[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
9/11 See other 9/11 Articles Title: Confessions Of A 911 Hitman Confessions Of A 911 Hitman Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top Page Up Full Thread Page Down Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 78.
#1. To: robin (#0)
(Edited)
Demolitions don't work that way. In fact demolitions won't bring down a building in and of themselves. That is why they spend more time gutting the inside of buildings and weakening the superstructure because the explosions would not do a thing in terms of getting the building to implode and fall down in a precise manner.
In fact demolitions won't bring down a building in and of themselves. That is why they spend more time gutting the inside of buildings and weakening the superstructure because the explosions would not do a thing in terms of getting the building to implode and fall down in a precise manner. Which is exactly what the man who wrote this saying, that it took years to plan this and months to prepare the building. BTW, have you watched any of the excellent 9/11 videos that have been made this year?
Sorry - this theory fails Occam's Razor theorem.
Have you seen any of the excellent 9/11 videos made recently? They explain with high school physics how the buildings fell at the rate of free fall and that this only happens in a demolition. They also show the squibs (the explosives going off under each falling floor) that precede that fall. They also interviewed some of the surviving tenants of the building who describe some of the odd goings on before 9/11. They also replay the sound of some powerful explosions that precede the fall of each tower. They also play the video of Larry Silverstein, who coincidently owned all 3 buildings that fell that day, saying on the video "so I told them to 'pull it'". He used a term used in demolitions regarding WTC7.
Wow - he let the bag out on a PBS interview - LOL - it was not a slip heard on some CB. People don't tell you that - they make it sound like his calls were intercepted. It was in reference to pulling out of WTC 7 and not trying to save it.
Not true, have you seen the video interview where he says exactly "pull it"?
Yes. Have you?
Do you too believe that the buildings pancaked on top of each other; yet managed to fall at the rate of free fall? So since the floors were around the steel center core, why isn't the core still standing? The pancake theory doesn't hold water regarding the center core and no one who tries to hold that theory can ever explain the center core not still standing. But demolition explains everything.
So since the floors were around the steel center core, why isn't the core still standing? The freefall rate is one man's work based on his own assumptions - a man not involved in the construction or demolition industry. The steel core is what to you? Some super duper adamantium structure? Like one long solid bar of steel that would be left standing like a pipe? Come on - you are making stuff up as you go along based on cartoon notions of pyhsics. Physics as composed by Bugs Bunny.
Blatantly false. The time has been proven by numerous researchers. Professor Steven Jones is a respected physicist and his research has been peer-reviewed.
Name the peers - dare ya. The paper has been the center of controversy both for its content and its claims to scientific rigour. Engineers have dismissed the controlled demolition hypothesis with reference to the consensus that has formed in the engineering community about the collapses.[19][20] Jones's early critics included members of BYU's engineering faculty[21] and shortly after he made his views public, the BYU College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences and the faculty of structural engineering issued statements in which they distanced themselves from Jones' research. They noted that Jones' "hypotheses and interpretations of evidence were being questioned by scholars and practitioners", and expressed doubts about whether they had been "submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review."[22] While Jones has always maintained that the paper was peer-reviewed prior to publication, doubts about this remain. On Thursday, September 7, 2006, Jones removed his paper from BYU's website at the request of administrators and was placed on paid leave. htt p://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E._Jones#WTC_collapse_controversy
The paper has undergone significant modifications following a third set of peer reviews organized by Journal of 9/11 Studies Editor Kevin Ryan. An earlier version was accepted for publication in a volume edited by David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott, 9/11 And The American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out, Northhampton, MA: Interlink Publishing. Do your own research, shill.
#91. To: angle (#78)
I call for the elimination of America and I am a shill?
Top Page Up Full Thread Page Down Bottom/Latest |
||
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|