It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by jthomas
I watched all three videos and I find it odd that you posted them at all given the subject matter of you supposed to be providing evidence for your claim that only"explosive demolition" can explain the collapse of WTC 7.
posted by SPreston
You are doing a great job jthomas.
posted by jthomas
Thanks, but it's hard to get 9/11 "Truthers" to think rationally, as you can see.
Originally posted by bsbray11
Originally posted by GenRadek
So he looks up, no mention of hearing anything exploding before any movement, and sees the building peeling in on itself, and he is hearing the "explosions" going off DURING the collapse.
Excuse me for a minute here but, in every CD I have ever watched, I always see and hear the explosions well BEFORE the collapse of the building
There were explosions in that building prior to its collapse. Look up Barry Jennings' testimony for one example of testimony to this effect. Officer Bartmer's is only one testimony.
Originally posted by bsbray11
reply to post by rush969
Not particularly. I'm not even that interested in my own conjecture. There are 20 unanswered questions in the OP of this thread and so far we have 11 pages of thread and not a single one of them has been resolved.
Originally posted by bsbray11
Originally posted by jthomas
Didn't you forget something?
Nope. But nice try.
Btw that link is wrong since members of those same organizations are in groups like AE911. Griff that used to post here was a member of the ASCE, and a structural engineer.
Originally posted by bsbray11
Originally posted by jthomas
We're waiting for you to refute NIST
I already did, above. And apparently you had no response to that. Nor do you have any response to my repeated question of how their claims tie into the law of conservation of energy.
As Jezus reminded you once again above, Congress did not charge me with investigative powers. They gave that to NIST. It was their burden to prove, they failed. If you want to back NIST, then it's your burden too, and you're failing.
Originally posted by bsbray11
reply to post by jthomas
First of all, thanks for completely ignoring my request to see the bottom of the building as it was collapsing, and demonstrating once again that you can't back up most of the things you post.
Second of all, I keep telling you my specific problem in every single post. Conservation of energy. PE/KE doing no work as the building collapses. I'll give you the opportunity to go back and actually read my posts for a change before you continue to post garbage that has already been addressed countless times in this thread alone.
Originally posted by bsbray11
Originally posted by jthomas
I watched all three videos and I find it odd that you posted them at all given the subject matter of you supposed to be providing evidence for your claim that only"explosive demolition" can explain the collapse of WTC 7.
The topic of this thread is 20 unanswered questions. I have provided the question, now can you provide the answer?
Originally posted by SPreston
You are doing a great job jthomas.
posted by jthomas
Thanks, but it's hard to get 9/11 "Truthers" to think rationally, as you can see.
Ahhh, but jthomas you are doing a great job of getting the newbies thinking 'rationally'.
Now, I looked up Barry Jennings and, of course, he is on every 9/11 "Truther" site known to humanity.
Is there in fact reliable and credible evidence from him.
Excuse me for a minute here but, in every CD I have ever watched, I always see and hear the explosions well BEFORE the collapse of the building
The New York Times
The Sept. 11 Records
A rich vein of city records from Sept. 11, including more than 12,000 pages of oral histories rendered in the voices of 503 firefighters, paramedics, and emergency medical technicians, were made public on Aug. 12. The New York Times has published all of them.
The oral histories of dispatch transmissions are transcribed verbatim. They have have not been edited to omit coarse language.
There were explosions in that building prior to its collapse. Look up Barry Jennings' testimony for one example of testimony to this effect. Officer Bartmer's is only one testimony.
I know you're having a tough time pretending you've provided evidence of "controlled demolition" but why insult everyone's intelligence, bsbray11, with your contiuned inability to give us any evidence??
why insult everyone's intelligence
Now, I looked up Barry Jennings and, of course, he is on every 9/11 "Truther" site known to humanity.
And I do find it striking that Barry Jennings heard "explosions" and the person with him did not.
The 9/11 Interview with Michael Hess: Evidence that NIST Lied about When He and Barry Jennings Were Rescued
So, we are right back at square one with not a darn piece of positive evidence that any "explosive demolition" ever took place
It's really quite amazing that "Truthers" actually think they can keep up with their charade.
Originally posted by jthomas
You are really confused. You know I don't have to explain anything. We're waiting for you to refute NIST which, as we all see, you can't .
Do catch up, tezz. Try, at least.
Originally posted by impressme
What I find so amusing is Barry Jennings tragic experience has been recorded and put on the internet and has been view by millions of people all over the world. The one thing that makes Jennings story so creditable, is he was in the WTC 7 when it was blowing up!
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by jthomas
You are really confused. You know I don't have to explain anything. We're waiting for you to refute NIST which, as we all see, you can't .
Do catch up, tezz. Try, at least.
Your illogical confusion deludes you into thinking that the NIST report has explained how WTC 7 fell for 2.25 seconds with free fall rate.
I wish that NIST had tried to explain it, then there would be something to refute!
Originally posted by jthomas
But you can't refute it. Why not?
Originally posted by jthomas
You already claimed - for some as yet announced reason - that there is something wrong with the explanation. I have given you the report and calculations but you still can't do anything but more hand-waving.
Originally posted by jthomas
Either refute the NIST evidence, methodology, and conclusions, or admit you can't.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by jthomas
But you can't refute it. Why not?
NIST have not explained how it happened, jthomas. NIST have not explained their own findings.
Originally posted by jthomas
So, explain why you categorically REFUSE to support your claims about WTC 7, the claims that you keep evading?
Originally posted by jthomas
Originally posted by bsbray11
Nope. But nice try.
I new you didn't bother to read it.