We've only been talking about all of this for how many years now?
I've posted many videos in which the eyewitnesses have stated that they were thrown by the blasts. Where in the hell have you been and why do I always seem to have to do all of your research for you?
Because the onus is on you to prove your case...:rolleyes:
I'll start with two names. Michael Hess and Barry Jennings. [/QUOTE]
I have just watched the two videos posted by colorut of Michael Hess and Barry Jennings. Still, both of you fail to prove bombs had anything to do with the WTC. Neither even mentions a bomb, but only "explosion" and "thick smoke all around us". Even if they had mentioned the word "bomb", as some on the street did, that still doesn't prove that the explosions heard were bombs. Is that what you're going to tell a judge? "People heard explosions, judge, you're going have to assume they were bombs." :stongue: The judge is logically going to ask you, "How do you know what the people heard were bombs?" Go ahead, attempt to answer this question...:o
Well, since you so fervantly believe that there were controlled demolitions, and you base this completely on eyewitness testimony of two people, who are you ready to prosecute? Once again, where are the bomb fragments? You STILL haven't provided definitive evidence of a bomb.
I guess I'm a troll for pointing this out, huh? Or a government agent?:haha:
{b.s.e.}
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
"People heard explosions, judge, you're going have to assume they were bombs." :stongue: The judge is logically going to ask you, "How do you know what the people heard were bombs?" Go ahead, attempt to answer this question...:o
Dude, let me relate an alternative scenario to what you are saying, so that maybe you will understand your point better:
There are two bodies found in a house. Inside, you find blood spattered all over the North wall, at the base of the wall is the body, with several exit wounds to be observed on his/her body, their wallet/purse has been taken. Near the South exit there is the second body, lying on his/her stomach, two bullets in their back. You cannot find any shell casings, or fingerprints. You ask the neighbours if they heard anything, and they respond that they heard several gunshots after two gentleman entered the residence.
You rule it as a suicide.:wtf:
edit__
Or natural causes. :thepirate
colonelcrisp
quote:
Originally posted by {b.s.e.}
Dude, let me relate an alternative scenario to what you are saying, so that maybe you will understand your point better:
There are two bodies found in a house. Inside, you find blood spattered all over the North wall, at the base of the wall is the body, with several exit wounds to be observed on his/her body, their wallet/purse has been taken. Near the South exit there is the second body, lying on his/her stomach, two bullets in their back. You cannot find any shell casings, or fingerprints. You ask the neighbours if they heard anything, and they respond that they heard several gunshots after two gentleman entered the residence.
You rule it as a suicide.:wtf:
edit__
Or natural causes. :thepirate
The only problem with your story is that in this particular case, there weren't any bullet holes, or blood spatter..... In this instance, you have two victims lying side by side on a bed with a giant empty bottle of cyanide sitting between them, no blood, no bullet holes. the coroner has called this multiple suicide, and 3 people wearing tinfoil hats on the street are yelling the people were murdered with an assault rifle.....
show me evidence of controlled demolition besides halfwit arguments based on youtube videos of the collapse......
{b.s.e.}
"The whole idea of the pancake theory ... that NIST talks about means that you have no resistance on the way down at that particular floor level that was supposedly weakened significantly. And by significantly I mean all around the perimeter, all at the same time. What an amazing thing that all of the bolts would have failed at the same time. All of the welds would have failed at the same time. And the whole thing comes down very nicely. There isn't even an explanation for how the core of the structure [collapsed]. It contained the elevators and the stairwells. It is an extremely highly structurally resisting part of the structure. So it is a very strong part of the structure. And it ... was virtually ignored [in the NIST report]. They just talk about the trusses that go across from column to column. And all of them fail at the same time. They start coming down. Even if you were to accept that, you've got resistance as the floors come down."
"I think Building number 7 is the big, big question mark and I don't know that there is an engineering explanation for that other than controlled demolition."
- Robert M. Korol Ph.D., P.Eng – Professor Emeritus, Department of Civil Engineering, McMaster University. Elected Fellow of the Engineering Institute of Canada for exceptional contributions to engineering in Canada. Fellow of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering. Well known for research on steel structures; the plastic theory of metal structures, inelastic buckling, limit analysis, environmental assessment and life cycle analysis methodologies. Hamilton-Wentworth's 1998 "Engineer of the Year."
quote:
Originally posted several times by BSE
Furthermore, the Conservation of Energy applies to falling bodies as well. When an object falls, it converts the potential gravitational energy (derived from its height above ground) into kinetic (speed) energy. If the object has to use some of its energy on something else, like air resistance, there will be less energy available as kinetic energy; lengthening the time it spends falling.
Let's use the example of a brick falling from the top of the tower, even just the energy required to move air out of the way is enough to slow the free fall time from 9.2 seconds to 12 seconds. The fact that the buildings were observed to fall at essentially free fall speed, means that all of the gravitational potential energy of the building was in fact converted to the kinetic energy of falling. The fall speed accounts for all of the gravitational potential energy available. There is no gravitational energy available to break steel, crush concrete, eject dust or do anything else but just fall. Let alone does a brick explode in mid-air, even if it collides with several other bricks or miscellaneous falling debree.
{b.s.e.}
quote:
Originally posted by colonelcrisp
and 3 people wearing tinfoil hats on the street are yelling the people were murdered with an assault rifle.....
show me evidence of controlled demolition besides halfwit arguments based on youtube videos of the collapse......
Listen, I stay civil with you twats. The notion that the holes in the Official Story don't beckon a second investigation is laughable, and you 'skeptics' are really nothing more than shallow, teat-of-authority sucking noobs.
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by {b.s.e.}
Dude, let me relate an alternative scenario to what you are saying, so that maybe you will understand your point better:
There are two bodies found in a house. Inside, you find blood spattered all over the North wall, at the base of the wall is the body, with several exit wounds to be observed on his/her body, their wallet/purse has been taken. Near the South exit there is the second body, lying on his/her stomach, two bullets in their back. You cannot find any shell casings, or fingerprints. You ask the neighbours if they heard anything, and they respond that they heard several gunshots after two gentleman entered the residence.
You rule it as a suicide.:wtf:
edit__
Or natural causes. :thepirate
No.
WTC 7 was severly damaged by the collapse of the towers.
So then what are the requirements for a complete and total gravity driven collapse? Because 7 was only damaged severely on one side, implying that you can expect with almost 100% certainty that the building, should it collapse, would collapse on the damaged side first; perhaps dragging the relatively intact side down with it.
CERTAINLY NOT AT FREE FALL SPEED HOWEVER.
Read that again.
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by {b.s.e.}
Listen, I stay civil with you twats. The notion that the holes in the Official Story don't beckon a second investigation is laughable, and you 'skeptics' are really nothing more than shallow, teat-of-authority sucking noobs.
As do I. I'm all for a second INDEPENDENT investigation. Until then, until you have a case worthy of a court room, you have nothing. Suck on that ay?
{b.s.e.}
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
As do I. I'm all for a second INDEPENDENT investigation. Until then, until you have a case worthy of a court room, you have nothing. Suck on that ay?
I was referring to Mr. Crisp. But cool :gsmile:
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by {b.s.e.}
So then what are the requirements for a complete and total gravity driven collapse? Because 7 was only damaged severely on one side, implying that you can expect with almost 100% certainty that the building, should it collapse, would collapse on the damaged side first; perhaps dragging the relatively intact side down with it.
CERTAINLY NOT AT FREE FALL SPEED HOWEVER.
Read that again.
With an out of control fire which burned for more than half a day.
I'de be surprised if it didn't fall.
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by {b.s.e.}
I was referring to Mr. Crisp. But cool :gsmile:
