reply to post by wmd_2008
wmd, why must you constantly take shots at my character? in every single one of your posts so far, you make at least one disclaimer about how i'm
stupid, or am making mistakes, or that i'm a little boy spewing nonsense. this makes for relatively nasty conversation, and will not get us anywhere.
please stop it. i think i've made a note of this a couple of times already, and it's getting tiring.
the link you posted is a piece of video i must have seen 200 times over again upon close examination. have you even bothered reading my whole post and
checking out the two links i sourced? i mean, you didn't even give a solid rebuttal to anything that i have written. it makes me think that you're
just waiting for your turn to speak without actually looking at what is being presented. it is exceedingly obvious that you are an emotional person,
and i think a part of that is what's stopping you from having an honest, informed discussion about this.
once again i will state what i have already stated, and wait for you to either take it seriously so that we may have a positive back and forth, or
just keep calling me a little kid and think that it actually makes some sort of impact.
tower 7 fell in about 4-5 seconds, and it fell straight down (coinciding with the fact that all 3 buildings came down the same way). if there was a
disproportionate amount of damage to one wall, the building should have fallen over. this is simple physics, and is an observation nobody would have a
problem with if it weren't for the fact that it happened to the world trade towers. there were explosions going off inside world trade center 7
pretty much throughout the day. once again, if you have been actually "looking forward" to my replies, you would have noticed that i posted these up
literally about 5 posts or so above this one.
now that i think about it, your claims are WAY more rash than mine, since you're not presenting anything, once again, to substantiate what you're
saying. the crux of your last response was "yes there was freefall, but not throughout the whole process, as part of the building came down first,
and then the rest followed. it actually took longer because of this." honestly this is a deceptive argument from top to bottom. it makes me think
someone's paying you for this.
the reason it makes me think that is the fact that i put up a whole lot more than that one little footnote you thought was incredible enough to put
this matter to rest. let's run it back, and this time actually go through what i post if you have any interest in "looking forward" to my
please take the time to go through these if you really want to have an open discussion about this, and please stop focusing your line of argumentation
on how terrible my reasoning is, or how little i am (which you literally can't possibly know). i have not been rude to you thus far, so please
respect that and do not be rude to me. we will get nowhere with this kind of attitude.
tl ; dr - the whole of wtc7 fell downwards (not over, through the path of destruction, as would be expected) in under 7 seconds. barry jennings
testified time and time again to there being explosions going off all day long in wtc7. cut the bs, and let's talk facts. if you can challenge any
one of these, i'm all ears.