NIST WTC7 status report

Originally posted by esdad71
Sure, I'll comment, it is old information and they are revising what they had previously investigated, and after all the information is disseminated, there will be a publication in early 2007. You are also choosing to show only the pictures and evidence thar support your theory

Then you admit there is support for it? Remember that this is from NIST, and if you think it supports what I'm saying, then you should agree that falling at free-fall speed is a problem with any type of natural collapse mechanism.

We all know the arguements, and I'll ask that same old question, that NO one seems to be able to answer. Where is the proof of demolition?

No one can answer this for you because you will accept nothing, and you will consider nothing that implies demolition. Absolutely no thing. And I've been talking to you for long enough to know this.

It's easy as hell for you to constantly ask for proof, but when you won't accept any damned thing, you aren't going to GET any damned thing. I don't think you properly understand half the things we even talk about, like the significance of falling at free-fall speed. This logically implies things that rule out "natural" collapse, but you don't seem to pick up on this at all, and it's the same with any other point that implies controlled demolition.

We can prove failure because of the collapse,

Then, will you do it?

I'm all ears man. It's just that saying "I can prove it" and actually doing it are two totally different things, just as saying "You have no proof" and being able to demonstrate that are also two different things. I could say both all day and it wouldn't mean a damned thing, and I like it that way.

[edit on 20-10-2006 by bsbray11]

I do accept all the information that you provide, and I have stated numerous times that if conclusive proof was given, I would sway,and I think you feel the same way. I disgest what is provided by other posters and I never make a decision without researching the information. The problem is that there is no new information.

In my mind, I can take the information about the WTC and fit it into a working throey for collapse, without demolition. I guess you do not and that is where the search for you answers comes from. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, and I apologize for the cheap shot about implosion delusions, but that is how I feel. I mean, on a constant basis I am labeled as a sheep or ignorant or a neocon because I do not beleive the alternative theory so I again apologize for the cheap shot, but not the reasoning behind it. I have accepted the fact that there may never be definitive proof, but at the same time I still feel that this was a natural occurance.

Intact passports but concrete pulverised to dust hmm, its funny how buildings collapse in earthquakes and major fires and steel buckles due to heat and loading. But I have never seen concrete turned to dust, Ive never seen huge chunks of steel blown from a building that is collapsing, bodies that have completely disapeared, but not a passport. Amazing, what a miracle, that in a million tons of rubble some kind soul risked his life to find an intact passport but not just any passport, not a passengers, but one of the terrorists. I havent seen pigs fly but I know some people who have.

If ESDAD and Howard were in a court of law VS. ther rest of the posters in this thread... they would be disbarred and slapped with contempt of court. No logical responses from either HowardRoark or Esdad... just rhetoric to deflect and dilute the topic.

Same old same old from the only two gov't conspiracy supporters left here.

Nice job boys.

Capt. Slap a Nut

Originally posted by Slap Nuts


Same old same old from the only two gov't conspiracy supporters left here.

And since there is no credible evidence, nor is there a "smoking gun" so to speak, none of the demolition theories would stand up in court.

Theres more than two of us mate.

cheers



[edit on 20-10-2006 by LeftBehind]

I believe if this went up against a jury who had no previous knowledge or bias about 9-11, then the jury would find it was a controled demolition. The evidence for just overwhelms the evidence against imo...

Originally posted by LeftBehind

Originally posted by Slap Nuts


Same old same old from the only two gov't conspiracy supporters left here.

And since there is no credible evidence, nor is there a "smoking gun" so to speak, none of the demolition theories would stand up in court.

Theres more than two of us mate.

cheers

That would be 4 (at least on how the towers and WT7 collapsed)

I am not saying I accept 100% of the official story. But I don't discount 100% of it either.

Unfortunately, it seems like it is all or nothing on these boards some times. You either are government conspiracy supporter (if you believe any part of the official story) or you aren't a government conspiracy supporter (if you don't believe ANY of the official story). Yet, its ok to not believe different theories as long as you don't believe any part of the official story.

Originally posted by LeftBehind
And since there is no credible evidence, nor is there a "smoking gun" so to speak, none of the demolition theories would stand up in court.

Theres more than two of us mate.

cheers

[edit on 20-10-2006 by LeftBehind]

My full deconstruction of this steaming pile of NIST dool is forthcoming.

I love how the gov't story lovers always make it OK that the gov't has presented us with crap research, crap hypothesis and crap data.

There will be no "smoking gun". The same precious groups story that you all cling to are the same people that destroyed the evidence, seald the area and obstructed investigations.

All that leaves for us is to show how very silly, unscientific, flawed and occasionally TOTALLY BASELESS the goverments "reports" are".

If what they spew satisfies you, than good... It does not satisify many, many collegians, engineers, physicists, theologians or ordinary blokes. Why? Big post to follow with answer. I need some eggs and toast first.


[edit on 21-10-2006 by Slap Nuts]

Originally posted by Slap Nuts


I love how the gov't story lovers always make it OK that the gov't has presented us with crap research, crap hypothesis and crap data.

You know, before you make another thread about how certain phrases should be banned because it's baiting, maybe you should take a good look at your own behavior first.


It's a little hypocritical to bemoan and complain about other peoples "baiting" when you have no qualms about using the same tactics.




[edit on 21-10-2006 by LeftBehind]

Hey Slaps, why don't you post what you have so far? You never seem to add anything to these threads and simply ride the coattails of people like Bsbray. As much as I do not agree with much of what he posts, he at least gives an alternate view to what I believe.

In a court of law, they would ask for proof of demolition, which cannot be given. It would then be proven it came down in accordance to the laws of physics and people would understand it once ALL of the evidence was put in one place. It is all out there, you just have to take the time to read it all and have an OPEN mind.

Originally posted by esdad71
Hey Slaps, why don't you post what you have so far? You never seem to add anything to these threads and simply ride the coattails of people like Bsbray. As much as I do not agree with much of what he posts, he at least gives an alternate view to what I believe.

You showed up late to the ball gamme daddy.

I used to post about vector forces, inertia, pulverization, energy, simple math, photographic evidence, etc., etc., etc.

Now, I stand by and watch the same three or four posters present over and over:

"the government is right they just sometimes lie, and that is OK, their figures do not add up, but that is OK, from a scientific standpoint the vegas oddsmakers would give 1,000,000:1 against that thier reports are accurate, truthful and reliable but that DOES NOT MATTER. There is a MOUNTAIN of circumstantial evidence photographic, financial, political, scientific and testimonially but THAT DOES NOT MATTER because it is NOT PROOF."

So, it is YOU that is playing a game. Not me. If you ever want to talk at a MS Physics level about the rotational inertia of the top 30 floors of WTC 2 at collapse onset and the consequetial loss of this rotation and finnaly the complete pulverization of this mass then I will debate with logic, fact and figures. This will NEVER HAPPEN though.

Those threads get ignored or derailed by 3 or 4 of the same posters who REALLY step with NOTHING other than the same old "the gov't is right and you are a CTer" B.S.

This is how you want it so I have now changed course. I am the anti-"you guys". I will post in the fashion that you always have until such a time occurs when the IMPORTANT and REAL questions are being debated.

Read my thread on aluminothermics or maybe the thread that was the basis for WCIP's WTC 7 Photo Gash Debunking. What are YOUR contributions other than parroting:

"YOU HAVE NO PROOF." "YOU HAVE NO PROOF."

Of course there is NO PROOF. The evidence is supressed. All we have is CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE which, unfortunately can NEVER = PROOF. SO, you see your little circle jerk game goes on and on. "We" present evidence, point out errors, omissiona dn flat out lies in the NIST, FEMA and 9/11 comission reports but none of this can ever equal PROOF unlees the supressed physical evidence is released. So, we look at EVERYTHING else and you play the same old game.

Let's talk SCIENCE and EVIDENCE daddy... I have tried. You have not.

Next.

[edit on 21-10-2006 by Slap Nuts]

Start a new thread Slaps, I would be more than happy to read what you have. Again, please post what you have so far that will convince me that the official story is bullS***. That is all I asked for. I do not doubt the knowledge you have on the subjects you jsut mentioned, I jsut ask for some of your information.

Your response is that I am too late. Can you post those past threads so I and others may read them?

Originally posted by esdad71
Can you post those past threads so I and others may read them?

Use the search function. I waste enough time here.

Maybe instead of telling others to read a certain book and calling me out for "bringing nothing to the debate" you, YOU, should READ the historical threads here.

You are making assumptions and you know what mom has to say about assuming dad? It makes an *** out of you and me.

Slaps you and I are wasting our time with the likes of E71 and his 2 mates, I call people who think like that flat earthers, no matter how much evidence you present they still think they will fall of the edge. And really E71 to say the physics of WTC collapse is right then you know nothing of physics. Mind you if your a disinformation agent that would explain alot. As I have said before Goverments kill their own people and there's historic proof of that but your still in denial arent you.

The usual Roark, esdad etal are pathetic indeed. They offer nothing more hyperbola and they all are complicit with the neocon zionist murderers of 9/11. Kind of ironic because 2 out of the 3 amigo shills are Jewish also .... makes you go hmmm what are they trying to hide and what country's interests are they really serving.

All 3 should off themselves as the only noble thing to do.

You waste your time here not taking the time to prove your case, that is all. It is not up to me to search for every thread you post. If you had the gumption to repost, it may mean something, but by not reposting it shows you have no faith in yourself.

Did you read the NIST update that you call garbage? I am sure you cast it aside and simply continue to not add any additional knowledge to your case. You are noting but a noisemaker who enjoys dropping a few large words once in while. Again, please post what you have that you were bragging about a few posts back, I think we would all like to read it. Seriously. That is the difference, where I may use some sarcasm, I am still interested and cast nothing off without at least reading it first.

Can you state anything you disagree with in the new NIST update?

Originally posted by esdad71
It is not up to me to search for every thread you post.

If you are going to post the shiiiit below, it IS up to you to do some research.

Originally posted by esdad71
Hey Slaps, why don't you post what you have so far? You never seem to add anything to these threads and simply ride the coattails of people like Bsbray.

Your posts are all #. PARROT, blah, blah, blah... Why would I POSSIBLY retye tens of thousands of keystorekes when there is NO chance of a logical, structured, educated debate with you?

You want to know what I have to say... SEARCH IT. If not, DO NOT make BLAKET UNTRUE statements about what I do or do not post here.

As to the NIST "update"... WE... and again I say WE have a complete deconstruction of this million dollar piece of BS coming quite soon so hold up Fieger.

WHAT IS YOUR AREA OF EXPERTISE? TELL US PLEASE. I have.

Originally posted by esdad71
Start a new thread Slaps, I would be more than happy to read what you have. Again, please post what you have so far that will convince me that the official story is bullS***. That is all I asked for.

You are asking me to waste my time re-writing things that you should have read prior to insulting my posts. Your inquiry is ridiculous. Do your own leg work. Read what is here, then should you NOT AGREE with what I HAVE ALREADY POSTED go ape # on it and prove YOURSELF.

Daddy.

Man Slap why are you soooo antagonistic and frankly...rude?

I have tried to search posts. Unless I am doing it wrong, it takes you to the beginning of a thread. I know of one thread that is 198 pages long. It isn't always easy to find exactly what someone has said in the past. Again, I might be doing it wrong.

You are being hostile to someone who doesn't agree with you. Maybe instead of being hostile you could steer him in the right direction.

Your attitude towards people with a different opinion than you does not help your cause.

No offense to anybody but this is what a controlled demolition of a Skyscraper sounds and look's like.

video.google.com...