quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Since when did the controlled demolition hypothesis rely on "heat" generated from explosives causing office furniture to "catch fire" and "bring down the twin tower?" No one, at least no serious person, ever stated the were "fireballs" at differnt floors bursting out of the windows as the WTC collapsed. On the other hand, there is plenty of video evidence showing smoke cloud shooting out of windows of the levels close rest of the builiding collapsing on top of them.

serious LOL. that's EXACTLY what culorut has been arguing mate. go look at the pictures of all the vehicles supposedly burnt out from the explosives used in the demolitions.

if youre gonna wander in here with your superiority complex then at least get a handle on what we're talking about.

quote:

Are you familiar with non sequiturs and red herrings? And why oh why does the least plausible hypothesis seem like the most plausible explanation to you?

o.m.g. the irony is killing me

quote:

Colonel, please don't take PKCs approach towards "arguments" here. Weren't you supposed to be his level headed hero who's degree somehow makes you a sole authority and the only one in a position to debate the collapse of the towers (that's called ad verecundiam in case you didn't know that). That's actually all I've seen from proponents of the pancake theory is; ad verecundiams. Certifications and degress in the modern age are no different than priesthood titles and status of the past. It's the same paradigm in a modern context.

i really hate to break it to you shaolin, but if you're going to get into an argument about the collapse of buildings, your opinion means exactly zero if you are unqualified to make the assessment(s).

which is why colonel has been showing up all your troofers in here that believe in the controlled demolition nonsense. that isnt ad verecundiams. its colonel telling you why your idea(s) are without any merit whatsoever. and none of you have yet to take a single claim of his to task. not one. so accuse me of appealing to authority all you want, but it doesnt change the fact that none of you actually have the commitment to defending particular points of contention. disingenuous to the extreme

is there a problem with wanting a coherent, scientific, alternative explanation than the so-called pancake theory? is it good enough in your eyes to simply dismiss the pancake theory when you don't have a single engineer with which to propose an alternative?

simple fact is that until youre a (relative) expert, denouncing people like myself for taking expert opinion on board is incredibly arrogant.

if you had paid any attention to colonel's posts on the topic of explosives, you would understand why its simply impossible. but, wouldnt wanna break free of the CT technique of doing 1000 things at once and refusing to debate individual points to any level of depth.

but hey! you're ignoring what cheney said/did/thought. omg noob! conspiracy!

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Since when did the controlled demolition hypothesis rely on "heat" generated from explosives causing office furniture to "catch fire" and "bring down the twin tower?" No one, at least no serious person, ever stated the were "fireballs" at differnt floors bursting out of the windows as the WTC collapsed. On the other hand, there is plenty of video evidence showing smoke cloud shooting out of windows of the levels close rest of the builiding collapsing on top of them. Are you familiar with non sequiturs and red herrings? And why oh why does the least plausible hypothesis seem like the most plausible explanation to you? Colonel, please don't take PKCs approach towards "arguments" here. Weren't you supposed to be his level headed hero who's degree somehow makes you a sole authority and the only one in a position to debate the collapse of the towers (that's called ad verecundiam in case you didn't know that). That's actually all I've seen from proponents of the pancake theory is; ad verecundiams. Certifications and degress in the modern age are no different than priesthood titles and status of the past. It's the same paradigm in a modern context.

i was merely pointing out to culrout that HE explosives would not cause all those vehicles to catch fire. the fireball explanation was an engrossed comparison for real explosions to hollywood explosions. In the movie world, giant balls of hydrocarbon fueled flames are far cooler looking than smaller bursts of dust and debris....

this coupled with the fact that curout posted a brash statement of fact that thermate and HE was what brought down the towers when there is not a shred of reliable evidence to prove it at all. thermate reactions come with a signature radiation emitance that is so bright it can burn the retina. no such phenomena can be seen in any of videos. HE charges would send concrete and glass fragments out from the building at alarming velocities (approaching several thousand feet per second), this was not obsereved in the footage either. And finally the logistical nightmaere of trying to conceal several hundred kilometers of det cord. culrout has posted many videos of controlled demolitions of buildings but not one of them has shown what the inside looked like before hte blast. stripped columns down to the steel or cored columns (reinforced concrete structures) with charges placed, then wrapped in chain link fencing and geotextile #3 to contain the blast energy, and then there is the spider web of det cord and delay devices that cover the entire floor. this is not easy to hide. especially when you are looking at a 110 storry structure.

Like any scientific process, a theory or hypothesis (the fema report) will stand until it is proven false by a defensible and documented scientific procdure or a better suited equally defensible model of the phenomena is created. neither of which has been accomplished to date.

so far yourself and many others have pointed out many points which you feel are inconsistent with the "official" explanation, however without providing a feasible and rational alternative. Blanket solutions such as "controled demolition" will hold no water, and earn no merrit due to lack of conclusive evidence. alot of truthers spend so much of their time and effort looking for holes, they loose sight of the bigger picture.

but in regards to my last point.... stupid statements beget stupid replys. i find it hard to maintain a level of professionalism in this thread when i find that i am almost talking to myself half of the time. ill spend a couple hours putting together a well structured explanation of certain aspects of building theory and structural behaviour, albeit not the most gramatically correct explanation, only to have the subsequent 9 posts containing nothing more than youtube links.

nothing personal of course, but it seems the only posts that really get any attention are the ones which contain brash over generalizations and statements.... which doesnt lend to a quality debate on any subject...

my 0.02$

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN I have 3 hobbies: gaming, DJing & correcting maladjusted fools on the internet.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Yeah, I’d like to know what horrible, scarring incident in your childhood turned you into such an ignorant, intellectual-hating philistine?

^^well stated

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp but in regards to my last point.... stupid statements beget stupid replys. i find it hard to maintain a level of professionalism in this thread when i find that i am almost talking to myself half of the time. ill spend a couple hours putting together a well structured explanation of certain aspects of building theory and structural behaviour, albeit not the most gramatically correct explanation, only to have the subsequent 9 posts containing nothing more than youtube links.

precisely.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp

Bravo.

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp i was merely pointing out to culrout that HE explosives would not cause all those vehicles to catch fire. the fireball explanation was an engrossed comparison for real explosions to hollywood explosions. In the movie world, giant balls of hydrocarbon fueled flames are far cooler looking than smaller bursts of dust and debris.... this coupled with the fact that curout posted a brash statement of fact that thermate and HE was what brought down the towers when there is not a shred of reliable evidence to prove it at all. thermate reactions come with a signature radiation emitance that is so bright it can burn the retina. no such phenomena can be seen in any of videos. HE charges would send concrete and glass fragments out from the building at alarming velocities (approaching several thousand feet per second), this was not obsereved in the footage either. And finally the logistical nightmaere of trying to conceal several hundred kilometers of det cord. culrout has posted many videos of controlled demolitions of buildings but not one of them has shown what the inside looked like before hte blast. stripped columns down to the steel or cored columns (reinforced concrete structures) with charges placed, then wrapped in chain link fencing and geotextile #3 to contain the blast energy, and then there is the spider web of det cord and delay devices that cover the entire floor. this is not easy to hide. especially when you are looking at a 110 storry structure. Like any scientific process, a theory or hypothesis (the fema report) will stand until it is proven false by a defensible and documented scientific procdure or a better suited equally defensible model of the phenomena is created. neither of which has been accomplished to date. so far yourself and many others have pointed out many points which you feel are inconsistent with the "official" explanation, however without providing a feasible and rational alternative. Blanket solutions such as "controled demolition" will hold no water, and earn no merrit due to lack of conclusive evidence. alot of truthers spend so much of their time and effort looking for holes, they loose sight of the bigger picture. but in regards to my last point.... stupid statements beget stupid replys. i find it hard to maintain a level of professionalism in this thread when i find that i am almost talking to myself half of the time. ill spend a couple hours putting together a well structured explanation of certain aspects of building theory and structural behaviour, albeit not the most gramatically correct explanation, only to have the subsequent 9 posts containing nothing more than youtube links. nothing personal of course, but it seems the only posts that really get any attention are the ones which contain brash over generalizations and statements.... which doesnt lend to a quality debate on any subject... my 0.02$

As well put together as that sounds no one other then your cheerleaders seem to believe you.

The official story is falling apart by the second, what is funny is you do not even realize that you are contributing to this with every post you make.

It's easy to see through fake people once their cracks are exposed.

Another inetresting video that I came across,and they do have a point I must say.

___________________
Mystic Mind - DJ Mixes
http://soundcloud.com/mystic-mind

Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/DJMysticMind

quote:

Originally posted by culorut As well put together as that sounds no one other then your cheerleaders seem to believe you. The official story is falling apart by the second, what is funny is you do not even realize that you are contributing to this with every post you make. It's easy to see through fake people once their cracks are exposed.

and here is an example of what we are talking about shaolin. a completely irrelevant and disingenuous response from someone without the capacity to debate the topic at hand. it gets really old really quickly.

if your ilk really had a commitment to the "truth" we would see some evidence in here. but no, as per usual we get the smartarsed responses, and oh look- another youtube link

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Another inetresting video that I came across,and they do have a point I must say.

you should be ashamed of yourself

why you idiots place your faith in people that dont even know the difference between "your" and "you're" is beyond me. christ.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN you should be ashamed of yourself why you idiots place your faith in people that dont even know the difference between "your" and "you're" is beyond me. christ.

Dont let a simple video get into you this much man.I just thought it was interesting thats all.


p.s no need to call me an idiot for posting a video!!

___________________
Mystic Mind - DJ Mixes
http://soundcloud.com/mystic-mind

Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/DJMysticMind

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer p.s no need to call me an idiot for posting a video!!

well, we were just discussing how everytime colonelcrisp makes an effort to explain something regarding the collapses, some fool wanders in with their latest youtube video

i know youre not an idiot, which is why your posts in here piss me off.

___________________