What happened to WTC 7 again?

Originally posted by esdad71
My first impression was thank god there was no more loss of life. The collapse took over 30 seconds, start to finish also, so stop wathcing the video that circulates so much on the web. I have read previews of NIST's WTC 7 report and it is conclusive......

The building caved inward after the structure began to fail. You can see it buckle in photographs, before it falls. The government had alot of offices there including the CIA and CIA front enterprises. The building burned itself out, the fires are believed to have been fed by natrual gas lines under and throughout the WTC 7.

So NIST's WTC 7 report is conclusive, is it? Can you please post the salient sections?

I don't intend to argue that the building fell in 30 seconds or 10 seconds, although I heartily disagree with the 30 second number. The key here is to observe that once the penthouse kinked, the building collapsed as if there was no resistance. I can't even fathom the odds of all the necessary joints failing at the exact moment required to have the building fall as it did. You could have fires in every room of that building and still it should have faced more resistance than it did.

wtc.nist.gov...

Go to page 6, and it gives the initial analysis, but I suggest you read it all.

God I hate this crap. Who are these people that insist that these buildings weren't demolished? They're idiots. Or maybe not, what the hell are they doing on a conspiracy site if they don't believe something happened? Something is fishy right there in itself. Maybe they're trying to buy some time until the next big thing takes our minds off the WTC?

These people keep pushing their government funded data, and won't look at all the damn facts. Can someone please give me an explanation for the all the molten steel pulled out of the rubble? Huh? Or how about how the "plane" that smashed into the pentagon evaporated into a 16 foot hole? No they can't but they keep insisting like they're either idiots or people trying to convince not us the believers but all the stand-byers watching these arguements.

Originally posted by esdad71
My first impression was thank god there was no more loss of life. The collapse took over 30 seconds, start to finish also, so stop wathcing the video that circulates so much on the web. I have read previews of NIST's WTC 7 report and it is conclusive. There is more damage to the tower 7 than

The building caved inward after the structure began to fail. You can see it buckle in photographs, before it falls. The government had alot of offices there including the CIA and CIA front enterprises. The building burned itself out, the fires are believed to have been fed by natrual gas lines under and throughout the WTC 7.

Why didn't they cap the gas supply? It could be done and in light of what was going on should have been made a priority during all of this disaster.

Originally posted by bigpappadiaz
God I hate this crap. Who are these people that insist that these buildings weren't demolished? They're idiots. Or maybe not, what the hell are they doing on a conspiracy site if they don't believe something happened? Something is fishy right there in itself. Maybe they're trying to buy some time until the next big thing takes our minds off the WTC?

These people keep pushing their government funded data, and won't look at all the damn facts. Can someone please give me an explanation for the all the molten steel pulled out of the rubble? Huh? Or how about how the "plane" that smashed into the pentagon evaporated into a 16 foot hole? No they can't but they keep insisting like they're either idiots or people trying to convince not us the believers but all the stand-byers watching these arguements.

I ask the same questions you do and I never get an answer. You would think that a conspiracy site is a place where ideas are discussed between interested people and NOT, where people have ideas about conspiracies and risk life and limb to defend them. I just don't get it either frankly.

Originally posted by bigpappadiaz
Who are these people that insist that these buildings weren't demolished?

Oh, I don't know. Scientists, strucutral engineers, Architects, etc. You know, people who study what makes buildings stand up or fall down.

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Oh, I don't know. Scientists, strucutral engineers, Architects, etc. You know, people who study what makes buildings stand up or fall down.

That's funny, you totaly ignore all the scientists, structural engineers, architects etc...Who do believe it was demolitions that bought the buildings down!
And that group is growing daily.

Now, looking at all the evidence, which group is either lying or are in denial?

Man that guy especially. What the hell does Howard believe that it dragged him here to ATS? Nothing as far as I can tell. He swears aspartame is safe, weather manipulation is impossible, and the towers weren't demolished. That's about all I've gathered from him so far.

Originally posted by bigpappadiaz
Man that guy especially. What the hell does Howard believe that it dragged him here to ATS? Nothing as far as I can tell. He swears aspartame is safe, weather manipulation is impossible, and the towers weren't demolished. That's about all I've gathered from him so far.

He also jumps in to "debunk" everyone who thinks fluoride is bad when ingested.

I think most of us here realized howweird was a spook a looong time ago...Why would someone spend so much of their valuable time doing nothing but de-bunking anything that is government connected?
Look at his points! That's a lot of work to get that, and for what?
And notice his tactics are mostly to ridicule?

Just a little reminder to the last three posters that this thread isn't supposed to be a discussion on HowardRoark, rather:

What happened to WTC 7 again?

Jak

Sry JAK but I believe somethings have to be said publicly...If only to put what some ppl are saying into context...

HowardRoark is not the subject of this thread.

Originally posted by SimonGray
Terms and Conditions of Membership for the AboveTopSecret.com Message Board(s)

By becoming a member of these domains, you agree to the following:


1). Posting:

1f.) Relevant Content: You will not post messages that are clearly outside of the stated topic of any forums nor disrupt a forum by deliberately posting repeated irrelevant messages or copies of identical messages (also known as "flooding").

Now please back to the topic of

What happened to WTC 7 again?

Jak

Originally posted by bigpappadiaz
God I hate this crap. Who are these people that insist that these buildings weren't demolished? They're idiots. Or maybe not, what the hell are they doing on a conspiracy site if they don't believe something happened?

No offence but only morons believe every conspiracy without looking at the information from both sides. If every person on ATS had to believe in every conspiracy presented here we would all believe in ridicilous ones like fake moon landings, John Titor, project serpo, The Jews were warned on 9-11 and numerous other bogus conspiracies. Keep a open mind but not so open your brains fall out.

Im sorry but when I contact people that do demolitons and ask them about WTC7 and they consider the concept "assinine". Or the lack of any irrefutable physical evidence that explosives were involved in the collapses, Any demo expert will tell you theres always physical evidence of any explosives, Blasting caps, det cord, explosive among other things. Or the fact that nobody saw the days or weeks of extensive column preparation and people placing massive amounts of explosives that would be needed to take down a building that size noless in a staffed functioning office building.

Or the fact that thousands of people in the area all didnt report the sound of explosives which would have to be clearly heard at any demo. So Either the mast majority of the people around WTC7 were deaf or in on the plot.

I dont consider the case all that rock solid as some make it out to seem.

I'm not saying every conspiracy, but this is probably the biggest, most in-your-face conspiracy out there. And if you believe in any other conspiracy out there that has brought you to this site, you probably should believe in this one. I mean it has the most amount of evidence, actually has men of science speaking out about it, and all the video and witness testimony you can ask for.

Im sorry but when I contact people that do demolitons and ask them about WTC7 and they consider the concept "assinine". Or the lack of any irrefutable physical evidence that explosives were involved in the collapses, Any demo expert will tell you theres always physical evidence of any explosives, Blasting caps, det cord, explosive among other things. Or the fact that nobody saw the days or weeks of extensive column preparation and people placing massive amounts of explosives that would be needed to take down a building that size noless in a staffed functioning office building.

Or the fact that thousands of people in the area all didnt report the sound of explosives which would have to be clearly heard at any demo.

What the hell are you talking about? You got no contacts, the evidence was smelted away, there sure were a lot of funny things going on at the WTC before they went crashing down and people clearly remember them, and sorry they couldn't hear all the booms over the sound of a skyscraper falling but I know a lot of people sure did report explosions coming from inside the building.

[edit on 29-3-2006 by bigpappadiaz]

Are you ignoring me Shadow? All I wanted to know was what your initial reactions were upon seeing WTC 7 fall for the first time.

I tried to be civil, I tried 'pretty please' now ANSWER ME DAMN IT!

LOL

But seriously.....

I remember all the so called "men of science" speaking out the Moon landing being faked they even had a bunch of video and photo evidence as well. In retrospect it was a ridiculous conspiracy IMHO and has been debunked quite well.

Even physicist can be biased and or even wrong with the actually physics. Remeber a physicists told us according too physics a Bumblebee couldnt fly

It might be different if even the majority of physicists said the WTC7 could have come down without explosives. That is just not true the majority of physicists back no such conspiracy.

Some of these "men of science" are some real pieces of work. Example Steven E. Jones Physics Professor famous (pro 9-11 demo) man. Who started looking into 9-11 after he went to a talk to a woman who had had a near-death experience and she told him what really happened on 9-11

Originally posted by bigpappadiaz
are you talking about? You got no contacts

Theres a few places to contact people with building demolition experience. People that have done this type of work for a living.

www.implosionworld.com...

These are the guys I asked about it and the staff and Senior Writer consider the concept absurb to put it nicely. Take the time out and ask experts yourself.

If not these guys im sure theres others out there.

Right Shadow, but you see the physicists are in addition to all the other mountains of evidence. You like to put each event into it's own little place and ignore everything else, and while that crap doesn't work on me, I'm afraid it works on all the other fragile stupid minds out there. It's a sad thing really.

And besides, it's also men of science who tell us electromagnetics play no part in the macroscopic universe, even though there are mountains of evidence for this, as well. As usual, it turns out to be the few brave men who speak out for it and the stupid masses never get to hear any of the reason.

And as for those Demo experts, I'm sure the reason why they say it's asburd is the ol' "Who da hell could get away with that?" but as for them looking Demo'd they sure as hell do.

[edit on 29-3-2006 by bigpappadiaz]

bigpappadiaz, I like your posting style. You don't pull your punches, nice.

Now JAK, I know you said stay on topic, but...did Howard really say that stuff about aspartame, fluoride, and weather manipulation?

Anyway, esdad71, you still haven't answered my question about Silverstein and "pull it." Hell, none of you other official story supporters have, either. I'll ask again...how the hell can you pull firefighters when there is no firefighting going on?

Shadow, you still haven't answered my question, either. I'll ask it again...what caused the "funny little puffs of debris" to run up the building right before it collapsed?

Those 2 facts, along with the mysterious parallel falling manner of all 3 buildings puts the official story on WTC 7 in SERIOUS doubt. And those who support the official story wonder why we question it...