Debunkers’ only response is to claim that no comparison to WTC 7 can be made, yet they feverishly compared completely dissimilar bridge collapses to twin towers in 2007.
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
The exact same list can be used for those who believe the official story. Straw man argument at best.
The fact of matter is a huge percentage of people do not believe the official story.
LOL, you are one to talk. Straw man fallacy boo hoo! You just made an Appeal to Numbers fallacy. Just because a number of people believe something does not mean it's true. But I don't expect a truther capable of logic since their conspiracies require none...:stongue:
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Never forget a building hit that building.
culorut
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Never forget a building hit that building.
Yes because debris from another building causes other buildings to blow up. :rolleyes:
Still trying to convince yourself?
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Yes because debris from another building causes other buildings to blow up. :rolleyes:
WTC7 building blew up? Wow, what else is new? Space aliens have landed?
quote:
Still trying to convince yourself?
I'm convinced you don't know what the your talking about..;)
XaNaX
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Yes because debris from another building causes other buildings to blow up. :rolleyes:
it didn't blow up dumbass. i'm so glad i washed my hands of you and the rest of the dumb truther morons a while ago
Audigy7
We should just close these stupid 9/11 threads on sight; they always degenerate into this non-sense.
culorut
Everyone getting mad because the Beijing building did not crumble?
culorut
quote:
WTC7 building blew up? Wow, what else is new? Space aliens have landed?
Yes it did actually, fires do not cause buildings to come down in that fashion and neither does debris.
Space aliens? Nope just some cutting charges needed.
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Everyone getting mad because the Beijing building did not crumble?
No, we just enjoy making fun of you.
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Yes it did actually, fires do not cause buildings to come down in that fashion and neither does debris.
Space aliens? Nope just some cutting charges needed.
I think Lebez already proved your ignorant statement "Fires alone do not and have never brought a building down in all of history." completely wrong. Additionally, WTC7 had a mere two-hour fire rating for steel beams, girders and truss, and a three-hour rating for columns. The fires burned far longer than that, and could certainly have contributed, along with several other factors which you complerely ignore, of bringing down the building.
And yes, massive debris from 100 story buildings crashing into a building can bring that building down. Hint, WTC 3, 4, 5, 6. Every one of your sentences seems either blatantly false, a half truth, or fallacious...:o
culorut
You believe a building collapsed straight down for the first time in history in that fashion and make fun of others when the only way to justify it is some trash paper from NIST?
Where is the building that slammed into WTC7 to cause it to fall then? Just talk if you cannot back it up champ. The very report you posted from NIST does not mention that this caused the collapse, they blame it on over exaggerated office fires and thermal expansion.
How come no other buildings have come down due to office fires and thermal expansion in the same fashion as WTC7, should be easy to answer as there have been many buildings on fire much stronger than WTC7 but not one of you has been able to yet....
And don't give me BS about the buildings are built differently, WTC7 housed some serious tenants (CIA, Secret Service, IRS, etc) and was a bunker in case of emergency. It was built much better.
