Enough with the dishonest behaviour Truthers - I'm calling you out.

Originally posted by hooper

They did. ASCE, AIA and the SEI have all directed letters to the NIST in support. I would bet that the OP's googling skills are better. Just for the hell of it google AIA AND NIST report.

Is this (below) what you are talking about as far as the AIA is concerned? I would hardly characterize that document as a letter of support. In fact, I was rather taken aback at how critical it was once you got past the lick-slurping preamble. Regardless, thanks for indirectly directing me to it, if it is not the "letter" you were referring to. Much of it seems to be tactfully questioning the validity of the analysis and the appropriateness of the facilities used by NIST to study the WTC collapses and then make architectural recommendations based on said studies. That document is worthy of much closer scrutiny and perhaps its own thread.

The World trade Center Investigation, The AIA's Response to NIST's Draft Report and Recommendations

Time and time again I see the same BS from the Truther movement and time and time again, when they're presented irrefutable facts they stop posting on threads and disappear.

Seems like the only person disappearing around here is you,OP.
Which you haven't posted since page 6.

Can you,or will you,prove anything of what you said in your OP saying?
Probably not...

All you have are empty words,your argument isn't holding any water whatsoever,not with me anyways.
Your supporting a explanation of theories that don't hold any water either.

Honestly try to explain this to me with a natural cause.





This doesn't happen naturally...

and debunk how the French can demo buildings without explosives, and explain how demos can be created so that they accelerate as they progress, then this is a silly conversation.

Can you show us all proof that the French are able to do this?
Everything around 911 can be explained with high school science/physics,its not that hard to figure out.

I'm no demolition expert,but i do know the basics,and this is exactly what a demolition expert would tell you if asked the same question,but in their own words obviously.Would be :

It speeds up because the mass below is not in the path of the above mass,which means there is no resistance.
Hence why the above mass is able to pick up speed because it hasn't got any resistance below it.
As far as i know,having a structure collapse with zero resistance,which means around or at free fall speed,can only be achieved by a controlled demolition,not naturally.

And our government, whether involved or not, did NOT use this event as an excuse to wage war for material and or financial gain... NOT

reply to post by BillyBoBBizWorth


Oh boy this is SO 2005.

Those are the places where clean up crews were cutting the columns.

This can be observed here:



Nice try, but no dice. No thermite demolitions.

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious


Good job posting more opinions by the way

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by spav5

 

I'm not exactly sure I understand your questions, but I'll try and be really clear.

If you believe that:

a) the towers look like demos
b) nano-thermite was discovered by scientists
c) skyscrapers never collapse by burning

then you think that's enough proof to then believe that the US government is lying.

What

Then you see Iraq and say, well, they lied about WMDs, and used 9/11 to get into Iraq, therefore it's only logical that 9/11 was an inside job.

BUT

If you KNEW that:


a) the towers look like demos - NOT TRUE
b) nano-thermite was discovered by scientists - NOT TRUE
c) skyscrapers never collapse by burning - NOT RELEVANT

then the whole thing falls apart pretty quickly.

What are you talking about Oh.....never mind forget it
OP's post is absurd...I don't know why I even bothered.
Besides, foul odors irritate me and it definitely stinks in here

reply to post by BillyBoBBizWorth


Its called cutting torches used during the clean up. That was an easy one....

This whole post is fail, so much fail.

reply to post by BillyBoBBizWorth


Besides why cut the verticle supports at ground level? The building chewed itself from top to bottom.

reply to post by axslinger


Hate to break it to YOU. The first and second floor (where there are NO steel reinforced concrete walls till you get to the third ring) are above ground.

fire.nist.gov...

Page 8

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Myendica

 

The people that win the lottery also wish to Win, they go so far as to go into shops and buy tickets based on their wish.

I guess the winners, who's wishes come true are also gods.

That "evidence" you just presented is called circumstantial evidence and no court ion the world would convict someone based on it...

Ya I just read your rant again up to this point and at no point do you provide sources for your information except for the suggestion that people google it themselves. Secondly, in your thermite video it didnt even explode it burned, which is what it's supposed to do. I also didn't see anyone claim the top floors were "ejected" so I'm not sure what you mean by that. Finally, your demolition video serves you no purpose except to show that a building can be demolished in another method which is irrelevant because, at least in your opinion, they weren't demolished...

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious


"Time and time again I see the same BS from the Truther movement and time and time again, when they're presented irrefutable facts they stop posting on threads and disappear.

So, enough of that.

I'm calling you out. "

Funny headline and topic.
You choose to question those who have questions about the OS.
WHY?

You must first start at the beginning.
Start with the media and polliticans,beginning on Sept 11th 2001.

LISTEN to whats being said and reported.
And feel free to discredit everything thats presented.

I've compiled alot of videos for you to reference here.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Dont shoot the messengers,listen to the message.

Cheers~!~

reply to post by Rabbit281


No, the Pentagon did NOT have any of those systems on 9/11/01. It would have been gross stupidity to have active SAMs next to an international airport.....as is the case with the Pentagon.

I suggest that you read the truth. The truth

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious


lol...

Did you just seriously post controlled demo videos that look exactly like how the towers fell...to show that the towers fell without controlled demolition?

Do you not see the problem with that?

The way the towers SHOULD have fell from a non-controlled (ie: planes crashing into the building), uhh....shouldn't look like controlled demo

because it does only makes it MORE suspicious...

reply to post by spw184


Even if the government is behind it, it is still a terrorist attack. Get your terminology right. You believe a group of organized amateur pilot radical jihadists flew like aces to hit all their targets that day, except the capital building which they missed because people apparently stormed the cockpit of flight 93 and it landed in pennslyvannia (supposedly, theres other information around that casts doubt on this as well but it seems logical) and that the jet fuel, which when burning at full temporature can weaken steal but not melt it, even though most of the fuel was burned off instantly, somehow weakening the steal enough to bring the buildings down. And I know that fires started in the elevator shafts or whatever, but they wouldn't be burning as hot as jet fuel, and again, that jet fuel would have to be burning consistently for a while in order to even weaken the industrial steel, which engineers have said those particular beams could withstand upwards of 2000-3000 degrees Celcius or more. I also have a list in my hands of about 160 smoking guns if anyone wants to hear it, but you can just type "911 smoking guns" in google.

reply to post by GenRadek


Radek, I just so hope you are not disinfo, not because you pointed out that it is a clearing site, it is or it isn't. But take a look at those guys, they are swathed in protective clothing aren't they? all wearing face masks and beavering away, and in all that toxic dust/very toxic dust they are protected? from. Even the cut columns are covered in dust, that means circulating dust does it not. I have not seen that particular picture before, and no matter what, it is an 'effing disgrace that those guys are in that situation.

Originally posted by BillyBoBBizWorth

Time and time again I see the same BS from the Truther movement and time and time again, when they're presented irrefutable facts they stop posting on threads and disappear.

Seems like the only person disappearing around here is the you,OP.
Which you haven't posted since page 6.

Can you,or will you,prove anything of what you said in your OP saying?
Probably not...

All you have are empty words,your argument isn't holding any water whatsoever,not with me anyways.
Your supporting a explanation of theories that don't hold any water either.

Honestly try to explain this to me with a natural cause.

This doesn't happen naturally...

and debunk how the French can demo buildings without explosives, and explain how demos can be created so that they accelerate as they progress, then this is a silly conversation.

Can you show us all proof that the French are able to do this?
Everything around 911 can be explained with high school science/physics,its not that hard to figure out.

I'm no demolition expert,but i do know the basics,and this is exactly what a demolition expert would tell you if asked the same question,but in their own words obviously.Would be :

It speeds up because the mass below is not in the path of the above mass,which means there is no resistance.
Hence why the above mass is able to pick up speed because it hasn't got any resistance below it.
As far as i know,having a structure collapse with zero resistance,which means around or at free fall speed,can only be achieved by a controlled demolition,not naturally.

edit on 12-9-2011 by BillyBoBBizWorth because: (no reason given)

I quoted your whole post because this is an exampe of "truther fail".

You did not post any links to the pictures. You are scalding the op for links and facts and you support no facts what so ever. A picture is just a picture.........

No dates, no times, no links, no nothing

Empty words Like your post that has two stars already. This is a perfect example of not doing the proper homework

reply to post by smurfy

Even the cut columns are covered in dust, that means circulating dust does it not.

I see slag from a torch cut.

Still there is no date or time in the photo. Am I supposed to take the word of you guys

Please read this thread about recent MSM propaganda www.abovetopsecret.com...