1st and foremost:
What did these things that you absolutely reject all of my explainations of??????
It seems like your taking more than a mere devils advocate role here, however you don't seem to offer any dichotomies to trump mine. Saying that mine
aren't possible is like an ongoing False Dichotomy as you don't offer anything better.
It's not possible for high explosives to shoot large sections of structural steel out sideways.
I didn't say 'large sections of structural steel", did I? Where? I said "things". For all we know, the seat part of a flaming
was spit out into that direction, and the metal shaft on the underside of the chair smashed its way thru a car window as it was projecting at hundred
mile sper hour (or whatever, humans can pitch baseballs that fast), and then the burning foam in the seat cusion dripped down and lit the inside of
the car on fire, which then led to total vehicular destruction. This is an example of a thing
, and examples liek that could account for all of
the other cars which weren't "melted" by things like structural steel, gas line fires/explosions etc.
It's not possible
?? You mean there's absolutely no way
that the violent catastrophic destruction that was occuring could have
ejected debris that far? NOT even if there were also explosives inside of thst monster as it was happening, adding even more explosive force to the
already monolithic extreme kinetic energy?
You're talking as if core columns had to make it over there to cause a boom:
And they weren't too far off.
You might want to check out:
There are plenty of implosion videos online, prove me wrong.
It wasn't a typical "implosion" as the ground-impact-point was several hundred feet up in the air, most of the way up each tower.
You're basically proving your own arguments wrong, as i'm saying that something could be possible (potentially, maybe), and you're going to the
extreme of saying it's impossible (can't happen, cars cant self-propel into outer space, trees cant walk, etc). That sort of language is riddled
In trth that event was the most violent and incredible and chaotic single event (besides maybe the tsunami) that will hopefully ever happen in our
lifetimes, and it's rather absurd to make statements like that as if the parking lot was 3 miles away.
Since we are still talking about the parking lot, I've fully demonstrated that gas lines exploded there, and you're welcoem to answer that
SEE POST ABOVE YOUR LAST
Don't forget to explain how the nukewave didnt affect the cars in front of the lot.
And yet again, we aren't seeing any debris fly into that parking lot.
I wasn't aware we had high quality images and videos of what was happening inside that lot during the collapse
Sure looks like some debris ended up in there. No large sections of structual steel, sure, but there was plenty of chaotic action and debris down
WFC Lot Cloud
And here's some more WTC7 cloud shots from your source:
That argument doesn't hold water because thermite and high explosives don't create large dust clouds of sufficient temperature and heat to
flash-ignite a car in any case. If you can't grasp this, then try to grasp the fact that everyone even on the streets around the bases would have
burned to death within seconds.
Notice how I said, over and over, random pockets
of heat; flaming random bits of debris. And so on. Also add in there sparks and things
from all of the chaos.
Unless, I'm mistaken, your argument is that a nuke blast did it. If that's the case, you're counterarguments don't hold any
water as a nuke
wave blast would be geometric and predictable; There's no evidence showing that to be the case.
The last part of your argument is the most damaging to... itself, as the nuke blast would have blasted people, because such an event leaves very
little room for random chaotic heat and burning debris as the dust cloud does. Please go watch soem of the live videos from inside the cloud.
[edit on 4-5-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]