Video & Evidence There Was No Controlled Demo

Hi Griff, i can see that your a knowledgable guy , who knows his stuff.. But you are wrong about me, the insults earlier in the thread were way out of line and totally inacurate..
But i will dismiss no evidence, i am a scholar and a real truth seeker, if you can change my mind with undeniable evidence, i WILL change my perceptions, why dont we start afresh, i have no problem with you, and i have stated i dont buy the official line, although through research, coincidentally instead of believing a lot of the original CT's it has brought me more in line with the official story..
I am willing to answer what ever questions you pose, and in doing so if i come across something that warrants a change of opinion, i will gladly do so..
Lets start again hey between you and me, and go through this scientifically?
Where do you wanna begin?

gj ignoring my (and others') posts.


if you are unable to adress a single issue, like the 'meteorite' one i raised, or the standing cores, which really constitute solid evidence, IMHO, your pleas for evidence are little more than thread dragging.

dragging it out so people will not bother to read it all.




PS: i know the inevitable response, try www.abovetopsecret.com... for mine

[edit on 15.6.2007 by Long Lance]

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Where do you wanna begin?

Let's start at the beginning, the construction of the WTC complex itself.
The Bin Laden Construction Group had worked with and seemed to favor Yamasaki, and I don't know how accurate that information is, and according to architect Paul Laffoley, apparently they were involved in the construction of the WTC complex, and there was apparently some mention of planting explosives in the building during construction even then.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Long Lance
gj ignoring my (and others') posts.


if you are unable to adress a single issue, like the 'meteorite' one i raised, or the standing cores, which really constitute solid evidence, IMHO, your pleas for evidence are little more than thread dragging.

dragging it out so people will not bother to read it all.

PS: i know the inevitable response, try www.abovetopsecret.com... for mine

[edit on 15.6.2007 by Long Lance]

sorry, i have not been able to reply to every post, heres the Meteorite debunked.

Large pieces of debris, likened to meteorites by preservationists, are actually several floors of the towers compressed together as the buildings collapsed. Furniture, twisted metal, pipes, cords and even papers with legible type are visible. The pieces are kept in a humidity-controlled tent in Hangar 17 of Kennedy International Airport.

If you have any more questions, i will try and answer, i am not thread draggin, but over 160 posts in several days is a lot, and i have been doing my best to spend some time on it..
I apologize, but dont feel left out.

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Hi Griff, i can see that your a knowledgable guy , who knows his stuff.. But you are wrong about me, the insults earlier in the thread were way out of line and totally inacurate..

And I apologize. I can come off as an ass sometimes, belive me, I know. I really don't mean to most of the time.

But i will dismiss no evidence, i am a scholar and a real truth seeker, if you can change my mind with undeniable evidence, i WILL change my perceptions, why dont we start afresh, i have no problem with you, and i have stated i dont buy the official line, although through research, coincidentally instead of believing a lot of the original CT's it has brought me more in line with the official story..

You sound like a reasonable person. I do apologize for my paronioa earlier in this thread.

I am willing to answer what ever questions you pose, and in doing so if i come across something that warrants a change of opinion, i will gladly do so..
Lets start again hey between you and me, and go through this scientifically?
Where do you wanna begin?

Sounds good to me. Take care.

Originally posted by twitchy

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Where do you wanna begin?

Let's start at the beginning, the construction of the WTC complex itself.
The Bin Laden Construction Group had worked with and seemed to favor Yamasaki, and I don't know how accurate that information is, and according to architect Paul Laffoley, apparently they were involved in the construction of the WTC complex, and there was apparently some mention of planting explosives in the building during construction even then.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I admit Twitchy, i know absolutely nothing about this.

why is it that when someone disagrees with a given theory they are automatically expected to have a plausable alternative theory?

i can tell you in detail why explosives likely didnt bring those towers down yet i cant explain what did...does that invalidate my data?

i would hope we're more open minded than that.

but thats just me i guess.

Originally posted by Damocles
i can tell you in detail why explosives likely didnt bring those towers down yet i cant explain what did...does that invalidate my data?

No it doesn't and thanks to you, I no longer believe conventional explosives could have been used.

i would hope we're more open minded than that.

but thats just me i guess.

Don't worry man, you're words are not falling upon deaf ears (well, I am deaf in one ear but that's beside the point).

thanks griff.

see that should be the goal, process of elimination, weed out the crap and cross it off the list. that way the list gets shorter and the resources can be more focussed on theories that dont have immediate mundane answers.

my offer is still open to anyone who has legit questions about demolitions, ask and ill answer and ill answer in ways you can verify so you dont have to worry im giving you bogus info to fit my "agenda" (of which im not sure i have one) and if i dotn know ill just tell you i dont know.

so feel free to u2u me but dont think im the bad guy just cuz i dont think the towers were blown up by HE.

Originally posted by Fowl Play

Originally posted by twitchy

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Where do you wanna begin?

Let's start at the beginning, the construction of the WTC complex itself.
The Bin Laden Construction Group had worked with and seemed to favor Yamasaki, and I don't know how accurate that information is, and according to architect Paul Laffoley, apparently they were involved in the construction of the WTC complex, and there was apparently some mention of planting explosives in the building during construction even then.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I admit Twitchy, i know absolutely nothing about this.

Honestly, I don't that much about it either, but it's something I have been researching and trying to sort out while presenting it here.
I do know that we don't know, and while as cliche' as that might sound, it's the driving force behind my own research into the events of 9-11. It angers me to see people dismiss things out of hand with no better reasoning than their own preconceptions, but it absolutely infuriates me to see people come here with what I think to be interesting, if not compelling, alternative theories and get absolutely railroaded. Yeah Killtown, BSregistration, and some others weren't being coothe at all, but it wasn't because they were welcomed here for sure. I'm paraphrasing here, but I saw one member actually say he would actively work to keep what he considered wild theories off the site. Great, how many of those kinds of people do we have here on ATS?

Griff, thanks for the comments and its good we can discuss things scientifically, and deny ignorance, i am with you all the way, like this we may find some answers

Twitch, i totally agree with you too, i believe all evidence should be explored, i will look into what you say and see what i can find, i agree with you about being able to post what we want, but constant ridiculous posts , presenting no evidence is unacceptable imo, i dont agree Killtowns methods were beneficial to any true truther

sorry, i have not been able to reply to every post, heres the Meteorite debunked.

Large pieces of debris, likened to meteorites by preservationists, are actually several floors of the towers compressed together as the buildings collapsed. Furniture, twisted metal, pipes, cords and even papers with legible type are visible. The pieces are kept in a humidity-controlled tent in Hangar 17 of Kennedy International Airport.

If you have any more questions, i will try and answer, i am not thread draggin, but over 160 posts in several days is a lot, and i have been doing my best to spend some time on it..
I apologize, but dont feel left out.

the building burned for weeks, while firefighters were pouring tremendous amounts of water into the ruins. later they recovered

www.abovetopsecret.com...

this thing weighs tons, it doesn't matter if debunkers want to take a sledgehammer to it, because that's hypothetical, all i know is that if the claims wrt this object are even remotely accurate that explanations like 'friction' or 'compression' are cop outs.

the sad fact that most people overlook is that, while a mechanical hammer set will of course reach extreme surface pressures, a collapsing building by default (disintegrating) lacks the rigidity to do that, so the load is distributed over a relatively large area, ie. the basement.


all the while you're STILL ignoring the point about the standing cores, better hurry up and figure out a mechanism to explain it. surely going to be as entertaining as collapsed building == molten steel in the basement.

there are even witness reports of molten pools of metal and debunking the meteorite because it was obviously cleaned and prepared for display won't change that.

www.whatreallyhappened.com/thermite.htm

[edit on 15.6.2007 by Long Lance]

well if any of our members here arent dirt poor like myself, why not get some sheets of 2" thick steel, stand them upright, whip up some thermite (thermate if you could even find the components) and try a bunch of ways to see if one can even cut verticle steel of that thickness with it?

i mean we cant all be broke can we? seems a simple way to put this to bed, just do it, if it makes cuts like we've observed in photos then it moves to the plausable realm.

cmon, no mythbusters out there?


cuz ya'll DO know why high explosives likely could NOT have caused the 'meteorite" right?

Originally posted by Damocles
i mean we cant all be broke can we? seems a simple way to put this to bed, just do it, if it makes cuts like we've observed in photos then it moves to the plausable realm.

My question is: With all of professor Jones' experiments, why has he not done this? Or has he and not said anything because he can't get it to work? Last part is speculation on my part but I'd like to see it work and the results myself.

Originally posted by Long Lance

sorry, i have not been able to reply to every post, heres the Meteorite debunked.

Large pieces of debris, likened to meteorites by preservationists, are actually several floors of the towers compressed together as the buildings collapsed. Furniture, twisted metal, pipes, cords and even papers with legible type are visible. The pieces are kept in a humidity-controlled tent in Hangar 17 of Kennedy International Airport.

If you have any more questions, i will try and answer, i am not thread draggin, but over 160 posts in several days is a lot, and i have been doing my best to spend some time on it..
I apologize, but dont feel left out.

the building burned for weeks, while firefighters were pouring tremendous amounts of water into the ruins. later they recovered

www.abovetopsecret.com...

this thing weighs tons, it doesn't matter if debunkers want to take a sledgehammer to it, because that's hypothetical, all i know is that if the claims wrt this object are even remotely accurate that explanations like 'friction' or 'compression' are cop outs.

the sad fact that most people overlook is that, while a mechanical hammer set will of course reach extreme surface pressures, a collapsing building by default (disintegrating) lacks the rigidity to do that, so the load is distributed over a relatively large area, ie. the basement.


all the while you're STILL ignoring the point about the standing cores, better hurry up and figure out a mechanism to explain it. surely going to be as entertaining as collapsed building == molten steel in the basement.

there are even witness reports of molten pools of metal and debunking the meteorite because it was obviously cleaned and prepared for display won't change that.

www.whatreallyhappened.com/thermite.htm

[edit on 15.6.2007 by Long Lance]

If this is the tone of your previous questions, no wonder i didnt answer them.
Cleaned for display lol? why bother?... any answer, truth or not is irrelevant to you, you already have your mindset. If you change your tune, i may bother with an answer, but as of now, your not worthy of a serious response.. try learning a bit of etiquette... the tone in the thread has become respectful and scientific... If you refute clear proof and independant reports, as well as call eyewitnesses liars, this thread is not the place for you..
Reasoned debate backed up with fact and sticking to the topic of the thread is the manner we are posting in.

Originally posted by Griff

My question is: With all of professor Jones' experiments, why has he not done this? Or has he and not said anything because he can't get it to work? Last part is speculation on my part but I'd like to see it work and the results myself.

well its no secret what i think of dr jones' methods. his motivation and ideals may be in the right place (depending on your point of view i guess) but with his laboratory practices i really wonder how he got his phd, i mean im sure he is brilliant but come on, just cuz youre a DR doesnt mean you get to just throw out the basics especially if youre trying to prove a piont

my GUESS would be he hasnt gotten it to work, becuase im POSITIVE that if he had, there'd be a billion copies of the video all over youtube and ats.

More important Official Statements..

"The major concern at that time at that particular location was number Seven, building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing.

So for the next five or six hours we kept firefighters from working anywhere near that building, which included the whole north side of the World Trade Center complex. Eventually around 5:00 or a little after, building number seven came down." - Chief Frank Fellini

"The biggest decision we had to make on the first day was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story building heavily involved in fire. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt. I issued the orders to PULL back the firefighters and define the collapse zone. It was a critical decision; we could not lose any more firefighters. It took a lot of time to PULL everyone out, given the emotionalism of the day, communications difficulties, and the collapse terrain." - Fire Chief Daniel Nigro "Report from the Chief of Department," Fire Engineering, 2002, VOL 155; PART 9, pages 56-59

Notice the use of the word "Pull" this was in a 2002 report, could Silverstein be choosing words that he has read in official reports about the incident?
His interview is from after the release of this report. Is this significant?
Could " Pull it" mean pull everyone from the building surrounding area and let the buildinhg collapse?
They knew it was gonna collapse before it did, does this Debunk people knowing it was gonna collapse and even Controlled Demolition? and BBC1 were already told it was coming down , thats why it was reported in advance? Food for thought!!

[edit on 15-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

[edit on 15-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

[edit on 15-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Notice the use of the word "Pull" this was in a 2002 report, could Silverstein be choosing words that he has read in official reports about the incident?
His interview is from after the release of this report. Is this significant?

[edit on 15-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

Could be. My thoughts on the pull it comment are that he just wanted to look the hero and didn't use the correct wording. Either way you look at it, the statements he made don't make sense.

If he ment the building: Since when does a fire chief have the authority to demolish a building?

If he ment the firemen: Since when does Silverstien have the authority to tell a fire chief what to do?

I think he was just trying to make himself look the hero by saying "hey, look at me, I'm the one who saved all those firefighters lives by pulling them out". When in actuality the phone call would have only been to tell him "hey, your building can't be saved".

All just my speculation of course.

[edit on 6/15/2007 by Griff]

Finally!! a man that makes sense and knows better!!

I've been threading posts regarding this for months and have been subsequently attacked by theorists...well done old boy well done

Not sure if you mean me but thanks if you did. I try to give both sides credance in the debate. I try to have an open mind. Key word is try.