Reply With Quote
mathmaticious...
...Thanks Mook, I have a mathematics degree....
mathmaticious...
I have pointed this bit out and it was ignored.
If explosives did indeed bring down the WTC they were awfully quiet.
I have personally been within a block of a SMALL building that was demolished with explosives.
It was LOUD and very distinct.
If you listen to ALL of the audio of WTC, you get a low rumble, but no sharp reports that carry for miles.
The amount of explosives alleged to have been in the buildings would have done two things:
Scattered debris for MILES, especially glass.
Been loud enough to hear distinctly in New Jersey.
Neither of which was observed in the actual collapse, which is why CTers wave this stuff away.
the witnesses near WTC 7 all described sounds typical of controlled demolition. The videos you see of WTC 7 all have the camera & mike several blocks or more away from the building.
You guys are pretty desperate.
Take a look at the carefull report made at the crime scene, showng were the remains of explosive devices were located.
Oh wait, no careful report of the crime scene was ever made. 99.999% of the debris was shipped to Asia before scientists could look at it.
Show me eyewitness accounts of steel beams bent by office fires.
The Fort Worth YouTube posted above was taken several blocks away too.
Nah. Simple common sense. It took four months of physical prep work to bring down the 30-floor Landmark Tower in Fort Worth. Given your extensive knowledge of building demolition -- how much prep work would be needed to bring down the two 110 buildings and one 47 floor building?You guys are pretty desperate.
How many pounds of explosives would need to be used on the structures that could not have been weakened earlier like the Landmark Tower was?
Be specific. You are the expert after all.
Yes ... the Truthers are the ones who have to bear the burden of proving that the Towers were a controlled demolition, or at least an inside job by the White House, the Illuminati, or whatever.
Non-truthers do not have that burden of proof.
, Galileo couldn't even admit that the Landmark Tower didn't have 64 floors.
Well, , what'd you expect? He did count them.
True dat.
especially becuase you say so . . .
Here's a number for you --
One month.
That is the amount of time from when this picture was taken until the Landmark Tower in Fort Worth was imploded:
Here's another number --
Three months.
That's how long the demolition experts had been working to expose the structural members of the Landmark Tower before this picture was taken.
Now you math majors are trying to tell me that all three towers were brought down by explosives and demo work that had to go on for months before 9/11 but went completely undetected by the tens of thousands of people working in them.
Bravo!
midwest wrecking company almost got away with it too those sneaky buttholesHere's a number for you --
One month.
That is the amount of time from when this picture was taken until the Landmark Tower in Fort Worth was imploded:
Here's another number --
Three months.
That's how long the demolition experts had been working to expose the structural members of the Landmark Tower before this picture was taken.
Now you math majors are trying to tell me that all three towers were brought down by explosives and demo work that had to go on for months before 9/11 but went completely undetected by the tens of thousands of people working in them.
Bravo!
TRUTH JIHAD RADIO
Archived Shows in April of 2008 - ARCHIVED PODCAST ( RSS )
SATURDAY, APRIL 5, 2008
MP3 Files: Hour 1, Hour 2
Playlist Files: PLS M3U
HOUR: 1
Rolf Lindgren--
FIELD: Libertarian Party activist; WTC Bldg. 7 researcher
TOPICS: 9-11 truth; Third Party candidates; failure to intercept flights
Jesse Ventura--
FIELD: Former governor of Minnesota
TOPICS: WTC controlled demolition (Bldg. 7); news entertainment: 60 Minutes; politicians vs. statesmen
HOUR: 2
Ed Thompson--
FIELD: Former Mayor—and current Mayor-elect—of Tomah, WI
TOPICS: 911; Ventura comments; WTC Bldg. 7; Ron Paul
http://www.republicbroadcasting.org/...d%253Darchives
the WTC was weakened and compromised by an airplane impact and fire, fewer explosives were needed to take it down.Here's a number for you --
One month.
That is the amount of time from when this picture was taken until the Landmark Tower in Fort Worth was imploded:
Here's another number --
Three months.
That's how long the demolition experts had been working to expose the structural members of the Landmark Tower before this picture was taken.
Now you math majors are trying to tell me that all three towers were brought down by explosives and demo work that had to go on for months before 9/11 but went completely undetected by the tens of thousands of people working in them.
Bravo!
You must be manic depressive.
First, you say no explosives were needed. Then you assert this gigantic amount of unheard of numbers of bombes must have been used.
Actually, no demo charges were needed to take them down.the WTC was weakened and compromised by an airplane impact and fire, fewer explosives were needed to take it down.First you assert that plane impacts and fire can't do any damage to the towers, now they are an integral part of the plan to weaken the buildings.First, you say no explosives were needed. Then you assert this gigantic amount of unheard of numbers of bombes must have been used.
Make up your mind.
And tell us how the explosives survived the plane impacts and the fires that you now admit did substantial damage to the buildings.
Please give details.
They didn't care about killing 50,000 people on 9/11 - 'nough saidNow you math majors are trying to tell me that all three towers were brought down by explosives and demo work that had to go on for months before 9/11 but went completely undetected by the tens of thousands of people working in them.
Huh?
Who's "they"? The terrorists? Yeah, I guess they didn't care much for human life.
And what's that to do with the question? -- how did the prep work (i.e., placing the bombs, getting them into the building, etc.) go completely unnoticed by everyone?
That wasn't the question. The question was why risk the probable exposure of the plot over the several weeks needed to plant the explosives and prep the columns for demolition on floors occupied by working offices?
I'll tell you the same thing I've been telling Chumpy for years....'They' are the people who planted explosives in the central core of the twin towers and WTC7.....or they didn't......
Why do you need extensive prep work if you don't care about safety?
Nobody was inspecting the beams and interior core....
Give me a ing break. The columns were right there on the floors with the working offices where the collapses started.
To keep from being laughed at, you must answer all these questions:
1) How did the government access the columns and beams on the multiple floors with working offices?
2) How were the explosives attached to them with no one's knowledge?
3) And how did the explosives survive the impact of the planes and the fires and remain perfectly attached to the columns and beams?
Be specific.
who said it was the government?How did the government access the columns and beams on the multiple floors with working offices?
....it's not like they strapped bombs on beams in the middle of offices...there were plenty of interior support beams out of view...How were the explosives attached to them with no one's knowledge?
...many didn't, obviously.....but the ones that compromised the lower floors? Why do you think both planes hit so far up the towers? Wouldn't have there been more chance of casualties if the planes had hit the towers much lower?And how did the explosives survive the impact of the planes and the fires and remain perfectly attached to the columns and beams?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
