The video that 9-11, OS movement cant handle and rather pretend it dosnt answer EVERYTHING!

reply to post by easybreezy


This video has been posted multiple times before. Therefore I'm fairly confident that the material has been discussed and been debunked many times over.

Also your attack of 911files makes you look very juvenile and does not encourage debate with you. 911files is someone who does his own research and comes up with his own conclusions and also doesn't parrot memes developed by conspiracy theorists. You would be well served to follow his lead.

reply to post by huh2142


i try'd the search function, but its the 911 forums, same shi, same arguments, different day

just thought id bring a large amount to bitc# about today, plus my point was made in the first page, that's were we trap newcomers.

Sulfur residues in the steel. Some of the steel rusted. Thermite is claimed to cause all of these indicators, though these indicators are also present in the natural chemical makeup of the towers and the aftermath. All the chemicals he is mentioning are in paint. 38 minutes in.

So now he's describing thermite as a cutter charge. 1,3-diphenylpropane. This is supposedly an indicator of thermite. I'll need more evidence that it shouldn't be there in the circumstances of the collapse and fires. It seems like something Gage is presenting to make it sound more complicated and scientific than it is. 39 minutes in.

Now he's going over Jones' dust analysis, which I'll mention was put into a discredited paper that has not been peer-reviewed. Once someone tried to replicate his results, no replication could be achieved. Some have theorized that Jones got contaminated samples from a person's apartment. I consider this to be unknown.

Thus far, there has been very little actual information that would be uniquely figured out by architects and engineers. It has been rehashes of the popular conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11. They're going over the iron spheres now. There is not even the consideration that these might have come from processing of some type for fireproofing or something. The presenter is assuming a great deal. 44 minutes in.

They are just reasserting that liquid metal and thermite are responsible. There is not even a hint of questioning their own theory to see if it might be wrong.

None of them can be explained by fire? Yeah right, the fire protection was DAMAGED. I have to assume that these architects and engineers are incompetent if they can't understand that exposed steel is going to be damaged more by fire. They reference fires that were in buildings that had undamaged steel and intact fireproofing. This is just silly. 47 minutes in.

FEMA's report was corrected after a year or two. I remember this. This is true.

Claims that the investigations were not independent at all. Rapid oxidation, sulfidation, etc. Shows damaged and corroded steel. Could not hundreds of thousands of tons of weight and energy cause these deformations? They reference the report that was before the comprehensive report on Building 7, and then claim that they don't know. They came to a conclusion later on after more research along with NIST. 52 minute in.

Claims FEMA destroyed evidence. Says all the steel was removed. Apparently the warehouse with samples and the Fresh Kills Landfill are nonexistent to A&E for 9/11 truth. For someone who claims he is not a conspiracy theorist, this is not well evidenced ideas that simply must be a conspiracy. This is direct conspiracy theorizing.

He mentions that someone's opinion is that Building 7 must have been a demolition, and this is supposed to be evidence. 55 minutes in.

They were concerned about Building 7 collapsing. Said it was either going to come down or be brought down. Naturally, these conspiracy theorists only hear "brought down" and assume that the building was wired and demolished with silent explosives within a few hours on the same day. They know that flame and debris will rain down during the collapse because the building was on fire. Fire causes flame.

And here's BBC's accidental early report. This really is just a rehash of every conspiracy theorist's "gotcha" evidence that isn't really evidence. Media makes mistakes all the time, but this time, they magically had inside information that the building was going to collapse, when firefighters were pulled out and were telling everyone the building was in danger of collapsing. 59 minutes in.

"As clear as it is that Building 7 was brought down by explosives." It isn't clear at all based on this non-evidence.

He's going over the uniqueness of the tower design now, how it was revolutionary at the time, and no other high-rise had ever been built like it. Tube structure, mesh of steel on the exterior for horizontal loading. Concrete and trusses. Says it was all pulverized on 9/11. 5/8ths inch bolts. Dense core structure would have remained standing if the surrounding floor collapsed... just a second. It did remain standing! This happened on 9/11, when after a few seconds, the lack of horizontal support caused them to collapse. Is Gage ignorant? 1 hour, 2 minutes in.

Built with skyscraper crashes in mind. Designed to have a 707 crash into it. At what speed? Speed increases energy, but no one addresses this in conspiracy world. If the 767 was going at cruising speed or landing speed, I doubt the towers would have collapsed.

South tower took 56 minutes and North tower took 102 minutes to collapse. Every truss disengaged from the wall at high speeds? Oh, he's talking about FEMA again. NIST came to a different conclusion. Here he says shock from 9/11 kept people from being able to see what he sees.

Differences to demolitions: collapse at impact locations, wrong squibs, etc. 1 hour, 7 minutes in.

Sudden onset analysis.

reply to post by Varemia


TL: DR

like i said caught em in the first page

howz zatt! for psy ops

Originally posted by easybreezy
reply to post by Varemia

 

TL: DR

like i said caught em in the first page

howz zatt! for psy ops

edit on 24-6-2012 by easybreezy because: (no reason given)

If you're asking me and others here to sit through 2 hours of video, you can manage to read a few paragraphs of response to it. It's only fair.

reply to post by Varemia


steel has a tend-icy to flash rust after exposed to high heat(near melting points) then being dowsed with h2o releasing o causing rust

sorry dude you got caught up in this, this was meant for the likes of goodolddave (i have reasons to think he may not even be even)(note people with particular angles(spelling?), even avatar pics that portray a type MSG in them self), not someone as smart as you...
look ill try to make it up to you in future with some proper tech responses

right now in aust its 1: 30 am and ive been up for 2 days, so im not much use

again thank you for watching the video



un fortunately these people are around, and really get in the way of proper disscusion


some weeding is due

It's always sad to see a "truther" so confidently display what he thinks is intelligent, yet failing to realize that he/she is simply advertising their own credulity.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


note* this is just a honey pot op

probly find th'ell still pile in

All EMTs and Firefighters had to record their experiences. The city did not release the information, which Gage takes as evidence that they felt and saw explosions. Again, all of this happens AFTER collapse has initiated. No one ever mentions explosions or flashes before the building was already coming down.

Orange and red flashes, thought it was explosives. And now he posts the video with conclusively proven faked sound. It would be ridiculous if I had to go through the list of evidence proving that video to have false audio inserted into it. Sigh. 1 hour, 10 minutes in.

Now he is showing clips of reporters' opinions from the day, thinking it was like a demolition. Funny how he shows them describing explosions while the camera doesn't catch any explosive sound. I've seen demolition videos. All cameras catch the sound of charges.

Apparently Gage cannot tell that explosion does not equal explosive.

None of these explosions are part of the official story? They are very much part of the official story, but the official story doesn't assume that they are explosives. Only conspiracy theorists do that. They do not have the signature sounds of explosives. 1 hour, 13 minutes in.

Now he's describing how he thinks someone might be able to sneak into the core columns to plant demolitions. "We're not conspiracy theorists, but it's pretty obvious that someone needs to be asked some key questions." They're conspiracy theorists. To say otherwise is a downright lie.

Wireless detonations are not reliable in demolitions. That's why no respectable demolition company uses wireless. It's all wired. Now, demolition experts are describing destroying a building from the top by releasing energy at the right place, putting the top of the building in motion and causing a complete collapse through kinetic energy. Interesting, because that's how the towers came down, yet there is no need for explosives if it only needed to be severed at the impact floor. 1 hour, 17 minutes in.

He thinks that the explosion of fire as the building collapsed on itself was more fuel. Why can't it be the internal fire pushing outward? He's describing the smoke and debris coming out of the building as it comes down as evidence of bombs. This is just stupid. Apparently he thinks internal collapse can't cause debris and smoke.

They're not explosions, Gage. Seriously. 1200 feet of debris distribution apparently is symmetrical enough to still be considered the footprint. And here's Loose Change again. Not conspiracy theorists? Someone is lying to themselves. 1 hour, 21 minutes in.

NIST says that the puffs were from air being pushed out by pressure during the collapse. Gage says these velocities can only occur by explosive, which is wrong. He doesn't seem to grasp how quickly this pressure is building. He thinks that the air would just even out and be quiet and calm during the collapse.

It's not the path of greatest resistance... and here's Loose Change again. This is a terribly researched and awful quality video so far. 2 seconds slower than free-fall speed is SIGNIFICANTLY more resistance than free-fall. This is physics that is too complicated for the A&E for 9/11 truth to figure out. 1 hour, 24 minutes in.

Now Gage is doing the retarded box drop example. And he got applause for dropping on box on another box, and another box over air. This is just ridiculous.

He says half of the mass of the top was blown outside the building, and that the mass disappeared. Mass can't be destroyed Gage. It's still there, exerting weight and holding energy. It just isn't in one big piece. I've determined from this video that Gage may be mentally handicapped.

No, not free-fall speed. You already admitted it was slower, ya dingbat. Now he's appealing to the incredulity of the audience.

"Explosion, as opposed to implosion, a first in demolition history." If it's a first, how is it a comparison? One of the pictures of debris from the towers was debris from Building 7 on the building behind it lol. Gage did not do his research at all.

Apparently kinetic energy cannot throw things horizontally according to Gage. Silent explosives, however, appear to have rocket capabilities. 1 hour, 30 minutes in.

Pancake collapse doesn't mean that the floors stayed intact on top of each other. Idiot.

Dust clouds were large and thick, meaning to these conspiracy theorists that it was pyroclastic. I guess hundreds of thousands of pounds moving with hundreds of thousands of Joules of energy is not able to do anything. The fireproofing made up most of the dust, but Gage will never think of that.

How did he calculate the energy in heat needed to create the cloud? That makes no sense.

Can't fall quickly as well as damage things? How can he assert this? Has he calculated that there was not enough energy? How did he calculate this? I have seen no math at all. He is just asserting this.

He thinks fire and collapse can't pulverize a body. 1 hour, 36 minutes in.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


see what i mean?

Originally posted by easybreezy
hello, OS believers, id like you to take the time to watch this video.

it answers all of the subjects by the "official reports" as well as the eyewitness events and media.

subjects included but not limited to:
pancake theory
fire theory
floor sag theory
floor expansion theory
pile driver theory
building 7
Thermite
free fall rate
Explosive theory and the evidence there of
melting steel theory and evidence there of

Google Video Link

Seriously who do you think your kidding?

seeing is believing

edit on 24-6-2012 by easybreezy because: (no reason given)

OS should be termed (Official Story) not Official Reports.
Assuming Official Story is the 911 Commission Report-19 arab highjackers-Osama Bin Ladin theory
The scientific methodology of collapse of buildings is incomplete without the entire picture regarding (futures-put options-wall street-finances) including Hyperdimensional occult synchronicities and symbolisms (Dates Numbers Coincidences that are outside the scope of coincidental) Motive for controlling middle east (oil) etc.

reply to post by superluminal11


not unless i was referring to the reports as in the inquiry's the actual reports

Says that when you consider all of this at once, the official story is not possible. Because he thinks it is so unlikely, he thinks it is impossible to not be explosives.

And he returns to the FEMA report again. Someone called it a "half-baked farce" apparently. I guess Gage really doesn't like to even discuss NIST. Ah, he mentions it, but he just complains that he thinks they wasted the money they used to investigate.

He thinks that the investigation was flawed because they didn't model the collapse itself. Their investigation was for figuring out why the collapse started, not what happened during the collapse.

We have the known weight of the building mass and the mass of the columns to resist it. He says they didn't calculate the resistance because he thinks it would come out as not going to collapse at all. Didn't Bazant do a resistance calculation and determine that even in a perfect column-on-column collapse, the resistance would still be overcome? 1 hour, 41 minutes in.

Now he's doing a broad criticism of NIST's models, not even considering what each model was meant to model. The point is to keep changing variables until the model reflects closest to reality, while keeping variables within realistic limits.

Now he's talking about tests done on steel with fireproofing. Again, he's talking about steel that was protected, not like the damaged, unprotected steel in the towers. Gage is apparently an idiot.

Now he's reiterating opinions by random people. They are just describing what they felt like it looked like. Nothing professional or anything. I wanted to see evidence by engineers and architects, not rhetoric and opinion. Didn't these guys go to school to be able to do measurements and math? 1 hour, 46 minutes in.

Another guy saying what he thought the collapse looked like from the outside. Funny thing is that Gage is talking down to these guys for what they thought.

He says none of the features of the towers could be attributed to fire, but he has not proven any of it. He has asserted it and used popular conspiracy theorists one after another to make himself sound credible. It's not scientific at all.

And they applaud him for saying what he says is apparently being kept a secret. He says it's up to "you", the viewer to come to the decision about whether it was fire or demolition. Based on this shoddy evidence, it seems to be more likely to be fire to me.

Funny though, he won't accept any other conclusion than demolition. He calls you asleep, in shock, or scared. This video was crappy, the points were crappy, and everyone who didn't want to watch it made a good decision. The only way you can hold this video against anyone is by claiming it has things that it doesn't, and then getting in their face about not watching it.

Guess what. I watched it. It's full of bullhonkey. There.

pancake theory wont explain a damn thing!

debunk that

The only way one could find out would be to rebuild 4 WTC towers to exact specifications and run the test on the clock. (This is a time sensitive test) including the free fall when collapse begins.


One set of (WTC 1 and 2) just planes(same type of planes, speed, fuel on board etc) causing the damage
Second set of (WTC 1 and 2) same planes causing the damage with explosives strategically placed in the building by the best minds in Controlled Demolition. This Stephen Jones Thermate nano thermite whatever it is allowable in the test.



Special Note-
* With all space based weaponry turned off- That would be considered cheating.
HR2977

the floors bowing doesn't work!

debunk that