The Serious 9/11 Arguments Compilation.

originally posted by: CymaticA
a reply to: neutronflux

Ok, they fell in their own footprint while ejecting concrete and steel latterly in certain spots. If "falling straight down", and " into own footprint " causes you to think i backpedaled, then you are just going to the extreme on semantics and ignoring the entire point. Obviously when I said straight down, I was reinforcing the point that they went straight down just like an imploded building would.

You did completely ignore the fact that implosions can eject material much further than a city block. You completely ignore the fact molten steel was discovered at the footprint. How about over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes during the fall. How about thermite discovered in the dust samples. How about NIST refusing to make public the data they used in their simulations.

First, you got caught up in the truth movement lie the towers fell in their own footprint? Now you just look sad contradicting yourself with statements like:

Ok, they fell in their own footprint while ejecting concrete and steel latterly in certain spots.

Which is not the meaning of “it’s own footprint”.

And do you mean ejected material from certain spots resulting in totally destroying WTC 3,4, and 6 by hitting them with enough pieces to result in their collapse? Damaging WTC 5 with enough rubble to make it uneconomical to repair, and putting a 20 story gash in WTC 7?

How about another take for prospective?

By: sr1419
www.metabunk.org...

www.metabunk.org...

debunked-wtc-towers-fell-in-their-own-footprints.t1226/#post-29903

really? I think your "facts" need further review.

foot·print (ftprnt)
n.
1. An outline or indentation left by a foot on a surface. Also called footmark, footstep.
2. The surface space occupied by a structure or device: the footprint of a building;

Definition of VIRTUALLY
1 : almost entirely


Its true the buildings didn't topple over but they most certainly DID NOT come "straight" down- most material followed the path of least resistance- down..but a lot of material was ejected, thrown outward and otherwise did not come straight down. Over 40 other buildings were damaged by this "own footprint" BS.

Its a false meme. Cling to it if you must.

Second, quote where I said there was no explosions. Lots of things explode when heated. Air-conditioning compressors and refrigeration compressors in building AC units, vending machines, water coolers, refrigerators, and freezers? Batteries in large power backups for server rooms and networks. Fire extinguishers. Electrical transformers.

Third, I asked for video and audio evidence of explosions with the force to cut steel. Explosions that should be heard at least a quarter of a mile away from the buildings. Probably loluder than that if you are claiming the detonations hurled 5 to 20 ton pieces of buildings about? Care to post a video where a building implosion ejected one piece weighing over 5 tons out of a building over a couple of hundred feet out? Detonations that should have blown out windows. Detonations that should have sprayed the streets and bystanders with splintered steel resulting is shootgun like injuries.

Five, thermite? Are you saying thermite, which was originally used to weld rails together, hurled out 5 to 20 ton pieces of building.

Six, thermite? You mean from the paper by Jones or Harrit that was improperly peer reviewed? Never took the next step of discover by handing some of their sample over to independent labs for conformation? People were not able to replicate Jone’s results with samples of WTC dust better preserved, and had a better chain of custody?

Like below for example?

WTC Dust Study Feb 29, 2012 by Dr. James Millette
www.internationalskeptics.com...
Pist by: chrismohr
www.internationalskeptics.com...

Here is Jim Millette's latest reply to the new 9/11 Truth chant that "he didn't do DSC so his testing is invalid":

Chris,


My assessment of the situation is that researchers performed DSC on some WTC chips and found what they thought was an exothermic reaction. They then formed a hypothesis that this might be caused by thermite materials in the dust. As is required in scientific inquires their hypothesis was testable. They set out to confirm their hypothesis by testing the chips. Their microscopical analysis showed some results that they concluded were consistent with thermite or nano-thermite. I was asked to analyze the materials to see if I could confirm or not confirm their conclusion. My initial tests showed similar findings in terms of the characteristics of the chips. However, additional testing following analytical forensic methods showed that the chips were not thermite or nano-thermite. We repeated the tests on 4 different samples from different locations and found the same result – not thermite. It seems to me that the ball is now in their court. The DSC testing can suggest a type of material based on thermal properties but cannot be used to prove the existence of thermite. If they believe that the DSC results clearly show an exothermic reaction they need to come up with another testable hypothesis as to what the chips are as they are not thermite.

Jim

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: CymaticA

Avery simple argument. So now there is lateral ejection with any CD?

Below is a link that has the video of the inward bowing of WTC 2 that resulted in buckling of the outer columns, and initiated the collapse of the top of the building into the tower below.

the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/

www.metabunk.org...

There is no evidence of CD. Sorry.

There is more visual evidence of the collapse process than that tiny corner. The other building never showed that inward bowing, it had less than half the weight on the top section and the building came down at the exact same speed.

So the factors that brought down the buildings were incosistant, yet produced consistant results?

I think you are missing a factor that is consistant in both towers that was required for both collapse to occure at consistant speeds. Not free fall, but equal enough that their collapse innitiation had to come from equal forces.

You do realize the top of WTC 2 started to lean before collapse. Is that false. I think WTC 1 showed signs it would fail, and also had a slight lean.

But once the bowing that cased the leaning changed to buckling, the building was past the point of no return. The columns buckled, and the remaining columns had to fallow suit. Once the vertical columns lost all resistance to uphold load, gravity took over to pull straight down.

9/11 - The Top of the North Tower Is Leaning - NYPD Warning

m.youtube.com...

I gues saying the buckling was in a narrow band around the circumference of the building in an area relative to the jet impacts can be worded better? How about the buckling occurred in a narrow one to two story band relative to the jet impacts?

Anyway, here is more?

www.911myths.com...
AN ANALYSIS OF THE TIPPING OF THE UPPER SECTION OF WTC 2 By
F.R. Greening

5.0 Summary and Conclusions
The collapse of WTC 2 began with a tilting or rotational motion of the upper section of the Tower about a “hinge” at the 80th floor. This rotational motion, which commenced at a tilt angle  2, was caused by an almost instantaneous multi-column failure that eliminated the structural support on one side of WTC 2 near the impact zone. Once set in motion, the upper block moved with a nearly “free” rotational trajectory of a body pivoting under the constant force of gravity. This behavior was sustained at tilt angles up to about 25. Thereafter the motion of the block changed somewhat although the suggestion that the tilting suddenly stopped is not correct.
What appears to happen is that the tilting upper section was continuously crushed near the 80th floor by its own momentum so that the rotation was no longer that of a rigid body. Eventually the "hinge" at the northeast corner failed and the descending block took on a more vertical motion. Interestingly, once the hinge failed, and the pivot became frictionless, the motion of the center of gravity is predicted to become vertical, causing a shift in the rotational axis. Unfortunately, however, details of this stage of the WTC 2 collapse were obscured by smoke, dust and flying debris.
F. R. Greening
[email protected]
June, 2006

A lot of babble and nothing noting the issue i raised. Then again you did offer something consistant... you dont know what fruck your talking about.. again.

Then you explain what caused WTC 2’s outer columns to bow in, and then buckle to initiate collapse?

Or post actual evidence of detentions with the force to cut steel to initiate the twin towers’ collapse? A system that survived jet impacts and fires to initiate the collapse at the point of the jet impacts? A system the truth movement claims had to takeout the resistance of every floor to achieve the witnessed collapse rate?

Why do you ask questions and answer them with your own half-baked theories in the same sentence.

Are you asking questions or making statements?

a reply to: neutronflux

here's some reading material

originally posted by: CymaticA
a reply to: neutronflux

here's some reading material

Can you actually debunk the above with a logical argument? Or did you just link to some long winded truth movement propaganda?

a reply to: neutronflux

Did you actually read any of the papers in the link, or are you just going to assume it's truth movement propaganda?

You ignored half the points/questions I raised.

a reply to: CymaticA

Considering you cannot post video / audio / seismic evidence of detonations powerful enough to cut steel, let alone hurl 5 to 20 ton pieces out of the towers?

And you cannot point to actual physical evidence like splintered steel recovered from the injured, or with human remains.

And fizzle no flash bombs are mythical.

You don’t seem to understand the term in their own footprints, or you just like to back peddle.

More than three buildings were destroyed at the WTC

And the thermite papers were fraudulently peer reviewed, in a pay to play open journal, and the chips were found to be paint, primer, or epoxy. And Jones / Harrit have not handed their samples over to independent labs for independent verifications to complete the discovery process which peer reviewed is part of. And nobody else can find thermite in WTC samples. And Jones-Harrit will not publish the results of burning their WTC dust in an inert atmosphere as a go / no go test for thermite?

What evidence does you links have of actual physical evidence that is the result of planted explosives at the WTC?

Are they items like the truth movement posting pictures of steel columns cut by cleanup crews with thermal lances as fraudulent evidence of thermite?

a reply to: neutronflux

Considering you can't understand simple facts, such as an airliner crashing into the ground leaving no large debris is unheard of, or that a skyscraper doesn't just collapse straight down due to structural damage or fire, then I can't take you seriously. Forget the twin towers for one second, and look at wt7 aftermath and tell me that isn't in it's own footprint.

Convenient you can just use a buzzphrase like '911 truther' that allows you to ignore any evidence contracting the official story. It's pretty pathetic you can buy the fact that the airliner in Pennsylvania left ZERO debris, in the crash zone, large enough to indicate any jet crashed. That alone has never happened, ever. Yet you completely ignore that fact. The response you gave completely disregards what every other plane crash shows.

There's a laundry list of coincidence s and anomalies that happened in one day and you completely disregard it, then try to give legitimacy to that fact by saying "911 truther". I guess I'll just refer to you as a 911 truth denier.

originally posted by: CymaticA
a reply to: neutronflux

Forget the twin towers for one second, and look at wt7 aftermath and tell me that isn't in it's own footprint.

What do you class as its own footprint?

I only ask because I would class the footprint as the area the building stood on and the damage to other buidings and the debris field strongly suggest that the building collapsed outside of that area

a reply to: CymaticA

Classic let’s change the topic????

Considering you can't understand simple facts, such as an airliner crashing into the ground leaving no large debris is unheard!

And

or that a skyscraper doesn't just collapse straight down due to structural damage or fire, then I can't take you seriously.

How is a mostly hollow building supposed to collapse? Fall over like a solid tree?

And the towers just didn’t fall straight down. WTC 2 leaned out past its footprint before the buckling lead to a full blown collapse. The buildings fell so straight down, they damaged up to 40 other buildings?

WTC2 Initial Tilt with Draft Overlay
m.youtube.com...

9/11 - The Top of the North Tower Is Leaning - NYPD Warning
m.youtube.com...

Can you cite actual proof of detonations with the power to cut steel from the video, audio, seismic, or physical evidence at the WTC. Show the collapse of the towrs was caused by something other than buckling?

Or you just got classic truth movement falsehoods and innuendo?

a reply to: neutronflux

You avoided several other points earlier. I would to know how you can buy the bs narrative in Pennsylvania. I would like to know how you could buy the story of a passport found at ground zero yet no blackboxes.

a reply to: CymaticA

What was a high speed crash supposed to look like?

Something like this to start with for context?

F-4 Phantom Jet Aircraft Crash Test HD
m.youtube.com...

Dramatic new video: Moment of Reno plane crash caught on camera
m.youtube.com...

Passenger Plane Crash Outside Moscow: What we Know So Far
themoscowtimes.com...

Remains scattered

Almost 1,500 body parts and 500 plane fragments have been uncovered at the crash site, the state-run RIA Novosti news agency cited the search mission as saying.

Oh, I forgot. Jet crashes are supposed to look like something from a wile e coyote cartoon according to the truth movement?

originally posted by: CymaticA
a reply to: neutronflux

You avoided several other points earlier. I would to know how you can buy the bs narrative in Pennsylvania. I would like to know how you could buy the story of a passport found at ground zero yet no blackboxes.

If you cannot provide proof the WTC towers where brought down by planted explosives, the narrative kinda unravels?

And there is zero proof of CD.

a reply to: CymaticA

Passports and ID’s are often found at crash sites. Along with clothes and personal papers. Even shot down airliners?

Malaysia Airlines MH17 passengers’ luggage looted, credit cards stolen
www.news.com.au... ea1acc874acf8385b1

CREDIT and debit cards are among hundreds of items reportedly stolen from the belongings of dead passengers from Malaysia Airlines flight MH17.

And it is well recorded jet wreckage ended up in the streets surrounding the WTC. There are some personal effects recovered from the WTC site from the jets on display at museums.

It’s expected some personal items will survive jet crashes. Throw a piece of paper against a wall vs an egg and let me know the results.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: CymaticA

Passports and ID’s are often found at crash sites. Along with clothes and personal papers. Even shot down airliners?

Malaysia Airlines MH17 passengers’ luggage looted, credit cards stolen
www.news.com.au... ea1acc874acf8385b1

CREDIT and debit cards are among hundreds of items reportedly stolen from the belongings of dead passengers from Malaysia Airlines flight MH17.

And it is well recorded jet wreckage ended up in the streets surrounding the WTC. There are some personal effects recovered from the WTC site from the jets on display at museums.

It’s expected some personal items will survive jet crashes. Throw a piece of paper against a wall vs an egg and let me know the results.

So a passport survives an explosion of jet fuel yet 2 blackboxes were never found. Ok

Because the passport was with the jet wreckage in the street, and picked up before the building collapse. However, scores of ID’s were recovered by the hand sorting of WTC rubble at Fresh Kills. Also found were recognizable guns, wallets, and watches. 19,000 pieces of human remains recovered. Not a single piece of blasting cap, or a fragment of a triggering device.
I think no filing cabinets were found whole?

a reply to: CymaticA

I found the attitude concerning the Passport odd. It is a fact personal items are expected to survive crashes. The passport was not needed as evidence, or used as a key piece of evidence. So why plant it? Why the risk? If it was planted, it could have been anyone? Like a co-conspirator wanting to make sure the individual hijacker was made known?

a reply to: CymaticA

I think it’s sad people are suckered by the charlatans of the truth movement with false pictures of thermite cuts, fraudulent thermite research, and pseudoscience. People that enable the exploitation of 9/11, and ignore the real incompetence of the government.

Then provide evidence something other than inward bowing leading to vertical column buckling resulting in collapse for the WTC Towers? As seen in the video in the linked to thread below.

www.metabunk.org...

the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/

I find it odd I want to talk about the evidence in the actual video and audio of the Towers’ collapse. The actual moment the collapse was caught on video. From different angles. And the lack of evidence for planted explosives.

You want to change the subject to Shanksville and passports to prove planted explosives at the WTC?

Don’t worry, typical conspiracist’s behavior.....

You never answered why 2 blackboxes were never found yet passports were.

Looks like when I try and make a perfectly reasonable analogy my post get's deleted. It was an analogy not an off topic thread drift. Whatever

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: CymaticA

I think it’s sad people are suckered by the charlatans of the truth movement with false pictures of thermite cuts, fraudulent thermite research, and pseudoscience. People that enable the exploitation of 9/11, and ignore the real incompetence of the government.

Then provide evidence something other than inward bowing leading to vertical column buckling resulting in collapse for the WTC Towers? As seen in the video in the linked to thread below.

www.metabunk.org...

the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/

I find it odd I want to talk about the evidence in the actual video and audio of the Towers’ collapse. The actual moment the collapse was caught on video. From different angles. And the lack of evidence for planted explosives.

You want to change the subject to Shanksville and passports to prove planted explosives at the WTC?

Don’t worry, typical conspiracist’s behavior.....

Thats rich.

You complain that those that ask questions and deny the official BS story are exploiting 9/11, but you have no issue with a 20 year war on terror exploiting 9/11...

I think that those that buy into silly conspiracy theories from people that sell books and t-shirts are slightly less harmfull than those that buy into the official narative as justification to the mass murder of millions of innocent muslims accros the globe.

Your moral compass is severly fractured and you need help.