posted on May, 6 2012 @ 09:36 AM
Originally posted by Nathan-D
From my understanding, I believe it's true that there's no evidence of conventional charges going off although it's likely (as indicated by the molten
steel) that WTC7 was probably destroyed unconventionally with thermate. But of course, this has been discussed to death on other threads on this forum
hundreds and hundreds of times already.
Thermite kind of destroys the argument that all supports were destroyed simultaneously. The reason thermite was made up as alternative is because it
kind of behaves exactly like fire, and a collapse caused by thermite would basically follow the same phases. With the main difference that thermite is
very likely to leave evidence, which is not known to exist.
How do you claim to know these things? You state them as though they are matters-of-fact as if you know them without a shadow of doubt? Is that
really so? Nevertheless, all supports, or virtually all of them, must have been removed to allow for free-fall acceleration. That's the point. And the
chances of fire causing all columns to fail so catastrophically and with such synchronization is to quote FEMA and NIST a theory that only has a "low
probability of occurrence". Perhaps if NIST had actually investigated the possibility of a controlled demolition instead of prejudgementally assuming
it collapsed from fire, they might have conceived a theory with a higher probability instead, eh?
I know these things because I have read a thing or two about the subject. But you are much
better off asking demolition experts. Email and ask
Anyway, you are reversing the burden of proof. It is rather hard to prove a negative. I can not prove that there is no CD where free fall is reached.
However, since you are claiming that free fall is a characteristic of CD, it should not be hard to show me a case where a building collapse using
explosives indeed reaches free fall.
Fine, let's have it here. I'll start the ball rolling, shall I? What reality-checks have you applied to your theory? Have you done that? Have
you tested NIST's hypothesis for yourself to see if it is probable, let alone possible and if it accords with established physics? Or are you just
wallowing in make-believe that you have no intention of getting out of? Since NIST have refused to release their primary data for independent
scrutiny, how can you claim to know that the theory NIST is propagating is true? You can't. If your position was really well-founded in your knowledge
of science and physics, you would be able to justify it rationally on scientific grounds. But you cannot do that, as you have already shown to
everyone on this forum every time you hit the 'submit' button.
NIST's hypothesis is non-testable without the proper resources, even if they release their models. We will have to trust they have done their job
correctly, or not of course. But there isn't really a reason for me not to trust them. I have yet to see a good argument.
I will never claim that NIST theory is 100% correct. But even if they are wrong, it still does not mean CD. Again, the burden of proof is at the
people making the claims. If you claim CD, prove it. Ignorance or incredulity is not proof.
Us, gullible? With 'no critical thinking?' Gosh, really? Isn't it always the way that self-ignorant people see in others what they are doing
secretly themselves? The truth is that your experts at NIST are not doing any real science at all but are only playing computer-games and pretending
to the world that this pantomime is genuine science. And gullible people like you who don't know any real science themselves believe them and become
what you have become - crusaders for a cause that they do not understand. What a dark and delusional path you have committed yourself to following.
'When the blind are led by the blind, they all fall into the pit.' Haven't you ever come across that saying before?
edit on 6-5-2012 by
Nathan-D because: (no reason given)
I am not making those accusations. I am just telling you what the motivations of the creator of that fake video were (I may even be wrong). It is up
to each individual to determine what you posting that video as if it was real means for your critical thinking skills. My personal opinion is that
they are lacking, but note that this is just my opinion.
edit on 6-5-2012 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)