True. That's because there's no logical answer for it. The 9/11 Commision Report didn't even touch it because there was no way of logically explaining it without sounding like complete idiots. If you showed that video to the most casual observer who didn't know what happened they would say it was a textbook demo job.

That would not and could not happen. How does a steel structure collapse into it's own footprint? Keep in mind that this wasn't just any ordinary building, it was built like a bunker.

If that is true then this fact alone should be suspicion flag for antitruthers. :2 cents:

From a technical standpoint, it was a nice demo job. Even demo jobs that have been well planned out get botched but still remain a solid structure. It takes a lot of work to bring a building down into a pile of rubble.

are you completely incapable of thinking on your own? do you even know what the 9/11 commission was tasked with? did you even happen to take 1 second to research for yourself?

jesus fucking christ.

i already knew, but it only took me a millisecond to go get this:

it/s not in the fucking report because it wasn't hit by a fucking plane.

dude. your a porner. you are not the smartest guy in the room. ever.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh moron

it's classic conspiracist bullshit. dude never even read the 9/11 report or he would have known it was not tasked with addressing wtc 7

and now we're supposed to believe his views on physics as well.

fucking classic.

You didn't let the Government down. Bush thanks you for your support!

Do your homework before running your mouth...

The truthers don't care for facts like this. It doesn't fit in their fantasy story.
They won't even click it. They just ignore it and keep repeating the same Youtube bullshit as 12 years ago.

Yes, they are sheep. They blindly follow the same bullshit story spread by other nutters on Youtube. They ignore facts and logic. Because it HAS to be a conspiracy. It just has to be!

When pointing fingers and trying to put someone down based on intelligence, I suggest you learn how to write properly.


:2 cents:

dodge and deflect the fact you are uninformed about what you are trying to act like you are an expert about, classic argument style for conspiracists.

like you did re: the 9/11 report.



ok, grammar nazi, sure thing. in the mean time let's summarize the contest:

i've pointed out very clearly how royally lost *truthers* are, fuck, even the name is fucked up, truthers don't want truth, they (you ) want to be right. that because you are not basing your view on fact you are basing it on fear and insecurity.

next, i've pointed out what an utter and complete failure the movement has been, not 1 single thing accomplished in close to 13 years, yet you still cling to what you have been told, refusing to dig deeper than face value, not reading reports and 1st hand research, instead accepting other's views of that, you deflect and dodge from that.

third, i clearly pointed out how you fail at researching your point of view, you glob on to something you glanced over on a message board and run with it like it's fact, like the 9/11 report didn't include 7wtc.

moreover, it's also been shown that you have not come up with 1 single shred of any new data that corroborates your position in the years and years since the event.

finally, it's been illustrated here that instead of being able to admit you are incorrect about even the most trivial of points, you fail at being able to admit being wrong and instead, dig the rabbit hole conspiracy deeper to cover your ass.


on the other side of the argument, my mistake was a typo, so you use that to *gotcha* me.


classic.

OMG...wall of text.
I gave up with the ostrich crew. You are free to believe whatever you are told.

dodge and deflect.

keep it up for another 13 years.

why are the truthers dodging https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1104063 ? Can any of you whackos tell us sane people (sorry, gov't sheeple) why we should believe your version of the truth, when *your own logic* dictates that your truth is also lies, conspiracies, controlled misinformation, and cover-ups?

Looking forward to reading answers in that thread :conehead

this is rather revealing. what is that i wrote- ~100 words? yet too much to read for a conspiracist. not unlike the actual research material that is available, too much for you to read.

omg...give it up..I am not in this thread to argue for or against any conspiracy.
You can go fuck yourself. I just find it hilarious when people try and stand on a pedestal and look down on others intellectually.
For the record, I am just not interested in reading any points you make.

This will be my last post in this thread and most likely to you for a good long while.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

that also sums up the 'you believe crap you are being fed' line truthers trot out as some kind of point, when we all believe what we are 'fed' from wherever we get it, which is how we form opinions in the first fucking place. As I think BlackCrayon said, same process, different source is all - at least the sane people understand that.

this is a debate pheonix, it's fundamentally about intellect. who is prepared, who is not. it's clear your side is not prepared, hasn't done the research and cannot formulate a cohesive thought.

The answers are there if you are willing to take off your blinders and look:

WTC 7

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

How the Loss of One Column May Have Led to the Collapse of WTC 7

WTC 7 did not fall into its own footprint. It did not fall down uniformly. It did not fall down entirely straight. Those are all myths spread by Alex Jones and his obedient band of Youtube warriors.

these are excellent reads, ty. i had reviewed the 1st one when you posted it prior.

this pic is hard to refute.
http://www.debunking911.com/wtc7pile.jpg

Yeah, but the Jones clones just go on and on about how the facts don't add up.

That's because:

a) The don't have all the facts.
b) They wouldn't know how to add them up anyways.
c) They make up their own facts.

which really is unfortunate. i honestly believed for years that there was a middle ground where we could all meet because the fact is, we do get lied to by the government, most sane adults know that. in fact, i'want to believe the conspiracy, i watch all the vids and read the print, there's just no real facts to base that on.


sadly, i'm sure many government officials would rather see us all arguing about this sort of thing rather than coming together.

but the fact is, there isn't a middle ground, the conspiracists require us to buy into their whole premise.

So governments lie and do evil things every time EXCEPT for when it comes to 9/11...right...

again, i never said that. but here's where just one area where you're an idiot: the government has nothing to do with physics.


you really need to learn how to read and debate/argue.

http://editthis.info/logic/Hans_Eyse...es_of_Argument


It's sometimes a disadvantage to reason with People of shallow Understandings; for be their Intention ever so honest, they shall wrangle about a thousand things solidly prov'd, for want of comprehending the Force of an Argument.
Now for Eysenck's Rules of Argument
"These rules are simple, but I recommend them to anyone who has occasion to engage in public arguments. Briefly, they are as follows":
1. Never argue about something about which you are fundamentally ignorant. Adherence to this rule alone would reduce the number of arguments in the world dramatically.
2. Do your homework, so that you really know everything there is to know about the topic in question. (I.e. know your opponent's position.)
3. Keep what you have to say short, because if you go on for any length of time the audience will forget the points you are making.
4. Concentrate on the most important points, and don't go hunting after those that matter less.
5. Having decided what are the most important points, force your opponent to answer these points, and don't let him [or her] escape by dragging in all sorts of irrelevant matters" (Eysenck, H, 1997, p. 76).
"Among the many errors committed are having no central theme, concentrating too much on unimportant aspects rather than vital ones, giving too much detail, ...over-estimating the background knowledge of the audience, failing to set the research in its proper background, and so forth ad nauseam. I consciously tried to avoid all these errors, and think of the particular audiences I was addressing, their needs, interests and requirements..." (Eysenck, 1997, p. 122). "[My father] taught me that it is very important indeed to have a particular high spot in your presentation, something which stands out and which will be remembered by the audience for a long time" (Eysenck, 1997, p. 122)

johnny- learn to argue properly:


A "straw man argument" is the process of taking an argument of the opponent, distorting it or taking it out of context so that it basically changes meaning, and then ridiculing it in order to make the opponent look bad.

Are we even talking about the same building? We're talking about WTC 7 right? The one that collapsed into it's own footprint in all the video angles. The one that was reduced to rubble within seconds. It collapsed with little to no resistance. There is no way a steel building could do that. It's a mathematical impossibility.

This was their major screw up and the irrefutable evidence of guilt. WTC 7 is the smoking gun.

Why people refuse to read is beyond me. Wow.

A mathmatical impossibility? Where do people come yp with this nonsense.

The numbers don't add up?
Everyone see thing differently.

Someone ask me:
A porn stars makes $10,000 per movie
There are average of two porn stars in each movie.
Add crew and editing/webmaster cost.
100,000 free movies on tube sites.

How the fuck do the porn companies make any money?

I find it to be almost intolerable to accept that some humans are really that stupid.

Are you a structural engineer? A demolition expert? A metallurgist? A mathematician? An investigator who somehow had access to all of the data and evidence for the collapse of WTC 7? What is the source of your certainty over the whole issue?

Is it just because you don't think it could happen the way it did?

You keep saying it is irrefutable but it has been thoroughly refuted. Several times just in this thread alone.

If you tried to bring this issue to a court of law you would be laughed out of the building because you have zero evidence for any of your claims.

Even when given an opportunity to learn and grow, they cling to fAlsehoods and then try and back that up with silly comments like mathmatecail impossibility.

A Youtube video made by a 16 year old. Which they consider fact and truth without even thinking twice. After all it's on Youtube.

Because it NEEDS to be a conspiracy. So they are very selective in what to believe and what not.
First they find a believe, then they try to fit in all their "evidence".
Exactly the opposite of how science works.

it's so nutty. that's partly why i decided to just be a dick about it. that and the fact i spent years trying to have adult level debate about it with them and just got treated like a dick anyway.