Melting steel?

a reply to: skyeagle409

In order for you to debunk that video, you have to provide the time lines where explosions are heard

Nope, don't have to do that..

a reply to: wildb

Nope, don't have to do that..

Of course you can't because there are no sounds of explosions in those videos, which explains why you cannot provide video time lines where you have claimed, explosions were heard.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Of course you can't because there are no sounds of explosions in those videos,

Yeah so, what does that mean, Oh yeah, nothing, nothing at all...

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

In order for you to debunk that video, you have to provide the time lines where explosions are heard and failing that, you have no case. Now, go ahead, debunk that video with the time lines that depict the sound of explosions as WTC 1 collapses. Failure to do so will prove my case that you have no case for explosives.

WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory
.

Federal engineering investigators studying the destruction of the World Trade Center's twin towers on Sept. 11 said

Well thats disinfo right there....

a reply to: wildb

Yeah so, what does that mean, Oh yeah, nothing, nothing at all...

This is not a school yard.
Answers like that make you look bad.
If you can post any videos of silent explosives your point will have merit.
But right now there is nothing to bolster your claim for explosives.

Well thats disinfo right there....

So if you can't prove your point he's a mythical disinfo agent?
Seriously?

a reply to: samkent

This is not a school yard. Answers like that make you look bad. If you can post any videos of silent explosives your point will have merit. But right now there is nothing to bolster your claim for explosives.

I don't think so, he post video with bad audio and claims thats proof. Then asks for video with explosions in it and when we give it to him he reply's with it's debunked, thats school yard.. The evidence is in the video not the audio.

So if you can't prove your point he's a mythical disinfo agent?

You don't read post very well or you would know sky did not say that. Furthermore I was stating a fact, the collapse of the towers were never investigated..

a reply to: wildb

The evidence is in the video not the audio.

Show us one video where the building is explosively demoed and the sound only has birds and crickets.
Just one video.

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: wildb

The evidence is in the video not the audio.

Show us one video where the building is explosively demoed and the sound only has birds and crickets.
Just one video.

Now thats school yard..

a reply to: wildb

Facts that have nothing to do with disinformation. Simple laws of physics, you understand.

a reply to: wildb

In other words, you cannot provide evidence of explosions in any WTC video.

a reply to: wildb

I don't think so, he post video with bad audio and claims thats proof. Then asks for video with explosions in it and when we give it to him he reply's with it's debunked, thats school yard..

That is false. You have yet to post a single WTC video time line where demolition explosions are heard. I have asked you for those time lines and you keep stalling.

a reply to: wildb

Oh yeah, nothing, nothing at all...

That's right!! Nothing in any WTC video that depicts the sound of demolition explosions.

a reply to: wildb

Well thats disinfo right there....

Prove it with evidence, otherwise, you have case.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

Facts that have nothing to do with disinformation. Simple laws of physics, you understand.

Yes I understand, simple laws of physics tell us the buildings did not collapse due to gravity alone...

a reply to: wildb

Yes I understand, simple laws of physics tell us the buildings did not collapse due to gravity alone...

Apparently, you do not understand the laws of physics. Now, let's take a look at a 21-story steel frame building that collapsed without the aid of explosives.

Photo: 21-Story Steel Frame Building Collapsed: No Explosives Involved

As you can plainly see, gravity had brought down that 21-story steel frame building.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

Yes I understand, simple laws of physics tell us the buildings did not collapse due to gravity alone...

Apparently, you do not understand the laws of physics. Now, let's take a look at a 21-story steel frame building that collapsed without the aid of explosives.

Photo: 21-Story Steel Frame Building Collapsed: No Explosives Involved

As you can plainly see, gravity had brought down that 21-story steel frame building.

This is as significant to the twin towers as a bowl of cherrys..

a reply to: skyeagle409

Apparently, you do not understand the laws of physics

Sure I do, thats how I know the OS is not true...

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

In other words, you cannot provide evidence of explosions in any WTC video.

If you tell a lie over and over you will soon believe it to be the truth...

a reply to: wildb

In other words, you cannot provide a single shred of evidence that explosives were used to demolish the WTC buildings.

Civil & Structural Engineers on WTC Collapse

Even if all of the columns and girders had survived the impact - an unlikely event - the structure would fail as the result of a buckling of the columns. The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."

911-engineers.blogspot.com...

a reply to: wildb

That won't fly. Facts, evidence, and the laws of physics have backed me up.

The Collapse of Twin Towers: Causes and Effects

web.mit.edu...