RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE

RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 9:06:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JonnieBoy Hey Eeeengleeesh ... You missed the point ... tried picking on the wrong guy and made yourself look a twat (so I'm told) Par for the course, of course SL4. There is no such thing as the wrong guy. When you made that big thing about leaving for good and then came back after a couple of months, now that would be my definition of making yourself look like a twat. When you started some secretive fight with MoGa, and broadcast it to the rest of the forum (to those people that didn't have a stake in it) now that also I would say made you look twat like. You judging others as looking pathetic is quite rich coming from you sir. So I'm told[;)]

Real0ne -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 9:42:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy I want to thank those who question #7. You are true patriots. We can not let this fraud stand. Hunk, some people are physics bankrupt. Its amazing how many people come out here and call themselves engineers when they dont know which side of a calculator to use. This is what should have happened to #2, but thats the real world! Cant have that! [image]local://upfiles/59055/8CA5F83C7CF047FF96A4883905708529.jpg[/image] That is alot more realistic then the free fall we seen when 7 was imploded. and no plane what-s0-ever hit that building. Well the laws of physics only apply (and work), in other countries! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

mnottertail -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 9:46:32 AM)
where is the airplane in this picture or dont they fly them in other countries where the laws of physics hold true, as they do in the united states.

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 9:50:20 AM)
Real0ne thinks the partial collapse of one floor, shown in the image, is what the failure mechanism of building seven should have looked like. What he needs to ask himself is: how is vibration and falling debris from the adjacent towers only going to affect one floor of building seven??????

mnottertail -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 9:53:28 AM)
the buildings are too close together in that picture. building 7 couldnt have went to mexico without an airplane.

PenOnBeadedChain -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 10:32:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AnimusRex As someone else pointed out, its amazing how suddenly insurance adjusters, office managers, mortgage brokers, and tv repairmen suddenly turn into chemists, metallugists, physicists and structural engineers, and speak confidently and with complete authority about crap that they had never even heard of until 3 days ago. That was me, on one of the global warming threads. And yes, it applies equally here as well. I think it speaks to a certain naivete about education that some people have. Armed with knowledge garnered from watching a youtube video, listening to a few agenda-soaked, half-the-truth talk radio shows and in jealous possession of a handful of bookmarks from slanted political blogs, the person in question has just duplicated years of arduous study in a sophisticated field in a shocking four days of part-time effort. They then venture forth bravely, flaunting their new self-conferred honorary doctorate in climatology (or structural dynamics) for all to marvel at (in the way that an abnormal psychologist gapes eagerly at a new case study). I'm chagrinned to say it's disproportionately a male thing. We are brought up to demonstrate our conquest of the natural and manmade world (it's one means for attracting sexual mates who will help perpetuate our genes) by spouting infinite, wide-ranging encyclopedic knowledge on topics from the trivial to the critical. It's a sign of maturity and enlightenment when we can finally surrender to reality and say with humility, "sorry, I don't know fucking squat about that subject, and it would be pointless of me to comment."

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 10:35:29 AM)
It's the land of wiki, wiki, wild, wild, pedia. We can do anything since the interweb, even brain surgery.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 10:38:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy the whole bases was to invade Iraq.. and supposedly we were going to "bring the troops home". why would anyone trust much the govt official line? the govt lies and kills for big corporations... and the very people who don't want to face it are being robbed of their retirement. the US IS A CORPORATION! http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3089415 No, it isnt. That was debunked years ago. At least keep up to date with your asinine theories.

Real0ne -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 10:51:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy the whole bases was to invade Iraq.. and supposedly we were going to "bring the troops home". why would anyone trust much the govt official line? the govt lies and kills for big corporations... and the very people who don't want to face it are being robbed of their retirement. the US IS A CORPORATION! http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3089415 No, it isnt. That was debunked years ago. At least keep up to date with your asinine theories. yeh we know! Everything you wish were not rtue was deunked years ago! Where they fuck do these people come from eh? TITLE 28 > PART VI > CHAPTER 176 > SUBCHAPTER A > § 3002 § 3002. Definitions (14) “State” means any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the United States. (15) “United States” means— (A) a Federal corporation; (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; o r (C) an instrumentality of the United States. (16) “United States marshal” means a United States marshal, a deputy marshal, or an official of the United States Marshals Service designated under

Real0ne -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 10:58:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PenOnBeadedChain quote: ORIGINAL: AnimusRex As someone else pointed out, its amazing how suddenly insurance adjusters, office managers, mortgage brokers, and tv repairmen suddenly turn into chemists, metallugists, physicists and structural engineers, and speak confidently and with complete authority about crap that they had never even heard of until 3 days ago. That was me, on one of the global warming threads. And yes, it applies equally here as well. I think it speaks to a certain naivete about education that some people have. Armed with knowledge garnered from watching a youtube video, listening to a few agenda-soaked, half-the-truth talk radio shows and in jealous possession of a handful of bookmarks from slanted political blogs, the person in question has just duplicated years of arduous study in a sophisticated field in a shocking four days of part-time effort. They then venture forth bravely, flaunting their new self-conferred honorary doctorate in climatology (or structural dynamics) for all to marvel at (in the way that an abnormal psychologist gapes eagerly at a new case study). I'm chagrinned to say it's disproportionately a male thing. We are brought up to demonstrate our conquest of the natural and manmade world (it's one means for attracting sexual mates who will help perpetuate our genes) by spouting infinite, wide-ranging encyclopedic knowledge on topics from the trivial to the critical. It's a sign of maturity and enlightenment when we can finally surrender to reality and say with humility, "sorry, I don't know fucking squat about that subject, and it would be pointless of me to comment." So how are you doing on dem dar WMD's in iraq? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfuBREMXxts

Real0ne -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 11:01:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy I want to thank those who question #7. You are true patriots. We can not let this fraud stand. Hunk, some people are physics bankrupt. Its amazing how many people come out here and call themselves engineers when they dont know which side of a calculator to use. This is what should have happened to #2, but thats the real world! Cant have that! [image]local://upfiles/59055/8CA5F83C7CF047FF96A4883905708529.jpg[/image] That is alot more realistic then the free fall we seen when 7 was imploded. and no plane what-s0-ever hit that building. Well the laws of physics only apply (and work), in other countries! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!! where is the airplane in this picture or dont they fly them in other countries where the laws of physics hold true, as they do in the united states. Wheres the BIGBODAFUCKNBOOM? [image]local://upfiles/59055/04A4441927BB4089A1D4209402F7A28B.jpg[/image] Gotta love these crystal clear fuckign pictures!

mnottertail -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 11:03:59 AM)
Ja, exactly ----- so how the fuck are those pictures related in even the most tenuous way?

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 11:15:43 AM)
He thinks all that grey shit is evidence of an explosion, forgive him he has never conducted an unconfined triaxial test, so he don't know how stupid the above remarks make him look.

Real0ne -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 11:22:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Ja, exactly ----- so how the fuck are those pictures related in even the most tenuous way? [image]local://upfiles/59055/C2FFDA7DB88A4550BA29BCBFE8F558A0.jpg[/image] BABABABABABABOMBS [image]local://upfiles/59055/27664036A33B4E9F847DC2936F5327A6.jpg[/image]

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 11:35:52 AM)
These images are so vague, are we supposed to look at that steelwork crucifix and see the truth? Do you want to see an image of the contents of the skip next door? I'm sure it relates to 911 some way or other.

Real0ne -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 11:44:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3 These images are so vague, are we supposed to look at that steelwork crucifix and see the truth? Do you want to see an image of the contents of the skip next door? I'm sure it relates to 911 some way or other. I agree! They dont have NIST telling you WHAT TO THINK! BBWWHAHAHAHAHA Proves beyond a shadow of a doubt you are out of your league and why posting evidence for people who are out of their league is a waste of time. I put that up for the benefit of those who understand what they see. NOT what NIST tells them to see. Cheers!

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 11:51:19 AM)
You may as well give up and go home then, you should be able to convince the most badly educated otherwise you'll have no chance with anyone else. Why don't you explain the image for me, you know for example when you read a report the figures aren't just splodged in for prettiness, they actually have text underneath detailing what the author thinks it shows. You is all presentation no content.

Real0ne -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 12:10:03 PM)
Nah... I would rather you explain why there is no black charring from the fire and where the hell did all the insulation go? You know dont you? That shit is on there so well you need to literally chisel it off. Since this piece was obviously blown free of the falling mass, where the fuck did the insulation go? BIGGABDDAFOKNBOOM!!!!!!

pahunkboy -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 12:16:11 PM)
then they criminally shipped all the wreckage out with in short time span and melted it all down. awfully convenient for the insurance fraud- which we bailed out AIG , AIG will need another bail out. Nice of youns to give up your retirement for the NWO. Very nice of you all.

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (2/27/2010 12:21:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Nah... I would rather you explain why there is no black charring from the fire and where the hell did all the insulation go? You know dont you? That shit is on there so well you need to literally chisel it off. Since this piece was obviously blown free of the falling mass, where the fuck did the insulation go? BIGGABDDAFOKNBOOM!!!!!! Depends on the type but if it was the spray on cementitious type then I suggest that it's rather brittle and crumbled off as the steel section deformed within it. You can actually see some remains on the top of the flange of that section. Also Real0ne you have to consider that the fire was localised and the collapse wasn't. i.e. was this section in a location exposed to the fire? The fire caused local weakness but the ultimate collapse was due to a cascading effect of floors above falling onto floors below. You know that whole (F = ma) thing where the F increases the greater the acceleration is. Getting run over by heavy plant at low speeds is just as deadly as getting hit by light cars at high speeds. The floors were not designed to withstand the impact loading of the floors falling from above i.e. once the steel (at the location of the fire) could no longer support the load. Simples

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875