to reach the foundations/bedrock below, but you ran from that.

All you do is run and when confronted with questions you KNOW will lead you admitting your thinking is flawed. Hence the, "I'm not explaining things to someone who doesn't understand" garbage. You would think a truther would jump at the chance to prove us debunkers wrong. Butnot you folks. It makes more sense to keep your supposed understanding to yourself and proclaim victory without showing anything.

That's how you win a debate.

So BJ, just keep telling everyone you know we are wrong, you have the answers the answer to prove it, but you're not going to explain.

Great job.

 

Nope. The high rise building experts and engineers understand the forces placed on buildings. That is why they are the building experts.

 

They certainly do, which is why they aren't 'truthers'.
The hacks, however ... they make YouTube videos.

 

No,he doesn't...like you,he's doing it wrong....the only scientific experiment that would matter is recreating everything exactly as it was on 9/11