haroki and all those who say nist investigation was fair and well researched are morally and intellectually bankrupt: http://www.911blogger.com/node/4324
Don't cry Bitty, not ALL of us are against you.... It must suck to be you, eh? After spouting your cocamamie stories, do you notice people laughing when you walk away? Ever wonder why?
This thread is inexorably moving in the same direction as the intelligent design thread. Over there, they have been forced to admit that their beliefs are a matter of opinion, and that they have no actual proof or even way of proving that life on earth was created by God. They are now talking about 'intuitive' proof over there. Yes, intuitive indeed. Same thing here. The 'proofs' we are hearing about are a pop on an audio tape, a puff of smoke in a video tape, and arguments by non-engineers about 'free fall' and demolition theory. On the evidence of these 'proofs' we are asked to believe that George and Laura Bush, acting in concert with Osama bin Laden, planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks. Another thing that no one seems to have brought up.... if WTC 7 or the twin towers were brought down by a planned controlled demolition, how is it possible that no one working there, no one in the neighbourhood, no tourists wandering there, no one ever saw any of this work being done? Do the conspiracy theorists have any idea how big a job it is to rig buildings like these to fall perfectly cleanly? Do they think that it would be possible to do all this work without someone noticing something? When was this work done? If it was being done surreptitiously, it would have taken several months at least, months of sneaking around doing small bits of the job. Did they clean everything up at the end of every shift so that there was no trace of their being there? Rigging a huge building to fall means selectively demolishing certain internal supports before the actual detonation, so that the building will fall completely and cleanly. Did the crews blow up and blowtorch these internal structures during stat holidays? When no one was looking?
poor gullible hibashi, why do you think nist avoids the pancake theory like the plague?? can you fathom a guess? LOL LOL LOL chopper boy go trade your 1 lots. just for humors sake... where do you stand on the pancake theory now... you have "waffled" more than a few times. somewhere john "flip flop" kerry is very proud. so do all of us a favor and inform us of your pancake preference. yes, no, too scared to voice your opinion so you sit on the fence? i love it. an expert iron worker, hedge fund manager and now John Kerry protege... we are honored by your mere involvement on our lowly forum.
i can't attest to the accuracy, plausibility etc, but it does seem like unusual work was being done, and that it was brought to the 911 commission's attention http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEJmcvTzYfo
One more time - now pay attention, son.... NISTâs findings do not support the âpancake theoryâ of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor systemâthat connected the core columns and the perimeter columnsâconsisted of a grid of steel âtrussesâ integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram below). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon. Look at the first sentence - they don't support the pancake theory OF COLLAPSE. In other words, they say that it didn't CAUSE the collapse, right? We're in agreement on this Ratboy... And now - ) The NIST said, the heat from the fires sagged the trusses which bowed the columns inward CAUSING the collapse. Pancaking did NOT cause the collapse. We're in agreement here too, right? 2) The evidence on the ground strongly indicates, after the collapse began, the building pancaked spreading the debris as we see below. The NIST never studied this so how could we be in disagreement? I recently E-mailed the NIST to verify this. Here is their response: NIST did not describe the specific sequence of events after global collapse initiated. The progression of global collapse was induced by the failure of the supporting structure (columns carry vertical loads; floors hold columns together, they do not carry vertical loads). NIST's investigation focused on the factors that led to the initiation of collapse, rather than the sequence of events after the collapse initiated. Sincerely, WTC Investigation Team Follow the sequence here - 1-NIST says they do not describe the sequence of events after the collapse initiated. 2-Pancaking occured AFTER the collapse initiated. 3-Therefore, any pancaking wasn't investigated by NIST, because it falls outside the scope of their investigation. Does this make sense to you yet? DO you see why they woud avoid investigating it? It's because anything that happened AFTER the collapse began is irrelevant. Can you follow the logic, or is it lost on you? Conspiracy theorists use the original hypothesis - which wasn't created by the government, and which was wrong - to say the NIST can't be trusted, but that's the way all science is. They look at the evidence and create a hypothesis, test the hypothesis against the evidence and if new information comes out, they change the hypothesis accordingly. You would think if the NIST was going to lie, they would just build the lie around the first hypothesis. That they changed it only shows independence. Ironically, Professor Jones has changed his paper numerous times, yet the conspiracy theorists don't cast doubt on whether his paper is correct. Proof of the pancaking effect is the core columns, which can be seen collapsing seconds after the perimeter columns hit the ground. http://www.debunking911.com/g02.jpg See the core columns? See the debris piled around them? The floors basically fell straight down, I think we're in agreement on that, right? So if you want to give another name to it, that's fine by me......
LOL........ read my lips.. i will go slowly.... C...O...N...T...R....O...L...L....E...D D....E....M....O....L....I....T...I...O...N
But the thing is, a controlled demo would be the CAUSE of the collapse. I thought we agreed that the columns buckling, etc was the cause.I'm talking about manner in which it fell after the collapse began. Too bad you can't get that through your thick skull. Because if you could, you'd be able to see the difference we have, and see that I'm not claiming that pancaking was the cause..... Oh well...
You're wasting your time on these idiot CT'ers. Most of these dopes wouldn't even know how to light a cutting torch, let alone use one. They haven't a clue as to how huge of a demo project this would have been. Impossible to hide, IMPOSSIBLE! What is far more frightening than some idiotic CT is the incompetence and total indifference of our government and it's agencies. These motherfuckers watched all the events leading up to the attack and did nothing to prevent it. Why? Because they're arrogant, egotistical pricks. They refuse to communicate with each other fearing someone other than themselves might get credit for "saving the day". They are so completely self absorbed in their own bullshit that they are willing to watch people die rather than work together. THAT, is what should scare the shit out of everyone, not some moronic conspiracy that Bush orchestrated 9/11 which would have required more competence and unity that this government will ever have.