Former FDNY Firefighter, Rudy Dent: "Incontrovertible fact (WTC) buildings were brought down."

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I have quite a in depth knowledge of the events of 9/11 based on facts.

oh please do..........

give me your SCIENTIFIC facts pertaining to the collapses we all see occurring on 9-11.

then I'll put them somewhere for ya.....

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

if your are interested, I have a massive 10,000 word thread with lots of links

and not one of those items does ya a bit of good on this thread do they....or else you would have used them just to shut me up.....but alas...ya got nutin

what good is a 10,000 word thread of BULLSH*T...if ya can't use one bit of it to shut me up this morning?????

I do not believe that WTC7 was a controlled demolition.

great!!!

then PROVE the in place ASSERTION, that new physics took place ONLY on 9-11.....

duhbunker....proving fire will NULLIFY everything else...or don't cha get that concept.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I am very well read.

..AND transparent!

and you leave here stating.."I don't have to talk to you"?

Also i find it difficult to debate with a individual who has not so far, at least in this thread, stated what he/she believes caused the buildings to collapse.

because this is NOT debate, this is, if YOU support the official claim, then YOU provide the supporting evidence of those claims......it's called DEFENDING what you preach......so go refresh yourself with your 10,000 words and find a few that can support the bull that is pushed as truth.

a reply to: liejunkie01

Well, I have experience in the building industry, including structural engineering. I know what goes into designing a building to resist various loads. I also have a lot of knowledge of history, and have followed the 9/11 debates very closely for years. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that those buildings were demolished. The official conspiracy theory is a massive fraud and coverup.

All one has to do is to look at how the top of one of the first two towers literally disintegrated before our very eyes, rather than wind up on the street below, to conclude the building was demolished. There are so many holes in the official story that it's amazing anyone believes it at all.

a reply to: wmd_2008

And guess what, it was falling onto thousands of pounds of undamaged material would damage the falling materiel.
We all know newtons 3rd law and that does not change that day, or well some people think it did.
But we see the top section just fall straight down, nothing changes it's speed or direction, how is that possible if it is falling onto itself? What is causing the core to just give way?
Why does the core not resist anything? Was that being held up by the trusses and exo as well?
Or is the core from the top section just obliterating the core below the whole way down?

a reply to: wmd_2008

It is also documented by nist that the fires took place out of view, and after good ole larry decided to let his building burn, no firefighter entered the building so how can those fires really be documented?
Yes there was some that we could see from the windows, but how long did those last??
Those def did not burn uncontrollably for hours on end

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

if your are interested, I have a massive 10,000 word thread with lots of links, pictures and videos that provides some incite into why I do not believe that WTC7 was a controlled demolition.

And when was the last time you actually commented back on that thread???
In this same thread you say that you can take some of the OS reports as true but other parts as false.
I fail to see how that is possible! You admit they are lying, but only on some parts, not the others
You do nothing but ramble on about how well read you are and then quote one of our threads, always feeling the need to put in the letter count like that means anything.
You just touch on the free fall and, paraphrasing here, just say "well that is weird" and that is the end of that

a reply to: _BoneZ_

People say a lot of things.
Doesn't mean what he is saying is true, or that what he is saying is truthful.

a reply to: BilboBaggins3

"Whenever a theory appears to you as the only possible one, take this as a sign that you have neither understood the theory nor the problem which it was intended to solve."
Sir Karl Popper- Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach (1972)

Why would a person believe debunkers over an actual NY firefighter? Seems to me the debunkers could be paid government shills, but I don't see any monetary rewards for guys like the former NY firefighter in the video.

i thought we all knew this.
Why the 96 flag hype over this?

Anybody with a sence of reality would say the same thing.

originally posted by: ChiefD
a reply to: _BoneZ_

Interesting that there have been no responses yet, but three flags on this.

I don't believe what this man is saying is true. There have been many books out that have debunked these conspiracy theories on 9/11.

Do yourself a favor and take a physics class.

Take it to 60 Minutes (but, it probably will not pass the smell test).

a reply to: Zoyd23

Last I checked, Firefighters were people too.

These 9-11 conspiracy threads are the worst trash this site has to offer. Pathetic.

a reply to: jaffo
Great addition to the thread...
What is so pathetic about this forum. Can you actually offer something up?

a reply to: _BoneZ_

I will check out the video when I am not at work, but I can honestly say that NONE of those "credentials" make him qualified to state that this happened for a certainty.

Would you believe me if I told you that the gas cap on your car is make from radioactive waste just because I worked at Jiffy Lube?

a reply to: andr3w68

He lacks the years of schooling that it takes to get a degree in engineering. Like the people who say that this was MOST LIKELY not a controlled demolition.

You can't say "OH, he was there, so that makes him infallible in his testimony."

I respect him for his service to the public, and this man is braver that 99% of the population. But I don't think he knows what he is talking about.

originally posted by: VoxVirtus
a reply to: andr3w68

He lacks the years of schooling that it takes to get a degree in engineering. Like the people who say that this was MOST LIKELY not a controlled demolition.

You can't say "OH, he was there, so that makes him infallible in his testimony."

I respect him for his service to the public, and this man is braver that 99% of the population. But I don't think he knows what he is talking about.

But within half an hour or so the MSM was quoting the famous Harley guy that was supposedly just a citizen on the street.

He took the time to explain the "Pancake Theory" to us peons on National news and on every channel.
And I ask this......What were his qualifications that day?

Regards, Iwinder

It's so sad that people can't do the research themselves. Of course it was planned! of course it was a set-up! just do the research yourself! I'm positive that an airplane also flew into the Pentagon, the fire of course melted away all engine parts too! so positive I bet my talking unicorn on it Honestly, beware of the agenda.