Funny, all of those questions have been reasonably answered here : http://www.debunking911.com/ and other linked sites..... And yet, I'm the one that hasn't done any research... You seem a little more logical, so let me explain how this works, since others don't seem to have much of a brain, or they're too scared to argue their point on the merits of their evidence. 1. - Cters have a question about ... A 2. - those sites will respond with... B Now, to refute B, you need to come up with statement... C. And in C, you must show a logical reason why B should be discounted. And if you can't come up with C......... A few questions - have you seen that from any of the Cters? Or is their modus operandi to say 'LOLOLOL'..... or 'watch the Goole video'.... Or to shout 'Wake up sheeple'... If you want to impress a few here, come up with C..... I double dog dare you..... I'll even give you a starting place. Why the towers came down as fast as they did is fully explained at the above site, and at other sites linked there. Read their explanation, do some research from the CT side, and use that research to explain WHY the debunking explanation should be discounted. And I don't believe it and LOL won't cut it either, bro.....
Logic? Rationale? What part of "I saw it on Google Video" do you not understand? To be totally honest, I am kind of disappointed. It was better when there was a chance that you actually believed this stuff. If you're just another brain-dead cunt of a bigot, all the fun sort of goes out of it. After all, brain-dead cunt bigots (like you) typically don't believe all the garbage they spew - they do it because it gives them sexual gratification. bsboy's little meter is rising as he thinks of dead Jews. C'mon little meter!!
So its the battle of websites i see. I can provide you several websites that debunk your debunking attempt.. But I asked you a few questions and you provide me this. Why do you believe our government? Simple question. PS. Bombs were felt and heard that day my friend. No way did those towers fall that fast at near freefall speed as alleged on your websites.How come so much debris was thrown out almost 500 feet way from the towers and where are the pancakes? Why was everything reduced to powder?Too much energy was expended to do the results from just a collapse, A total collapse at that.Do you know how improbable a total collapse as it that speed? No website will ever explain all this away.
Clearly you've never seen footage of, or made the effort to learn about the science behind a big landslide. If you had, you would know, even in a non-scientific way, that large volumes of solid matter moving at high speeds start to behave exactly like liquids. The only thing that's surprising is that the 'wave' of material splashing out at the foot of the buildings didn't travel farther than 500 feet. Imagine a column of water as high as the trade centres. Now imagine it suddenly collapsing straight down. Get the picture? Re: why was everything reduced to small rubble... is this a serious question? One thing that has become abundantly clear is that the intersection between the set of structural engineers and the set of CT nutbags is 0. Anyhow... this has been posted as a refutation countless times. The CT'ers just plug their ears and say 'We can't hear you'. It's much sexier, after all, to imagine a huge conspiracy involving that well known heroin trafficker, George Bush Senior, Osama and KBR, the International Zionist Bankers, and the man in the Moon.
each floor would have given resistance ... the 2 big problems of the fantasy pancake theory is speed due to this resistance ... and if everything resulted into dust.. which it did in fact do.... then what force kept collapsing the floors? there were no concrete floors after the collapse.... just dust.. this includes all furniture, computers, everything except the steelbeams which mysteriously had 45 degree angled cuts. unfortunately this evidence was removed from the crime scene illegally by rudy almost immediately. which by the way is a felony.
wow.... you guys win. i just saw the light... if the twin towers were liquid, that explains everything. freefall of water.... great analogy. please show me one photo or video of stacked floors at the base of ground zero??? for your theory to hold water (pun intended), there would need to be evidence of this great force. that mimicked water. (sigh) we have been debating fools, that makes us the losers.
not to mention only the outside square was concrete.. the core was made up of extemely thick steel beams, with 45 degree angled cuts in them.
you haven't been debating anyone. you've simply been laughed at. to believe there was a massive conspiracy, one would have to really, really want to believe in one. "the floors pancaked" is your proof???? do a quick calculation of the potential energy stored in 20 floors 1/4 mile in the air. What do you think, they'd just stop in mid-air after the initial floors gave way? this thread is a cesspool of stupidity, much like all of them.