The purpose of debunkers


A professional debunker's job on forums like this one is to:

1. Try to 'convince' or otherwise bully people who are unsure into accepting the official government dogma;

2. Failing in that, they simply start up new topics so that other, valid topics are bumped to the back pages of the forum.

My advice to newcomers: do not go into (lengthy) discussions with debunkers as they will simply waste your time. But if they convince you then you're welcome to it as I can't stand morons.

Anyone who thinks WTC 7 could collapse in such a fashion (symmetrical, at freefall speed) due to fires and other external damage is either a debunker or braindead. WTC 7 was demolished on purpose (using explosives). We can only speculate why it was demolished on purpose but nobody can deny that buildings don't collapse at freefall speed unless it's rigged by a professional demolishing team with explosives.

We cannot say for sure why WTC 7 had to go too but it sure is a remarkable coincidence that Rudy Guliani's emergency control bunker was located in WTC 7 plus several federal organisations such as secret services and thousands of files concerning Wall Street fraud cases. Unfortunately, all those files were destroyed when WTC 7 was demolished.

Use your own eyes. Watch the collapse of WTC 7 a few times and make your mind up.



Think you can trust your cat? Think Again!

reply

A professional debunker's job on forums like this one is to:

1. Try to 'convince' or otherwise bully people who are unsure into accepting the official government dogma;

2. Failing in that, they simply start up new topics so that other, valid topics are bumped to the back pages of the forum.

My advice to newcomers: do not go into (lengthy) discussions with debunkers as they will simply waste your time by making you confront facts, rather than pure theories. But if they convince you then you're welcome to believe them as I can't stand morons or those open to alternative points of view.

Anyone who thinks WTC 7 could collapse in such a fashion (along the path of least resistance, though the collapsing center of the building) due to fires and other external damage is either a debunker or braindead or has reviewed the facts and less likely theories. WTC 7 was demolished on purpose (using explosives) according to unproven and unlikely theories. We can only speculate why it would be demolished on purpose but anybody can deny that buildings don't collapse at freefall speed unless they are rigged by a professional demolishing team with explosives.

We cannot say for sure why WTC 7 had to go too but it sure is a remarkable coincidence that Rudy Guliani's emergency control bunker was located in WTC 7 plus several federal organisations such as secret services and thousands of files concerning Wall Street fraud cases. Unfortunately, most of those files were destroyed when WTC 7 was demolished.

Use your own eyes. Watch the collapse of WTC 7 starting with the penthouse failure a few times and make your mind up.

/Fixed that for you (including grammar!)
//By the way, I've never met a "professional" debunker, so maybe your first two points are entirely correct...but I doubt it.

reply

Anyone who thinks WTC 7 could collapse in such a fashion (symmetrical, at freefall speed)

18 Seconds is not free fall, nor was is symmetrical, does that mean the purpose of a CT'er is to be intellectually dishonest or obtuse?

symmetrical, On it’s Own Footprint?

WTC7 debris in the street.

http://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/images/image098.jpg

http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/wtc7/wtc_aerial.jpg

http://www.pernondimenticare.it/images/ny1600.jpg
Nice aerial view with debris in the street (Credit to ta2me92704)

(Complements blfsweet6) Better photo of WTC7 debris in the street. Kind of looks like it fell sideways into the street. Looks like it may have nicked the building below it (look at the roof and watch the below video, not sure)

http://www.debunking911.com/wtc7pile.jpg

FLIP BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN ONE AND TWO A FEW TIMES

Photo 1 WTC Leaning (look at the air between it and the building to the right.)

http://www.debunking911.com/wtc7f1.jpg

Photo 2 WTC7 Leaning more,( look at the air between it and the building to the right.)

http://www.debunking911.com/wtc7f2.jpg

Photo 3 WTC7 at the end of it’s 18 second fall.

http://www.debunking911.com/wtc7f3.jpg



Video of it falling to the left

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ewf3zYS-QkA&search=WTC%207


Photo right after the fall.

And now comes the most important and telling fact in this photo. Note the west side (Right side in this photo) of the north face is pointing toward the east side (Left side of this photo) where the penthouse was. What caused this? It would not be unreasonable to expect the building to fall toward the path of least resistance. The path of least resistance in this case would be the hole in the back of the building and the hole left by the penthouse. Since the penthouse was on the east and the 20 story hole in the middle, that would make the east and middle the path of least resistance. The conspiracy sites agree with this theory but say it never happened. They say the fact that it didn't happen helps prove controlled demolition. But you see it happen here... What will they say now?

"But the building doesn't look like it fell over, it fell "In it's own foot print" you might ask. That's because it is impossible for a 47 story steel building to fall over like that. It's not a small steel reinforced concrete building like the ones shown as *Examples* of buildings which fell over. Building 7 is more like the towers, made up of many pieces put together. It's not so much as a solid block as those steel reinforced concrete buildings.
This evidence supports the NIST contention that the building collapse progressed from the penthouse out as columns weakened by the fires. The slow sinking of the penthouses, indicating the internal collapse of the building behind the visible north wall, took 8.2 seconds according to a NIST preliminary report. Seismograph trace of the collapse of WTC 7 indicates that parts of the building were hitting the ground for 18 seconds. This means the collapse took at least 18 seconds, of which only the last approximately 15 seconds are visible in videos: 8 seconds for the penthouses and 7 seconds for the north wall to come down.


Rosie, Here we come..........

reply

As you see, debunkers will try to go into pointless discussions which will waste your time as you try to point out the flaws in their rhetoric assuming they are of good intentions.

As you may also have read in the above posts, they will even argue that WTC 7 can still be explained perfectly when all you have to do is watch the videos of WTC 7 collapsing at breakneck speed and what's more: in perfect symmetry.

No doubt, in their following replies, these gents will argue that what you see on the WTC 7 videos is "in fact not a symmetrical collapse."

Their lame fairy tales about superhuman Cessna-trained (top of the Top Guns) kamikaze pilots and perfectly explainable "collapses" all start unraveling with WTC 7.

Think you can trust your cat? Think Again!

reply

As you may also have read in the above posts, they will even argue that WTC 7 can still be explained perfectly when all you have to do is watch the videos of WTC 7 collapsing at breakneck speed and what's more: in perfect symmetry.

Another youtube junkie that can't read. it's clear from above you are wrong but hey, go back to your youtube for the cutting edge in scientific analysis.

Their lame fairy tales about superhuman Cessna-trained (top of the Top Guns) kamikaze pilots and perfectly explainable "collapses" all start unraveling with WTC 7.

Gosh, Lets ask real pilots.

I guess they had some training on some simulators at flight school and had no problem flying them as well as they seem to. Or did they?

They trained on simulators and small planes, they neither had to take of and land and there was sue of autopilot. Did they have problems flying, see the text in red, plays out just as one would think.


Atta and Shehhi finished up at Huffman and earned their instrument certificates from the FAA in November. In mid-December 2000, they passed their commercial pilot tests and received their licenses.They then began training to fly large jets on a flight simulator. At about the same time, Jarrah began simulator training, also in Florida but at a different center. By the end of 2000, less than six months after their arrival, the three pilots on the East Coast were simulating flights on large jets.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-244.html

In 1996, Hanjour returned to the United States to pursue flight training,after being rejected by a Saudi flight school. He checked out flight schools in Florida, California, and Arizona; and he briefly started at a couple of them before returning to Saudi Arabia. In 1997, he returned to Florida and then, along with two friends, went back to Arizona and began his flight training there in earnest. After about three months, Hanjour was able to obtain his private pilot's license. Several more months of training yielded him a commercial pilot certificate, issued by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in April 1999.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-242.html
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-243.html

Settling in Mesa, Hanjour began refresher training at his old school,Arizona Aviation. He wanted to train on multi-engine planes, but had difficulties because his English was not good enough.The instructor advised him to discontinue but Hanjour said he could not go home without completing the training. In early 2001, he started training on a Boeing 737 simulator at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Mesa.An instructor there found his work well below standard and discouraged him from continuing.Again, Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-243.html
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-244.html

Jarrah and Hanjour also received additional training and practice flights in the early summer.A few days before departing on his cross-country test flight, Jarrah flew from Fort Lauderdale to Philadelphia, where he trained at Hortman Aviation and asked to fly the Hudson Corridor, a low-altitude "hallway" along the Hudson River that passes New York landmarks like the World Trade Center. Heavy traffic in the area can make the corridor a dangerous route for an inexperienced pilot. Because Hortman deemed Jarrah unfit to fly solo, he could fly this route only with an instructor.

Hanjour, too, requested to fly the Hudson Corridor about this same time,at Air Fleet Training Systems in Teterboro, New Jersey, where he started receiving ground instruction soon after settling in the area with Hazmi. Hanjour flew the Hudson Corridor, but his instructor declined a second request because of what he considered Hanjour's poor piloting skills. Shortly thereafter, Hanjour switched to Caldwell Flight Academy in Fairfield, New Jersey, where he rented small aircraft on several occasions during June and July. In one such instance on July 20, Hanjour--likely accompanied by Hazmi--rented a plane from Caldwell and took a practice flight from Fairfield to Gaithersburg, Maryland, a route that would have allowed them to fly near Washington, D.C. Other evidence suggests that Hanjour may even have returned to Arizona for flight simulator training earlier in June.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-259.html

As I've explained in at least one prior column, Hani Hanjour's flying was hardly the show-quality demonstration often described. It was exceptional only in its recklessness. If anything, his loops and turns and spirals above the nation's capital revealed him to be exactly the *beep* pilot he by all accounts was. To hit the Pentagon squarely he needed only a bit of luck, and he got it, possibly with help from the 757's autopilot. Striking a stationary object -- even a large one like the Pentagon -- at high speed and from a steep angle is very difficult. To make the job easier, he came in obliquely, tearing down light poles as he roared across the Pentagon's lawn.

It's true there's only a vestigial similarity between the cockpit of a light trainer and the flight deck of a Boeing. To put it mildly, the attackers, as private pilots, were completely out of their league. However, they were not setting out to perform single-engine missed approaches or Category 3 instrument landings with a failed hydraulic system. For good measure, at least two of the terrorist pilots had rented simulator time in jet aircraft, but striking the Pentagon, or navigating along the Hudson River to Manhattan on a cloudless morning, with the sole intention of steering head-on into a building, did not require a mastery of airmanship. The perpetrators had purchased manuals and videos describing the flight management systems of the 757/767, and as any desktop simulator enthusiast will tell you, elementary operation of the planes' navigational units and autopilots is chiefly an exercise in data programming. You can learn it at home. You won't be good, but you'll be good enough.

"They'd done their homework and they had what they needed," says a United Airlines pilot (name withheld on request), who has flown every model of Boeing from the 737 up. "Rudimentary knowledge and fearlessness."

"As everyone saw, their flying was sloppy and aggressive," says Michael (last name withheld), a pilot with several thousand hours in 757s and 767s. "Their skills and experience, or lack thereof, just weren't relevant."

"The hijackers required only the shallow understanding of the aircraft," agrees Ken Hertz, an airline pilot rated on the 757/767. "In much the same way that a person needn't be an experienced physician in order to perform CPR or set a broken bone."

That sentiment is echoed by Joe d'Eon, airline pilot and host of the "Fly With Me" podcast series. "It's the difference between a doctor and a butcher," says d'Eon.
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/05/19/askthepilot186/

Experienced pilot Giulio Bernacchia agrees:
In my opinion the official version of the fact is absolutely plausible, does not require exceptional circumstances, bending of any law of physics or superhuman capabilities. Like other (real pilots) have said, the manoeuvres required of the hijackers were within their (very limited) capabilities, they were performed without any degree of finesse and resulted in damage to the targets only after desperate overmanoeuvring of the planes. The hijackers took advantage of anything that might make their job easier, and decided not to rely on their low piloting skills. It is misleading to make people believe that the hijackers HAD to possess superior pilot skills to do what they did.


Rosie, Here we come..........

reply

[deleted]

We do not offer theory or point blame.

Oh, That is good Jenna, what solid rebuttal, they don't offer any theories but those pilots that trained them above (in my post do), they would know something about the hijackers skills.

Fun Fact, 3 out of 4 of the hijackers had commercial pilots licenses, 3 out of 4 hit their targets, which one do you think did not make it? Big hint, the two subsets of three dovetail 100% ditto on the 1.

Rosie, Here we come..........

PS: If you are running the Loose Change play book by the numbers here is the answer to your next question.

--------------------------------

PENTAGON FLIGHT PATH DATA

There are three pieces of "data":
1) The official flight path (dictated by the light poles)
2) The FDR raw data
3) The animation released by the NTSB based on the FDR

The video JDX has uploaded shows that #1 and #3 are inconsistent. In this respect, he is absolutely right. The problem however comes when many CTers claim that the FDR-data is inconsistent with the official story. Those people are wrong.

When examining the actual FDR data (#2) released as a CSV file, it actually agrees perfectly with the official flight path. When plotted on the map, it hits all the lightpoles. The error occurred when the NTSB made the animation. They incorrectly rotated the underlying map to correct for magnetic/true north. If you draw the line of the light-pole path and you draw the line of the animation path, it is exactly twice the correction needed for magnetic/true north conversion. In other words, they added the correction instead of subtracting it.


reply

This has to stop.

Why are there no explosives heard directly before WTC 7 fell?

Because they weren't present.

However, MasterFake is now rejecting the 6 second collapse and is going for 18 seconds. Nevertheless, it fell quickly and directly into the ground, no resistance. And a large part of the building fell in the first 6 seconds.

You have to ask yourself a question, if there was a conspiracy, something that the United States Government had been involved with, do you think that NIST, a part of the Department of Commerce, would do a proper investigation?

And once again, the 9/11 Commission and the NIST did not even investigate any other possible cause of collapse, they had to make the plane/fire/falling story fit together.

Lasers leave no trace of themselves, you can tell if something was damaged by lasers, but they leave no residue. The core was cut by laser beams, it sounds rediculous but look at the orb right after the South Tower was hit. Go to www.911lies.org and they show you where a light beam was detected by a camera, leading the hologram into the building.

reply

However, MasterFake is now rejecting the 6 second collapse and is going for 18 seconds. Nevertheless, it fell quickly and directly into the ground, no resistance. And a large part of the building fell in the first 6 seconds.

18 Seconds is not free fall, their was resistance, this is not from the government but a series of seismographs ran by various firms, at least 3, I think it was 4 and reported by Implosionworld.

Rosie, Here we come..........

This has to stop. Not that I much care, you have not been around long or you would get it but "MasterFake" is not a good way to stop much of anything. You might ask Stewie or WhitePowerDog. Play it how you will, I am entertained either way.

reply

Why are there no explosives heard directly before WTC 7 fell?

Great question, One would expect to hear explosions and then see it start to fall in a Controlled demolition, if none are heard before the fall but after it starts falling or after it fell ahhhh.. whats the point of the Controlled Demolition.


Rosie, Here we come..........

reply

[deleted]

As you see, debunkers will try to go into pointless discussions which will waste your time as you try to point out the flaws in their rhetoric assuming they are of good intentions.


Those damn debunkers and their.....facts....

I agree that we shouldn't try and get into discussions concerning the evidence, in the past that usually blew up in our faces.



Super conspiracy theorist! Faster than the speed of stupid!

reply

[yawn] Yeah, like that time Oswald did actually hit both Kennedy and Connally with a single bullet that went through several bones while zigzagging through both men. And it appeared miraculously on a stretcher in near pristine shape!

Btw, WTC 7 was brought down by a controlled demolition (explosives). Just watch the squibs appearing shortly before the entire structure tumbles to the ground.

Interestingly, the Twin Towers also showed large squibs appearing in the center of floors that appeared prior to the 'destructionfront' catching up with it on its way down.

Tsk, notknight... Calling other people names went out of fashion after you left elementary school, don't you remember?

Isn't it fascinating how the alleged truth (super Top Gun kamikaze pilots hijacking airliners with box cutters and flying them to their targets without aid of air traffic control) needs so many defenders?

Think you can trust your cat? Think Again!

reply

Here comes MasterFake with his moronic primary and secondary radar.

Two planes crash into the world trade center in an obvious terrorist attack.

Over 30 minutes later, another hijacked plane somehow flies into WASHINGTON DC, THE CAPITAL OF THE UNITED STATES, where the White House, Capitol, & Pentagon are located.

And the defense isn't even there yet!

MasterFake should at least admit they MAY have let it happen.

reply

Here comes MasterFake with his moronic primary and secondary radar.

One needs the education no matter what side of the claim they make, it is important, especially the transponders.

How about one of their own with a transponder off?

Lost almost three weeks...

The A-10 also was tracked by radar in Phoenix, Albuquerque and Denver. Because the A-10's transponder was turned off, however, the plane could not be identified at the time. It was only after studying radar tapes later that authorities were able to track Button's flight.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9704/11/missing.a10/index.html


What the lie is, or how big it is, is something I don't know yet.-Jenna

reply

Two planes crash into the world trade center in an obvious terrorist attack.

Over 30 minutes later, another hijacked plane somehow flies into WASHINGTON DC, THE CAPITAL OF THE UNITED STATES, where the White House, Capitol, & Pentagon are located.
So, if you were in charge of air defense for the eastern United States, and had you four fighters to defend that entire area, and had two planes crashed in New York, you would shift your coverage to defend Washington, D.C.?

It would have worked better in this case, to be fair, but I'm not sure that your idea will ever become accepted military doctrine.

reply

Btw, WTC 7 was brought down by a controlled demolition (explosives). Just watch the squibs appearing shortly before the entire structure tumbles to the ground.

The ones that run up the building, not very squiblike, and why did the FDNY know it was coming down three hours earlier when it was creaking groaning and leaning.

Interestingly, the Twin Towers also showed large squibs appearing in the center of floors that appeared prior to the 'destructionfront' catching up with it on its way down.

Sure.....Assertion #1 in the link, I expect these people would know more than you.

http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf

Isn't it fascinating how the alleged truth (super Top Gun kamikaze pilots hijacking airliners with box cutters and flying them to their targets without aid of air traffic control) needs so many defenders?

Gosh, And you are a pilot too, what the heck would they need ATC for, WW2 must have been a bitch without ground contact? Lets look at what pilots other than yourself say.

I guess they had some training on some simulators at flight school and had no problem flying them as well as they seem to. Or did they?

They trained on simulators and small planes, they neither had to take of and land and there was sue of autopilot. Did they have problems flying, see the text in red, plays out just as one would think.


Atta and Shehhi finished up at Huffman and earned their instrument certificates from the FAA in November. In mid-December 2000, they passed their commercial pilot tests and received their licenses.They then began training to fly large jets on a flight simulator. At about the same time, Jarrah began simulator training, also in Florida but at a different center. By the end of 2000, less than six months after their arrival, the three pilots on the East Coast were simulating flights on large jets.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-244.html

In 1996, Hanjour returned to the United States to pursue flight training,after being rejected by a Saudi flight school. He checked out flight schools in Florida, California, and Arizona; and he briefly started at a couple of them before returning to Saudi Arabia. In 1997, he returned to Florida and then, along with two friends, went back to Arizona and began his flight training there in earnest. After about three months, Hanjour was able to obtain his private pilot's license. Several more months of training yielded him a commercial pilot certificate, issued by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in April 1999.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-242.html
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-243.html

Settling in Mesa, Hanjour began refresher training at his old school,Arizona Aviation. He wanted to train on multi-engine planes, but had difficulties because his English was not good enough.The instructor advised him to discontinue but Hanjour said he could not go home without completing the training. In early 2001, he started training on a Boeing 737 simulator at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Mesa.An instructor there found his work well below standard and discouraged him from continuing.Again, Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-243.html
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-244.html

Jarrah and Hanjour also received additional training and practice flights in the early summer.A few days before departing on his cross-country test flight, Jarrah flew from Fort Lauderdale to Philadelphia, where he trained at Hortman Aviation and asked to fly the Hudson Corridor, a low-altitude "hallway" along the Hudson River that passes New York landmarks like the World Trade Center. Heavy traffic in the area can make the corridor a dangerous route for an inexperienced pilot. Because Hortman deemed Jarrah unfit to fly solo, he could fly this route only with an instructor.

Hanjour, too, requested to fly the Hudson Corridor about this same time,at Air Fleet Training Systems in Teterboro, New Jersey, where he started receiving ground instruction soon after settling in the area with Hazmi. Hanjour flew the Hudson Corridor, but his instructor declined a second request because of what he considered Hanjour's poor piloting skills. Shortly thereafter, Hanjour switched to Caldwell Flight Academy in Fairfield, New Jersey, where he rented small aircraft on several occasions during June and July. In one such instance on July 20, Hanjour--likely accompanied by Hazmi--rented a plane from Caldwell and took a practice flight from Fairfield to Gaithersburg, Maryland, a route that would have allowed them to fly near Washington, D.C. Other evidence suggests that Hanjour may even have returned to Arizona for flight simulator training earlier in June.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-259.html

As I've explained in at least one prior column, Hani Hanjour's flying was hardly the show-quality demonstration often described. It was exceptional only in its recklessness. If anything, his loops and turns and spirals above the nation's capital revealed him to be exactly the *beep* pilot he by all accounts was. To hit the Pentagon squarely he needed only a bit of luck, and he got it, possibly with help from the 757's autopilot. Striking a stationary object -- even a large one like the Pentagon -- at high speed and from a steep angle is very difficult. To make the job easier, he came in obliquely, tearing down light poles as he roared across the Pentagon's lawn.

It's true there's only a vestigial similarity between the cockpit of a light trainer and the flight deck of a Boeing. To put it mildly, the attackers, as private pilots, were completely out of their league. However, they were not setting out to perform single-engine missed approaches or Category 3 instrument landings with a failed hydraulic system. For good measure, at least two of the terrorist pilots had rented simulator time in jet aircraft, but striking the Pentagon, or navigating along the Hudson River to Manhattan on a cloudless morning, with the sole intention of steering head-on into a building, did not require a mastery of airmanship. The perpetrators had purchased manuals and videos describing the flight management systems of the 757/767, and as any desktop simulator enthusiast will tell you, elementary operation of the planes' navigational units and autopilots is chiefly an exercise in data programming. You can learn it at home. You won't be good, but you'll be good enough.

"They'd done their homework and they had what they needed," says a United Airlines pilot (name withheld on request), who has flown every model of Boeing from the 737 up. "Rudimentary knowledge and fearlessness."

"As everyone saw, their flying was sloppy and aggressive," says Michael (last name withheld), a pilot with several thousand hours in 757s and 767s. "Their skills and experience, or lack thereof, just weren't relevant."

"The hijackers required only the shallow understanding of the aircraft," agrees Ken Hertz, an airline pilot rated on the 757/767. "In much the same way that a person needn't be an experienced physician in order to perform CPR or set a broken bone."

That sentiment is echoed by Joe d'Eon, airline pilot and host of the "Fly With Me" podcast series. "It's the difference between a doctor and a butcher," says d'Eon.
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/05/19/askthepilot186/

Experienced pilot Giulio Bernacchia agrees:
In my opinion the official version of the fact is absolutely plausible, does not require exceptional circumstances, bending of any law of physics or superhuman capabilities. Like other (real pilots) have said, the manoeuvres required of the hijackers were within their (very limited) capabilities, they were performed without any degree of finesse and resulted in damage to the targets only after desperate overmanoeuvring of the planes. The hijackers took advantage of anything that might make their job easier, and decided not to rely on their low piloting skills. It is misleading to make people believe that the hijackers HAD to possess superior pilot skills to do what they did.




What the lie is, or how big it is, is something I don't know yet.-Jenna

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

pilots say that the alleged hyjackers lacked the requisite piloting skills

Where do the pilots in your link say that, also you are cherry picking again. Old quotes during training, newer ones that do not say that it would have been hard and one totally cherry picked that says when ask directly that it would not have been hard for them to accomplish their mission.

What the lie is, or how big it is, is something I don't know yet.-Jenna

PS: Big gash in WTC7, man. See the pics?

reply

PS: Big gash in WTC7, man. See the pics?


You crack me up. Don't quit your daytime job, though.

That must explain why WTC 7:

1) fell completely within a matter of seconds;

2) collapsed onto its own footprint with all the hallmarks of a controlled demolition.

Think you can trust your cat? Think Again!

reply

18 Seconds, not on it's own footprint but since this is not a bad youtube video but text so you may find it confusing.

symmetrical, On it’s Own Footprint?

WTC7 debris in the street.

http://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/images/image098.jpg

http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/wtc7/wtc_aerial.jpg

http://www.pernondimenticare.it/images/ny1600.jpg
Nice aerial view with debris in the street (Credit to ta2me92704)

(Complements blfsweet6) Better photo of WTC7 debris in the street. Kind of looks like it fell sideways into the street. Looks like it may have nicked the building below it (look at the roof and watch the below video, not sure)

http://www.debunking911.com/wtc7pile.jpg

FLIP BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN ONE AND TWO A FEW TIMES

Photo 1 WTC Leaning (look at the air between it and the building to the right.)

http://www.debunking911.com/wtc7f1.jpg

Photo 2 WTC7 Leaning more,( look at the air between it and the building to the right.)

http://www.debunking911.com/wtc7f2.jpg

Photo 3 WTC7 at the end of it’s 18 second fall.

http://www.debunking911.com/wtc7f3.jpg



Video of it falling to the left

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ewf3zYS-QkA&search=WTC%207


Photo right after the fall.

And now comes the most important and telling fact in this photo. Note the west side (Right side in this photo) of the north face is pointing toward the east side (Left side of this photo) where the penthouse was. What caused this? It would not be unreasonable to expect the building to fall toward the path of least resistance. The path of least resistance in this case would be the hole in the back of the building and the hole left by the penthouse. Since the penthouse was on the east and the 20 story hole in the middle, that would make the east and middle the path of least resistance. The conspiracy sites agree with this theory but say it never happened. They say the fact that it didn't happen helps prove controlled demolition. But you see it happen here... What will they say now?

"But the building doesn't look like it fell over, it fell "In it's own foot print" you might ask. That's because it is impossible for a 47 story steel building to fall over like that. It's not a small steel reinforced concrete building like the ones shown as *Examples* of buildings which fell over. Building 7 is more like the towers, made up of many pieces put together. It's not so much as a solid block as those steel reinforced concrete buildings.
This evidence supports the NIST contention that the building collapse progressed from the penthouse out as columns weakened by the fires. The slow sinking of the penthouses, indicating the internal collapse of the building behind the visible north wall, took 8.2 seconds according to a NIST preliminary report. Seismograph trace of the collapse of WTC 7 indicates that parts of the building were hitting the ground for 18 seconds.

This means the collapse took at least 18 seconds, of which only the last approximately 15 seconds are visible in videos: 8 seconds for the penthouses and 7 seconds for the north wall to come down.






What the lie is, or how big it is, is something I don't know yet.-Jenna

reply

Calling other people names went out of fashion after you left elementary school, don't you remember?
super Top Gun kamikaze pilots hijacking airliners with box cutters
Sorry, just had to juxtapose those. Apparently, someone hasn't left elementary school.

reply

I teach English. "super," Top gun," and "kamikaze" are all being used as adjectives in his sentence. "Calling other people names" means using nouns.

reply

Thanks for the meaningless semantics. I was unaware that there was such a difference between labelling someone "moronic" and calling them "a moron." Oh, that's right. There isn't one in most cases.

You're being pedantic and nit-picky, if not being yourself a pedant or nitpicker.

reply

If you called me super or a Top Gun, I dont think I would be very offended. If you called me a kamikaze, I might just be a bit confused.

reply

I called you pedantic and nit-picky.

What did I win for that entry?

reply

You are right. My comments were a bit pedantic. Sorry no prize though. lol

reply

[yawn] Yeah, like that time Oswald did actually hit both Kennedy and Connally with a single bullet that went through several bones while zigzagging through both men. And it appeared miraculously on a stretcher in near pristine shape!

Except that it didn't zig-zag, which is a fact you fail to recognize. That may not put all JFK assasination conspiracy theories to rest, but it should at least bury the "magic bullet" hysteria.


Oh, and Connally survived, which I assume you knew but forgot to write down.

Btw, WTC 7 was brought down by a controlled demolition (explosives).

Wrong! It was brought down by the burning, crumbling North Tower!


reply

It entertains me so deeply seeing all you idiots on the lovely internet arguing about *beep* that simply does NOT matter. Are you all really so pretentious to assume that what you think makes a bit of difference in the way this world works? Pro tip: It doesn't. Not now, nor will it ever. Let's be honest now, shall we? Do you believe that even IF the United States government was responsible for this 'tragedy,' that it would make a single iota of difference? Who would stand up to them? You guys? HA! Sorry, but you'd all be too busy continually bitching about some other 'who dun it' mystery. The best part is, you focus ALL of your energies, and ire, and fury against one another, and never, ever against those who may have been in the wrong. Seriously?! That's about as stupid as bashing your alarm clock for waking you up in the morning. Hi, uhm, yeah, you set the alarm clock genius. Quit the god damned infighting and get pissed off at yourselves. Get pissed at yourselves for being so easily deceived into EITHER explanation. We get spoon fed our answers (regardless of which side you're on), and we happily accept said explanations as reality. Sadly, I liken humanity to a colony of ants, a few on the top reaping all the rewards, protected by a small bastion of loyalists (police, soldiers, et. al.), from the great majority of 'workers.' So, next time you're off patting yourself on the back, basking in the glories of your 'freedoms,' just remember, you're nothing more than a worker ant, carrying other peoples *beep* your entire life so they don't have to. Enjoy your slavery and 'happy consumering.'

This sig will self destruct in 5 seconds.

reply