May I ask, where are the documentary pix the ones that agents of either the local police sheriffs dept. or possibly FBI ( etc.... ) would shoot documentary pix to make a legal record of what the scene looked like as soon after the dust had settled enough to actually shoot pix. Why are there no Documentary pix?
apparently you gotta click on the image to see it properly or am I doing something wrong in attaching pix?
Well,if you look at the gentleman standing on the beam, he is a steelworker. This photo was take during the clean up. The firemen were there to assist in recovery of remains. Also, these beam were near ground level...the collapse initiated near the top not the bottom.
Still no data as to who took the pix and exactly when and were the cuts a product of the clean up operation or controlled demolition. still nothing definite.
Can you get the logic, that is simply saying that you have spotted someone who appears to be dressed as an "iron worker" doesn't answer the question of when the pix was taken, before the clean up effort, or after, and it makes a huge difference.
here is the steel in question the first two images prove that a torch or plasma cutter were used the melted steel drops on the out side of the cuts prove this. the third image show the actual Cutting. Thermite or explosives would not leave melted steel as the reaction would be too fast for melting to occur...
Excuse me, but I don't get the reference, what does saying anything at all to one's wife or kids have to do with the topic at hand? My point is that simply pointing out that somebody in a give picture is recognizable as an iron worker, does not in any way document when the pix was taken. Can you see that?
No, what everyone can see is, you refuse to apply common sense and logic when arguing your position. Using your logic, what can be assumed using common sense cannot be assumed unless there is a time date stamp available.
On the subject of common sense, its a given that complete & total destruction of anything in an indication that some intelligence has guided the operation, now in the case of WTC 1, 2 & 7 there is allegedly no intelligence guiding the "collapse" events and yet we get total destruction. why? There are many things about the events of 9/11/2001 that just happened that way in a manner that is improbable, ( rather VERY improbable ) and we are expected to simply acquiesce to this string of coincidences? why?
WTF does that even mean? The plot to crash planes into the towers was a couple of years in the making. It was planned, financed and well thought out. How can you claim there was no intelligence? No, there are not. Just because you cannot grasp what happened, does not make it "improbable".
so crashing an airliner into a building is a guaranteed slam-dunk to total destruction of the building? is that what you think?
No, and thats not what the terrorists thought either. The terrorists were looking to cause as much damage as the could, to one of the most visible US icons during one of the most busy times of the day. The fact the towers collapesed, was just icing on their cake.
there are people who make their living computing the odds of things happening and the odds of buildings being completely destroyed just happens to be in the category of highly unlikely. ( that is unless the event was a controlled demolition ) The idea of having 3 buildings destroyed on the same day, is a bit much. like mega-improbable. given the fact that in order to achieve complete destruction, the controlled demolition engineers would have to very carefully plan the operation and then the placement of charges is to be considered along with the precision timed detonation of said charges, and Controlled Demolitions go wrong, and when they do, it results in incomplete demolition, with that said, WHY should it be considered at all plausible that chaotic events, random fires ( etc.... ) could produce the result obtained by an engineered demolition?
you've already been told how to find the date and even who photographed "said person" beside the pic itself screams world trade center ,you know that, if you bothered to actually look at pre collapse photos and video. the frame the iron worker is cutting is one of the four facades (outer skin) of wtc1
what you are describing (badly) is the law of probabilities.... your version only works if you can prove a CD ..
where are those reports on the tests for explosives? ya know, if you can't find them, maybe they don't exist. So how would you describe ( not badly ) the law of probabilities with regards to the WTC on 9/11/2001 .... (?)
