Mark F
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2013
- Messages
- 8,814
- Reaction score
- 3,835
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
I know what your thinking - shocking, right? :think:
Trust me, no one was more shocked than I to learn that it was actually terrorist d-bags flying Kamikaze Boeing's after 13 years of people bombarding me with the idea that steel buildings can only collapse if someone wires them up ahead of time with things that go boom (or that don't go boom, depending on one's particular brand of reality-distortion). But alas it is true, none of the Twin Towers or 7 World Trade Center (or Fiterman Hall, the Duetsche Bank Building, St Nicholas Church, the Marriott, or 4, 5 & 6 WTC for that matter) were pre-wired with:
*High-Explosives
*Hush-A-Booms
*Squibs
*Mini-Nukes
*[/b]S [/b]uper [/b]H [/b]igh [/b] I[/b]ntensity [/b] T [/b]herm_te
*Energy Beams from space
*Sharknado's
*Or anything else,...
For 13 years we have been listening to Conspiracy Theorists make wild accusations of Controlled Demolition (CD) but they have never presented a plausible case to prima facie standard. They don't even try - because they can't. :boohoo: They just know it was and if you don't agree with them you are a sheeple, government shill, etc, etc, etc,... Only they know the real truth. The rest of us are but mere buffoons.
:allhail
How do they know?
*Why, because it looked like a Controlled Demolition (so it must have been)
and/or
*The building(s) feel at free-fall speed or at least at near free-fall speed (whatever that means)
and/or
*The building(s) fell symmetrically (or near-symmetrically - see above) and in their own footprint
and/or
*The collapses defy the laws of physics
And of course that time-honored classic,...
*Never before has a high-rise steel building collapsed from fire (thus it can never happen because nothing that has never happened before can ever happen).
Part 1: Does it Look Like a CD?
So what about the belief that it looked just like a Controlled Demolition? Well, the 3 WTC building collapses sort of did... except for all the parts that didn't look like a CD, which is just about everything and obvious at anything beyond very casual observation.
Most people will only have experience of what a building looks like as it collapses by watching an actual known Controlled Demolition, either in person or on video. That is their only frame of reference. So when a building falls due to some other cause (which is thankfully exceedingly rare, as it should be) the fact that it falls sort-of similarly (ie: in the direction of gravity - what other way could it fall) it is easy, even natural to say "hey, that looks like a CD". But because it looks like a CD, does not prove it is a CD. To say that after watching a short Youtube video a couple of times the collapses look "just like a CD" isn't evidence, it is an observation and observations are open to interpretation. Unless you are an expert in controlled demolitions who has participated in at least dozens, hopefully hundreds of such events the observation likely isn't very useful.
There is nothing about the Twin Towers falling that looks "exactly" like any Controlled Demolition. They are in fact as good an example of totally uncontrolled destruction of a major building that one might find (ie; 'top down' destruction, debris scattered over several blocks, massive collateral damage, etc, etc,…).
And let's not forget the elephant in the room - the part Conspiracy Theorists have to conceal: what the collapses sound like, which is NOTHING like any explosive CD which has ever been done. EVER. And of course the fact that not a single piece of steel shows the effects of demolitions explosives or incendiaries. Zero. Nor has any other physical evidence for any type of demolition been discovered, by anyone, EVER.
But there is a bigger problem,…
Why CD the Twin Towers or 7? What purpose is served by this? What possible, plausible motive justifies the enormous risk and challenge of demo'ing these buildings? Why would the evil inside-job plotters go through so much effort of wiring a building with devices, using hundreds of people whose highly obtrusive work could be found out or who might later spill the beans over a pint or to get their 15 minutes on Oprah, setting up the building to fall contrary to all other controlled demolitions, when crashing a plane without the towers falling would have just as much a profound effect?
In other words, why demo the buildings at all? What purpose does that serve the plot that makes it worth the enormous trouble and risk? Why is it necessary?
Starting a war? The problem with that explanation is that you don't need the towers to collapse for the plan to work. Crazy foreign people seizing control of civilian aircraft and impaling them in the sides of some buildings right here on American soil would be horrifying enough on its own to warrant whatever action even without the collapse of any buildings. The terrorist attack was about instilling fear, not real estate.
In other words, that any buildings collapsed at all, far from being the central focus is at best incidental and probably the least important aspect of the whole narrative.
So why not simply crash aircraft and let the chips fall where they may?
Of course the real reason CT's believe there was CD at the WTC is because they believe the government (or the Jews, or the NWO or whomever) is evil and responsible for all evil things that happen in the world. If they accept the WTC towers could have collapsed because of aircraft impacts they have to accept that the whole thing could have been done by 19 terrorist d-bags doing what terrorist d-bags do. CD is the only way to ensure the ____________ can be blamed, therefore to satisfy their ideology they have to believe there was CD, no matter what the evidence actually tells us.
The Twin Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed due to the combined effects of structural damage from high speed impact of a large aircraft, intense fires raging across multiple floors simultaneously, compromising of the buildings safety systems, time and gravity. 7 World Trade Center collapsed due to all of the above less the aircraft impacts - so it took longer.
The fundamentals of the collapses of both World Trade Center Twin Towers and of 7 World Trade Center are easily explainable by aircraft impacts and fire plus time and gravity to anyone who wants to learn (who drops the ideological baggage) AND can grasp high school level physics.
(to be continued,...)
Trust me, no one was more shocked than I to learn that it was actually terrorist d-bags flying Kamikaze Boeing's after 13 years of people bombarding me with the idea that steel buildings can only collapse if someone wires them up ahead of time with things that go boom (or that don't go boom, depending on one's particular brand of reality-distortion). But alas it is true, none of the Twin Towers or 7 World Trade Center (or Fiterman Hall, the Duetsche Bank Building, St Nicholas Church, the Marriott, or 4, 5 & 6 WTC for that matter) were pre-wired with:
*High-Explosives
*Hush-A-Booms
*Squibs
*Mini-Nukes
*[/b]S [/b]uper [/b]H [/b]igh [/b] I[/b]ntensity [/b] T [/b]herm_te
*Energy Beams from space
*Sharknado's
*Or anything else,...
For 13 years we have been listening to Conspiracy Theorists make wild accusations of Controlled Demolition (CD) but they have never presented a plausible case to prima facie standard. They don't even try - because they can't. :boohoo: They just know it was and if you don't agree with them you are a sheeple, government shill, etc, etc, etc,... Only they know the real truth. The rest of us are but mere buffoons.
:allhail
How do they know?
*Why, because it looked like a Controlled Demolition (so it must have been)
and/or
*The building(s) feel at free-fall speed or at least at near free-fall speed (whatever that means)
and/or
*The building(s) fell symmetrically (or near-symmetrically - see above) and in their own footprint
and/or
*The collapses defy the laws of physics
And of course that time-honored classic,...
*Never before has a high-rise steel building collapsed from fire (thus it can never happen because nothing that has never happened before can ever happen).
Part 1: Does it Look Like a CD?
So what about the belief that it looked just like a Controlled Demolition? Well, the 3 WTC building collapses sort of did... except for all the parts that didn't look like a CD, which is just about everything and obvious at anything beyond very casual observation.
Most people will only have experience of what a building looks like as it collapses by watching an actual known Controlled Demolition, either in person or on video. That is their only frame of reference. So when a building falls due to some other cause (which is thankfully exceedingly rare, as it should be) the fact that it falls sort-of similarly (ie: in the direction of gravity - what other way could it fall) it is easy, even natural to say "hey, that looks like a CD". But because it looks like a CD, does not prove it is a CD. To say that after watching a short Youtube video a couple of times the collapses look "just like a CD" isn't evidence, it is an observation and observations are open to interpretation. Unless you are an expert in controlled demolitions who has participated in at least dozens, hopefully hundreds of such events the observation likely isn't very useful.
There is nothing about the Twin Towers falling that looks "exactly" like any Controlled Demolition. They are in fact as good an example of totally uncontrolled destruction of a major building that one might find (ie; 'top down' destruction, debris scattered over several blocks, massive collateral damage, etc, etc,…).
And let's not forget the elephant in the room - the part Conspiracy Theorists have to conceal: what the collapses sound like, which is NOTHING like any explosive CD which has ever been done. EVER. And of course the fact that not a single piece of steel shows the effects of demolitions explosives or incendiaries. Zero. Nor has any other physical evidence for any type of demolition been discovered, by anyone, EVER.
But there is a bigger problem,…
Why CD the Twin Towers or 7? What purpose is served by this? What possible, plausible motive justifies the enormous risk and challenge of demo'ing these buildings? Why would the evil inside-job plotters go through so much effort of wiring a building with devices, using hundreds of people whose highly obtrusive work could be found out or who might later spill the beans over a pint or to get their 15 minutes on Oprah, setting up the building to fall contrary to all other controlled demolitions, when crashing a plane without the towers falling would have just as much a profound effect?
In other words, why demo the buildings at all? What purpose does that serve the plot that makes it worth the enormous trouble and risk? Why is it necessary?
Starting a war? The problem with that explanation is that you don't need the towers to collapse for the plan to work. Crazy foreign people seizing control of civilian aircraft and impaling them in the sides of some buildings right here on American soil would be horrifying enough on its own to warrant whatever action even without the collapse of any buildings. The terrorist attack was about instilling fear, not real estate.
In other words, that any buildings collapsed at all, far from being the central focus is at best incidental and probably the least important aspect of the whole narrative.
So why not simply crash aircraft and let the chips fall where they may?
Of course the real reason CT's believe there was CD at the WTC is because they believe the government (or the Jews, or the NWO or whomever) is evil and responsible for all evil things that happen in the world. If they accept the WTC towers could have collapsed because of aircraft impacts they have to accept that the whole thing could have been done by 19 terrorist d-bags doing what terrorist d-bags do. CD is the only way to ensure the ____________ can be blamed, therefore to satisfy their ideology they have to believe there was CD, no matter what the evidence actually tells us.
The Twin Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed due to the combined effects of structural damage from high speed impact of a large aircraft, intense fires raging across multiple floors simultaneously, compromising of the buildings safety systems, time and gravity. 7 World Trade Center collapsed due to all of the above less the aircraft impacts - so it took longer.
The fundamentals of the collapses of both World Trade Center Twin Towers and of 7 World Trade Center are easily explainable by aircraft impacts and fire plus time and gravity to anyone who wants to learn (who drops the ideological baggage) AND can grasp high school level physics.
(to be continued,...)
