Suit yourself, I'm just not ever going to buy the "official story". I've had years on this issue and to me you just sound like a newbie to it all and very, very naive.

On 10/14/2014 02:15 PM, salyavin808 wrote:

---In, <noozguru@...> wrote :

On 10/14/2014 12:28 PM, salyavin808 wrote:

    <>, <noozguru@...>
    <mailto:noozguru@...> wrote :

    On 10/14/2014 12:14 PM, salyavin808 wrote:

        <>, <noozguru@...>
        <mailto:noozguru@...> wrote :

            And don't forget this video to help with your phobia:


                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

        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
    and starting fires that continued to burn throughout the
     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
     The building was equipped with a 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
    <> to deliver water. Also,
    water pressure was low, with little or no water to feed

    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
     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]
     During the afternoon, fire was also seen on floors 6–10, 13–14,
    19–22, and 29–30.^[38]
     In particular, the fires on floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13
    continued to burn out of control during the afternoon.^[9]
    At 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
     During the afternoon, firefighters also heard creaking sounds
    coming from the building.^[45]
     Around 3:30 pm, FDNY Chief 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]
     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]
     There were no casualties
    <> 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.

Reply via email to