Originally posted by Stateofgrace
Since you have now chosen to champion this campaign, maybe you can explain exactly what type of explosive was used to cause the squibs. Was it
thermite or tradition explosives? Think carefully as one answer may contradict another claim you are making.
I think both were used, except replace "traditional explosives" with just "high explosives" in general. I don't know what kind they were, but
neither do I have to for the demo theory to still be top dog as far as explanations for those collapses go.
Thermite would've allowed the collapses to initiate without a blatantly obvious fireworks show (ie WTC2 during its tilt, up until the start of a
vertical fall), and then a sequence of high explosives charges would've been set off, which is when the expulsions of pulverized materials started
coming from within the buildings, and the buildings start falling straight down floor-by-floor.
Also, since you're apparently into logical fallacies, here's another one for you:
Moving The Goalposts (Raising The Bar, Argument By Demanding Impossible Perfection):
if your opponent successfully addresses some point, then say he must also address some further point. If you can make these points more and more
difficult (or diverse) then eventually your opponent must fail.
Same source as before. lol
Of course it is totally illogical of me to imagine that the collapse of the Towers didn’t sound like an explosion. I can imagine quite easily
it was quiet. It probably sounded like a atomic bomb going off, my friend
Then why do you take issue with the lack of sound coming from the collapses?
Really? have you any idea how far outside the footprint of these buildings, this collapse went.
Have you any idea what a center of gravity is? It doesn't matter how far the debris was sprayed. The buildings still fell straight down in a manner
of speaking (
the manner of speaking that's to the point of what you're complaining about) if all of the debris landed around a central
point.
The difference between the WTC Towers and any other demolitions falling straight down is that the WTC Towers' materials were violently ejected
outwards as they fell downwards. I should be stating the obvious here. Watch a video of the collapses.
The objection is simple, my friend, both Towers started to collapse at the point of impact. This allows for no margin of error.
Ah, ok. In that case, it's still to do with the order in which you set off the charges. Between impacts and collapses there was plenty of time to
pick a floor to detonate the charges from. It's the same issue of which charges to trigger, and when to trigger them.
Next you assert that because of the amount of explosives you're assuming were used, the Towers would have had to have "split." I don't have any
reason to believe that would've been the case, and you didn't give me any reasons to believe it, so I don't see any point in addressing what you
failed to support anyway.
As for the last list of demands, you should send that to NIST and all the relevant government agencies telling you it was the fires and plane damage
alone. I'm sure you've read the NIST Report and carefully analyzed the "evidence" they use to support
their case, right? My argument is a
sort of process of elimination. Until you can substantially back up NIST's claims, which not even NIST itself can do, I have more reason to believe
these were demolitions than anything else. And so until then, I will.
The burden of proof as to what happened to those towers isn't on a bunch of nutter conspiracy theorists. It's on the people you're paying with your
taxes to
do this kind of stuff for a living. So I'd email them up and tell them to get cracking.
[edit on 5-5-2006 by bsbray11]
