The Collapse Of WTC7: Why was it so fast?

[Aemilius]

I don't think anyone has ever had the ba*ls to call swansont befuddled.

 

Personally I agree with you 100%. The buildings were brought down by explosives.

 

( Several belly and wing tanks filled with JP-4 fuel, similar to kerosene, which fuels jet engines, exploded, or at least fire-balled in the interior of the buildings and weakened the central support structure. Is that what you meant ? )

 

Hah! Right MIgL, nice to (virtually) meet you. Your gift for understatement is already legendery (at least in my mind).... I should mention, though, that the exclusive, really laser like focus of my interest here has to do with the destruction of WTC7, not the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, or Shankesvllle.

 

In view of the empirically verifiably fact that WTC7 was brought down by explosives, the rest of the events that day are really rendered as academic (according to Merriam Webster), provided of course one is willing to adhere to the so called old school scientific method.... that is.

 

Not ignoring you unintentionally swansont, just getting drunk in order to formulate an intelligible response.... shouldn't be long (I'm a lightweight, it's saved me a great deal of money).

 

 

How does energy conservation prevent free fall?

 

Alright swansont, I'm fully prepared now (several more shots of extremely low quality whiskey) after cursorily reviewing my old textbook from 1964 entitled "The Fundamentals Of Physics" to respond to your empirically hilarious question.... "How does energy conservation prevent free fall?"

 

Oh God (figuratively speaking)! Hold on a minute,... I've just noticed something else from earlier on. I'll just drink a bit more.... be right back!

Edited to add.... Thanks for the "Neg Reps".... still drinking.

Edited December 28, 2014 by Aemilius

[ZVBXRPL]

There is no way of knowing what happened on 9/11. You can read articles, stories, interviews, watch video after video, all giving different theories. At the end of it, how do you decide what is truth, what is fiction, what is real information and what is disinformation. You cannot, so it's no different to reading about any event in history. You just absorb various information and sift through it in your mind. A lot of people just accept the official version of what happened (angry muslims did it), they trust the government and do not ask questions. Others make claims that CIA did it, goverment did it, Jews did it or even aliens did it etc etc. You get exactly the same for the Kennedy assassination and other major events in history. I do not know what happened, so my answer to what happened on 9/11 is always "I don't know". Regarding the 3 buildings that collapsed, I don't know why they collapsed. I know that WTC was hit and 3 buildings collapsed. Pentagon was also hit. People died. There was an act of violence committed by some people and it is now part of the history books. If you wonder what happened, decide to read the official version of events provided by the government and then be 100% satisfied you have your answers and move on, fair enough. I would never do that because I know that the government is not a reliable source of truth. But knowing that there is a high probability the government is lying does not automatically mean that one of the other theories is truth. Which theory? There is no way of knowing. Even if you somehow found out the 100% truth of what happened from some mystic powered superbeing, what then? There is nothing you could do about it anyway.

In my opinion, the most plausible theory is that 9/11 was a false flag operation to initiate the decades long war on terror. During the Cold War, there was a "Operation Northwoods" put forward by the President's chiefs of staff, all of them signed it and it was ready for the green light, but Kennedy rejected it. The plan was to commit an act of terrorism on US citizens and blame Cuba. The US citizens would be outraged and violence could ensue with the people behind it and supportive of it. After 9/11 the vast majority of people are supportive of the violence that has been committed in the Middle East, because they believe that "these guys attacked us on 9/11, let's kill 'em all". Some object, but they are the minority. Vietnam War caused anti war protests too, but the protests were much stronger because there was no 9/11 type event for Vietnam. (Maybe there should have been, in hindsight?). The 9/11 for WW2 was Pearl Harbour. Doesn't matter whether US knew that the attack was imminent or caught with pants down, the effect was the same. Same for 9/11. After 9/11 War on Terror was set in motion and decades of violence was given the green light by the people and those in power. What is the actual reason for the War on Terror? Does it matter to the people who were outraged by 9/11? Not really, they just seek vengeance on who they believe was responsible. People are naturally violent. Wars have been fought all over the world since we first started building walls to protect our resources.

Some might think that the government would never act so evil, why? Why would they be any less evil than those who commit atrocities all over the world? Truth is that the majority of people in this world are violent and evil, motivated by greed and anger. If they were not, there would be much less crime, poverty and war than there is.

[Aemilius]

Wow! I don't think I've ever seen such an enormously small block of text that so successfully fails to address a simple empiricaly verifiable graphical link removed.... well done (and good luck recovering from that stroke)!

 

 

Edited December 28, 2014 by hypervalent_iodine

[ZVBXRPL]

 

Wow! I don't think I've ever seen such an enormously small block of text that so successfuly avoids and utterly fails to address a simple graphical link removed..... well done (and good luck recovering from that stoke)!

What makes you so special? Did I quote you? Did you make the thread?

I just made a post in a 9/11 thread giving some thoughts and opinions. I didn't even read any of your posts. Don't plan to either after observing your ego.

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

Tone down the personal jabs, please.

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

Aemilius, we get it. Stop spamming your blog.

Edit: the soap boxing also stops. This is a place for discussion, not an extension of your blog.

Edit 2: please don't respond to the modnote in-thread. If you are unsure of something, please report the post or PM staff. You may wish to review the forum rules and what constitutes soap boxing first, however.

[Aemilius]

It's clear to me now that no one here is either willing or able to directly address the analysis. In view of that, I'll just ban the forum before the forum bans me.

 

You've all had plenty of time and not one of you has said or shown anything that empirically contradicted it.... what a bunch of losers.

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

Well, just to be sure, I'll ban you as well.