Bush's connections and now a possible connection to controlled demo consulting and planning company

a reply to: skyeagle409

That won't fly either. Case in point.

That wont work, case in point.

Exclusive
June 17, 2009
29 Structural/Civil Engineers
Cite Evidence for Controlled
Explosive Demolition in
Destruction of All 3 WTC
High-Rises on 9/11
More than 700 architects and engineers
have joined call for new investigation,
faulting official reports

www2.ae911truth.org...

Evidence for the Explosive
Demolition of World Trade Center,
Building 7 on 9/11

www2.ae911truth.org...

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade
Center Catastrophe

www1.ae911truth.org...

Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials

link.springer.com...

Direct Evidence for Explosions: Flying Projectiles and
Widespread Impact Damage

www.journalof911studies.com...

a reply to: skyeagle409

I guess you don't want to argue with the NYPD about what they saw just before the WTC buildings collapsed.

Cherry picking are we?

I guess you don't want to argue with NYC firemen who went on the written record of demolition and loud sounds of explosions at all three WTC?

a reply to: Informer1958

Your links have been debunked by civil and structural engineers, architects, demolition experts and seismograph operators.

To sum it up, you have no case.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Your links have been debunked by civil and structural engineers, architects, demolition experts and seismograph operators.

To sum it up, you have no case.

LOL, that is your "opinion" and the fact is, you have failed miserably to debunk any of my claims.

The fact is, The OS garbage doesn't stand up to credible science.

a reply to: Informer1958

I guess you don't want to argue with NYC firemen who went on the written record of demolition and loud sounds of explosions at all three WTC?

Of course not, and here is why.

Louie Cacchioli, 51, is a firefighter assigned to Engine 47 in Harlem

Cacchioli was upset that People Magazine misquoted him, saying "there were bombs" in the building when all he said was he heard "what sounded like bombs" without having definitive proof bombs were actually detonated.


Dominick Derubbio

It was weird how it started to come down. It looked like it was a timed explosion, but I guess it was just the floors starting to pancake one on top of the other.


FDNY Batallion Chief Brian Dixon

I looked up and you could actually see everything blew out on the one floor. I thought, geez, this looks like an explosion up there, it blew out. Then I guess in some sense of time we looked at it and realized, no, actually it just collapsed. That ís what blew out the windows, not that there was an explosion there but that windows blew out.


Craig Carlsen said that he and other firefighters “heard explosions coming from . . . the south tower

...there were about ten explosions. At the time I didn't realize what it was. We realized later after talking and finding out that it was the floors collapsing to where the plane had hit.

Nothing there about explosives as responsible for the explosions they heard. In fact, some firefighters attributed the sounds they heard to exploding gas lines, not explosives.

I was between LIHOP and MIHOP, but didn't believe demo was used, imo the planes and fire alone could collapse those buildings.

BUT, I've seen how it's possible and not just in real-life, but pre-wired skyscrapers are already a known things, like in the Get Smart episode.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Nothing there about explosives as responsible for the explosions they heard. In fact, some firefighters attributed the sounds they heard to exploding gas lines, not explosives.

Not credible.

No sources, no credibility.

a reply to: Informer1958

You know the sources because I posted the sources during my earlier replies to you.

a reply to: skyeagle409

You know the sources because I posted the sources during my earlier replies to you.

Opinions do not debunk claims, if you want to be taking seriously, then you would post your sources.

No you have never posted the sources to this information before.

If it comes from 911 Myth. or Debunking 911.com then it is not credible information, and probably made up.

a reply to: Informer1958

Exclusive
June 17, 2009
29 Structural/Civil Engineers
Cite Evidence for Controlled
Explosive Demolition in
Destruction of All 3 WTC
High-Rises on 9/11
More than 700 architects and engineers
have joined call for new investigation,
faulting official reports

Now, for some real numbers.

There are 123,000 members of ASCE(American Society of Civil Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report. There are also 80,000 members of AIA(American Institute of Architects) who do not question the NIST Report.

There are 120,000 members of ASME(American Society of Mechanical Engineers) who do not question the NIST report. There are also 370,000 members of IEEE(Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) who do not question the NIST report.

There are also 40,000 members of AIChE(American Institute of Chemical Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report. There are also 35,000 members of AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) who do not question the NIST report.

911-engineers.blogspot.com...

Just to let you know that the bogus information you posted from "AE 911 Truth" has been debunked with scientific evidence.

a reply to: Informer1958

Scientific evidence has debunked 9/11 conspiracy claims regarding 9/11.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Just to let you know that the bogus information you posted from "AE 911 Truth" has been debunked with scientific evidence.

Apparently this is all a game to you.

I don't think anyone on ATS takes you seriously, because I don't.

Your "opinions" that A&E has been debunked with scientific evidence is a fallacy.

I have asked you about 50 times or so, to show the scientific evidence and I am still waiting?

The fact is, You have no science, nothing.

a reply to: Informer1958

I don't think anyone on ATS takes you seriously, because I don't.

You have to understand that it is all about what the evidence depicts, not what you think.

Your "opinions" that A&E has been debunked with scientific evidence is a fallacy.

It is a fact and I have posted references to backup my claim and it is clearly evident that "AE 911 Truth" is not credible.

The Poorly Scripted Cognitive Infiltration of AE911Truth and Tom Sullivan’s Lies of Omission

Richard Gage’s Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth seems to be spreading more and more disinformation since Gregg Roberts has come on board and their latest foray into anti-detcord disinfo (Tom Sullivan section starts at 1:34:35 into the video) with CDI (primary suspect for the demolition of the Trade Centers) explosives loader Tom Sullivan, is no exception.

Tom Sullivan is now being paraded around as a former CDI employee, someone who took photos and “loaded” buildings with explosive charges for demolition. But in this video “interview” with Richard Gage, his story is wildly inaccurate as he contradicts himself over and over again and his real purpose (aside from undermining the controlled demolition investigation of 9/11 (much like Steven Jones’ “thermite” saga)) seems to be to spread deliberate misinformation about det cord to real Truth advocates.

empirestrikesblack.com...

a reply to: skyeagle409

You have to understand that it is all about what the evidence depicts, not what you think.

We have given you a mountain of evidence, you have only ignored it.

You are the one posting your "opinions" and many times giving no sources to back what you think. Turning the tables is all you have in defending the proven fallacies of the OS.

It is a fact and I have posted references to backup my claim and it is clearly evident that "AE 911 Truth" is not credible.

That is a proven fallacy.

I am done talking to you in this thread you have been very dishonest.

This thread is not about YOU.

This thread is not about YOU SPAMMING the OS propaganda either.

Your not credible.

a reply to: Informer1958

]I am done talking to you in this thread you have been very dishonest.

Facts and evidence speak louder than words.

a reply to: Informer1958

Your not credible. We have given you a mountain of evidence, you have only ignored it.

You've provided nothing of substance nor anything credible, and much of what you have posted has been debunked with scientific evidence and the laws of physics and has been spew by discredited Richard Gage and discredited "AE 911 Truth."

For an example, the very folks who were operating seismographs during 9/11 have said that their seismographs did not detect demolition explosions, which simply means that your claim regarding seismic data claim is false, which brings up this question: who supplied you with disinformation that seismic data depicted demolition explosions when seismograph operators have said their seismographs detected no such thing?

a reply to: FlyingFox

but pre-wired skyscrapers are already a known things, like in the Get Smart episode.

No they are not.
Explosives have an expiration date.

Point to one building that is pre wired.
Point to one building inspector that has or would ever approve occupancy for a build that has explosives in it.
You are living in an internet fantasy land.

a reply to: FlyingFox

BUT, I've seen how it's possible and not just in real-life, but pre-wired skyscrapers are already a known things, like in the Get Smart episode.

So you base your evidence on a 1960's comic TV show....?????

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: FlyingFox

BUT, I've seen how it's possible and not just in real-life, but pre-wired skyscrapers are already a known things, like in the Get Smart episode.

So you base your evidence on a 1960's comic TV show....?????

that's true come on folks don't open yourself up for ridicule, don't try to act like the show get smart was proof of anything here.