---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> wrote :
On 10/14/2014 12:28 PM, salyavin808 wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> mailto:noozguru@... wrote : On 10/14/2014 12:14 PM, salyavin808 wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> mailto:noozguru@... wrote : And don't forget this video to help with your phobia: http://youtu.be/5bUlTR6uOFE http://youtu.be/5bUlTR6uOFE I've been googling for this "hard scientific evidence" she talks about. No luck yet. I'm sure the truth is out there..... It is and you don't have to try that hard. You just don't want to find it. My guess is she means something different than I do when she says "hard evidence". Theories about them having to have used nuclear bombs to bring down two of the three WTC buildings does not qualify, for instance. You might try the architects and engineers site about 9/11. You must have not watched the whole video because "hard evidence" was covered in terms of where to find it. But then it's useless for me to argue with you because if I said 2+2=4 you would argue it doesn't. But my current transits show that people will disagree with me but just for a few more days. ;-) You overvalue this conspiracy stuff, 2+2 actually does equal 4. The problem with the AE9/11 site is that there is no evidence for their beliefs, let alone anything that qualifies as hard science. The lengths they go to so it fits into the deliberate demolition narrative are absurd. Who the hell could have done it, and got away with it, without anyone noticing! What they have is an argument from personal incredulity - they don't understand so it can't be true. They don;t seem to be able to accept the evidence in front of them, I don;t blame them it was a weird day, in fact it's much more logical to accuse them of the sort of dissonance the psychologist in your video was talking about. if you watch the video of WTC7 collapsing of course it looks suspicious, but they don;t give you any of the facts that might help you judge whether their analysis is the correct one. Here's what you don;t see from the perspective of the video: As the North Tower collapsed on September 11, 2001, heavy debris hit 7 World Trade Center, damaging the south face of the building[38] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-NIST-june2004-38and starting fires that continued to burn throughout the afternoon.[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-ncstar1-a-8 The collapse also caused damage to the southwest corner between Floors 7 and 17 and on the south face between Floor 44 and the roof; other possible structural damage included a large vertical gash near the center of the south face between Floors 24 and 41.[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-ncstar1-a-8 The building was equipped with a sprinkler system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_sprinkler_system, but had many single-point vulnerabilities for failure: the sprinkler system required manual initiation of the electrical fire pumps, rather than being a fully automatic system; the floor-level controls had a single connection to the sprinkler water riser; and the sprinkler system required some power for the fire pump http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_pump to deliver water. Also, water pressure was low, with little or no water to feed sprinklers.[39] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-39[40] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-40 After the North Tower collapsed, some firefighters entered 7 World Trade Center to search the building. They attempted to extinguish small pockets of fire, but low water pressure hindered their efforts.[41] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-41 Over the course of the day, fires burned out of control on several floors of 7 World Trade Center; the flames visible on the east side of the building.[42] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-42[43] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-43 During the afternoon, fire was also seen on floors 6–10, 13–14, 19–22, and 29–30.[38] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-NIST-june2004-38 In particular, the fires on floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 continued to burn out of control during the afternoon.[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-nist-questions-9At approximately 2:00 pm, firefighters noticed a bulge in the southwest corner of 7 World Trade Center between the 10th and 13th floors, a sign that the building was unstable and might collapse.[44] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-hayden-44 During the afternoon, firefighters also heard creaking sounds coming from the building.[45] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-45 Around 3:30 pm, FDNY Chief Daniel A. Nigro http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_A._Nigro decided to halt rescue operations, surface removal, and searches along the surface of the debris near 7 World Trade Center and evacuate the area due to concerns for the safety of personnel.[46] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-46 At 5:20:33 pm EDT (according to FEMA), the building started to collapse, with the crumble of the east mechanical penthouse, but differing times are given as to what time the building completely collapsed: at 5:21:10 pm EDT according to FEMA, and at 5:20:52 pm EDT according to NIST.[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-fema-ch5-7[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-ncstar1-a-8[47] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#cite_note-47 There were no casualties http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualty_(person) associated with the collapse. Doesn't sound like the story the "truthers" tell... Good luck with your planets but it still seems to me that 2+2=4 here. The simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
