Look at this collapse

[kookbreaker]

You said gravity did it I didn't. If you think so much explosives are needed then how did gravity do it?

8,000 megajoules of potential energy in the block above the fire. Add to that the PE of the rest of the tower as it fell.

[LashL]

Well your claiming gravity alone did it, so you wouldn't need that much. Just enough to break the core apart. The core that is repeatedly lied about.

Who is claiming that gravity alone did it? Did you forget about the large jetliners, the massive structural damage, the loss of fireproofing, and the massive fires?

And, to what are you referring when you claim that the core "is repeatedly lied about"?

[Docker]

Not at all. We are saying that the fire and impact led to gravity doing the damage.



How much?



And how was this placed? How was it detonated? Please show some real work here.



Examples?

Brad reagan from PM lies about the core here: http://archive-b02m01.libsyn.com/podcasts/c9da824e018a7464b61b1f99e6a4a4a9/452fafd9/mickelson/mickelson-2006-08-22.mp3

[kookbreaker]

Brad reagan from PM lies about the core here: http://archive-b02m01.libsyn.com/podcasts/c9da824e018a7464b61b1f99e6a4a4a9/452fafd9/mickelson/mickelson-2006-08-22.mp3

Please point out the lie.

[Docker]

Please point out the lie.

He actually says about 20 minutes in that there were no columns in the core of the towers.

[realitybites]

We know it was the core that failed because the antenna dropped first.
And the south tower tilting? Was that due to core damage as well?

[gumboot]

We know it was the core that failed because the antenna dropped first.


It didn't, but never mind. We know for a fact the core didn't fail first, because in video of the collapses most of the core remains standing for as much as 20-30 seconds after the rest of the building has collapsed.

-Gumboot

[defaultdotxbe]

You said gravity did it I didn't. If you think so much explosives are needed then how did gravity do it?
do you (you as in docker) thing GPE contained enough energy to collapse the towers in the manner observed?

if so, why do you believe explosives were needed?

if not, how much energy would be needed?

[kookbreaker]

He actually says about 20 minutes in that there were no columns in the core of the towers.

I may be listening to the wrong part (as QT on the browser does not have a timer), but he states that there was a shell of outer columns, then he mentions a 'big structural base' in the middle. Then he states that there is just the floors in between. He then states "THere wasn't like a series of columns in between" (unlike the ESB). He is talking about the space between the structural base and the outer columns. He then mentions that the plane went through the outer columns and did not stop until it hit the core (prior to this he states that the WTC towers did not have a 'thick, concrete core' like the EBS, which is accurate).

At no point does he deny the columns in the core. He simplifies by calling it a 'big structural base'. But there is no statement that there were no columns there.

I don't think he is the one lying here.

[Docker]

I may be listening to the wrong part (as QT on the browser does not have a timer), but he states that there was a shell of outer columns, then he mentions a 'big structural base' in the middle. Then he states that there is just the floors in between. He then states "THere wasn't like a series of columns in between" (unlike the ESB). He is talking about the space between the structural base and the outer columns. He then mentions that the plane went through the outer columns and did not stop until it hit the core (prior to this he states that the WTC towers did not have a 'thick, concrete core' like the EBS, which is accurate).

At no point does he deny the columns in the core. He simplifies by calling it a 'big structural base'. But there is no statement that there were no columns there.

I don't think he is the one lying here.

Wait till the caller comes on and asks him at the end.

[defaultdotxbe]

Wait till the caller comes on and asks him at the end.
what time is that?

[Docker]

do you (you as in docker) thing GPE contained enough energy to collapse the towers in the manner observed?

if so, why do you believe explosives were needed?

if not, how much energy would be needed?

I dont deny the GPE was huge, but you can't get a symettrical collapse like that unless all 47 core columns fail simultaneously.

[Docker]

It didn't, but never mind. We know for a fact the core didn't fail first, because in video of the collapses most of the core remains standing for as much as 20-30 seconds after the rest of the building has collapsed.

-Gumboot

The antenna fell first, its visible in the video. Please stop lying.

[Garb]

I dont deny the GPE was huge, but you can't get a symettrical collapse like that unless all 47 core columns fail simultaneously.

The structure of the tower was meant so that all columns have the same weight pressed on them.

Is it a possibility that not all the columns were destroyed at the same time? That once each column was unable to handle the weight, the weight was transferred to the other columns and once the weight was too great for the remaining "intact" columns that the tower fell? At that point the tower would most likely fall "symettrically" even though that wasn't the case with the south tower.

The antenna fell first, its visible in the video. Please stop lying.

The antenta did not fall into the building. The top collapsed, and the antenna fell with it. Not liek the antenna was going to wait around in midair.

[defaultdotxbe]

I dont deny the GPE was huge, but you can't get a symettrical collapse like that unless all 47 core columns fail simultaneously.
do you have a source for that?

[defaultdotxbe]

The antenna fell first, its visible in the video. Please stop lying.
and in the south tower?

[gumboot]

The antenna fell first, its visible in the video. Please stop lying.

If you had read the NIST report (which you claim you have) you'd know that the movement of the antenna was due to the asymetrical collapse initiation - in other words the roof initially rotated towards the initial collapse point.

In addition, as I have said, the core can be seen standing after the rest of the structure has collapsed. Therefore it could not have collapsed first.

Your lack of knowledge is becoming staggering.

-Gumboot

[kookbreaker]

Wait till the caller comes on and asks him at the end.

The hell? All he says is that the experts don't think there was anything unusual about the fall. (The caller discussed freefall).

Give the exact words.

[kookbreaker]

I dont deny the GPE was huge, but you can't get a symettrical collapse like that unless all 47 core columns fail simultaneously.

You're a qualified structural engineer then?

[firecoins]

there was an invisible concrete antenna in the South Tower:boggled:

[defaultdotxbe]

The hell? All he says is that the experts don't think there was anything unusual about the fall. (The caller discussed freefall).

Give the exact words.
i think i found what hes talking about, about 33mins, the caller says the towers were held up by the steel outside, and the elevator shafts, and goes on to say theres no internal columns, and the PM guy just agrees "right, right"

my assumption is he just didnt catch what the guy was saying (and/or assumed he meant the steel core when he said the elevator shafts)

[kookbreaker]

OK, I found it. The caller was 'Kevin'

Kevin points out the cause of ther buckling, and notes again that the strcutural bearing points are the 'elevator shaft' and the exterior columns. He states that 'like you said there's no internal columns holding that building up'. Reagan says 'yeah'.

In context, especially given Reagan's description I posted above, it is OBVIOUS THAT 'KEVIN' IS TALKING ABOUT A LACK OF COLUMNS BETWEEN THE CORE AND THE EXTERIOR COLUMNS. There is no denial of columns here, and its Kevin's comment (which is not the clearest said) that was made, not Reagan's.

The liar here is not Reagan.

[realitybites]

i think i found what hes talking about, about 33mins, the caller says the towers were held up by the steel outside, and the elevator shafts, and goes on to say theres no internal columns, and the PM guy just agrees "right, right"

my assumption is he just didnt catch what the guy was saying (and/or assumed he meant the steel core when he said the elevator shafts)
I think the "no internal columns" is referring to the fact the floor space was completely open. It wasn't like a typical skyscraper with a steel box grid.

[Piggy]

Where's the boom, Docker?

If there were explosions, why no boom?

Why do the walls bend in on both videos?

Why is the debris pattern exactly what we would expect from a collapse?

[Docker]

Keep going. This reminds me of helping my nephew with his high school homework.

[kookbreaker]

i think i found what hes talking about, about 33mins, the caller says the towers were held up by the steel outside, and the elevator shafts, and goes on to say theres no internal columns, and the PM guy just agrees "right, right"

my assumption is he just didnt catch what the guy was saying (and/or assumed he meant the steel core when he said the elevator shafts)

Which is a fair assumption given that he mentions them as being load bearing. He also is commenting on Reagan's previous description of the building's load bearing points.

This doesn't even come close.

Docker is full of it.

[kookbreaker]

Keep going. This reminds me of helping my nephew with his high school homework.

There's nothing more after that. The next caller discusses 'freefall' which Reagan has almost no time to reply.

You lied.

[defaultdotxbe]

Keep going. This reminds me of helping my nephew with his high school homework.
sounds about right

docker: just check in your book, its near the end
nephew: what page?
docker: just keep going

[Piggy]

Keep going. This reminds me of helping my nephew with his high school homework.

Answer my questions.

[Docker]

Which is a fair assumption given that he mentions them as being load bearing. He also is commenting on Reagan's previous description of the building's load bearing points.

This doesn't even come close.

Docker is full of it.

Also the 911 commision describes th core as a hollow steel shaft.

Face it, the core was 47 huge steel box columns, embedded in the bedrocked and interlocked with lots of lateral beams.

[Piggy]

Why no boom?

Why an inward bend?

Why debris patterns consistent with collapse?

[defaultdotxbe]

Also the 911 commision describes th core as a hollow steel shaft.

Face it, the core was 47 huge steel box columns, embedded in the bedrocked and interlocked with lots of lateral beams.
and why should the 911 commission know (or care) about the construction of the towers? their job was discuss the attacks, not the mechanics of what hapened to the buildings (that was NISTs job)

[kookbreaker]

Also the 911 commision describes th core as a hollow steel shaft.


Nothing wrong with that. I've seen no engineers complain about that description, and in fact I've seen experienced engineers say that is an accurate description.

So there's no lie there, either.

[kookbreaker]

and why should the 911 commission know (or care) about the construction of the towers? their job was discuss the attacks, not the mechanics of what hapened to the buildings (that was NISTs job)

Its actually an accurate description. Not the most detail, certainly. But accurate.

[WildCat]

Also the 911 commision describes th core as a hollow steel shaft.

Face it, the core was 47 huge steel box columns, embedded in the bedrocked and interlocked with lots of lateral beams.
The steel box columns are hollow. You don't think they're solid steel, do you?

[Docker]

Does this look like a hollow steel shaft? Does it look like a bit of fire would make it break into a million pieces?http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc1_core.jpg

[kookbreaker]

I wonder why he thought this stuff about the shaft would work if he tried it a second time? (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=2020983&highlight=hollow+steel+shaft#post2020983)

Sheesh, make that third time. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=2007866&highlight=Brad+Reagan#post2007866)

[kookbreaker]

Does this look like a hollow steel shaft?

Does it look solid to you? Do any engineers agree with your asessment?


Does it look like a bit of fire would make it break into a million pieces?

'Bit of fire'? Go pound sand, liar.

[stateofgrace]

For goodness sake docker will you answer piggy's questions?

Why did the building buckle inwards just prior to the start of the collapse?

Why was there no earth shattering roar as the buildings were simply blown apart?

Don’t tell me lots of people heard explosions, I KNOW lots of people heard what sounded like explosions. This is because buildings that are on fire tend to make things get hot and explode.( example flashover)

So again

Question 1 why did the building buckle inwards?

Question 2. Why no earth shattering roars?

Take your time, engage your gogs and have a little ponder. Then, try and make a reasonable a post.

Over to you.

[LashL]

The antenna fell first, its visible in the video. Please stop lying.

(etc. etc.)

Honestly, people, this is just getting beyond stupid.

It's obvious that "Docker" hasn't a clue about any of the subjects that s/he starts threads about, hasn't a clue about any of the subjects about which s/he posts, and that s/he is - to use the Brit vernacular - just taking the piss.

I'm beginning to think that giving Docker this much attention is only feeding his need for attention (negative attention is just as desirable as positive attention to the attention-starved) in his obviously empty life (350+ posts in less than 2 days - what does that tell you?)

S/he gets a kick out of posting stupid crap and having us go and look up the actual facts and evidence to prove his crap wrong, so that s/he can then simply ignore the facts and evidence and make yet another and another and another and another stupid pronouncement, and start all over again.

It's rather obvious that this is all a game to Docker. And, personally, I don't think that the events of September 11, 2001 are either funny or game material.

[Oliver]

Does this look like a hollow steel shaft? Does it look like a bit of fire would make it break into a million pieces?http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc1_core.jpg

No, but it looks exactly like a construction wich couldn´t hold the weight from above if damaged from a large airliner /and heat. :boggled:

[Pardalis]

Why no boom?

Why an inward bend?

Why debris patterns consistent with collapse?

So Docker? Receiving, Docker?

Respond please.

[gumboot]

So Docker? Receiving, Docker?

Respond please.


Yeah, Docker. Listen to Piggy. He has the conch.

-Gumboot

[stateofgrace]

Does this look like a hollow steel shaft? Does it look like a bit of fire would make it break into a million pieces?http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc1_core.jpg

You forgot the part about a passenger plane been flown into it at high speed first.

[Docker]

I looked on google images and searched for hollow steel shaft. No buildings, just lots of pictures like this:
http://www.carbonxtreme.com/catalog/images/carbonxtreme/CX00-100-601_tn.jpg

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

The fact that they were totally destroyed.

Circular reasoning fallacy.

[realitybites]

Does this look like a hollow steel shaft? Does it look like a bit of fire would make it break into a million pieces?http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc1_core.jpg
Oh fantastic! Docker's back to posting pictures again. Whew....

[kookbreaker]

I looked on google images and searched for hollow steel shaft. No buildings, just lots of pictures like this:
http://www.carbonxtreme.com/catalog/images/carbonxtreme/CX00-100-601_tn.jpg

Instead of trying to salvage something from your sad, sad lies, why don't you answer Piggy.

[realitybites]

"Bit of fire"....

That's like saying an ice cube and a litre of water sunk the Titanic.

[firecoins]

Does this look like a hollow steel shaft? Does it look like a bit of fire would make it break into a million pieces?http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc1_core.jpg
It looks like an airplane flying at the speed of a shotgon blast might damage it, yeah

[Docker]

"Bit of fire"....

That's like saying an ice cube and a litre of water sunk the Titanic.

Compared to the building the fires were tiny

[firecoins]

I looked on google images and searched for hollow steel shaft. No buildings, just lots of pictures like this:
http://www.carbonxtreme.com/catalog/images/carbonxtreme/CX00-100-601_tn.jpg
of course there 2 building in NYC with steel core contrsuction. Both were destroyed in terrorist attacks on the same date. What a coincidence! Maybe it was a conspiracy!

[Docker]

It looks like an airplane flying at the speed of a shotgon blast might damage it, yeah

But does it like every joint would break and it would be completely flattened? No.

[Pardalis]

http://www.911blogger.com/blog/704

:rolleyes:

[firecoins]

But does it like every joint would break and it would be completely flattened? No.
didn't need to. When is that science backround you been accussed of lying about going to kick in?

[Docker]

of course there 2 building in NYC with steel core contrsuction. Both were destroyed in terrorist attacks on the same date. What a coincidence! Maybe it was a conspiracy!

Lots of buildings have that construction now. The core of the building could never be described as a hollow steel shaft.

[kookbreaker]

Compared to the building the fires were tiny

The building was very, very large. That does not make the fires 'tiny'. A lot of folks jumped out windows to avoid the fires you call 'tiny'. A lot of folks were trapped by the those fires you called 'tiny'.

A building was destroyed by the fires you call 'tiny' (and the impact of the plane).

[realitybites]

Compared to the building the fires were tiny
Even the ones that engulfed entire floors? You realize that's one whole acre on fire right there. That's "tiny"?

I think you've watched too many videos online and have truly forgotten the scale of the event. It's easy to look at the towers on your monitor when they're both an inch and a half wide and say, "Boy, the fires don't look that bad from here."

But they were.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Compared to the building the fires were tiny

Did you not read my post quote the NIST report on the thermal output of the fires? (it was the fire progression section)

[kookbreaker]

The core of the building could never be described as a hollow steel shaft.

Why not? Just because you say so? I think not.

[Gravy]

Does this look like a hollow steel shaft? Does it look like a bit of fire would make it break into a million pieces?http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc1_core.jpg
The fire didn't make it break into a million pieces, which you would know if you had read the NIST report.

I asked you this in another thread but you didn't answer. Docker, what was the mechanism of collapse in the towers, according to NIST?

Oh, and what do you get out of lying about the events of 9/11? There must be some personal benefit for you in behaving like this. What is it?

Just asking questions and demanding answers.

[realitybites]

Lots of buildings have that construction now. The core of the building could never be described as a hollow steel shaft.
Dude, you're arguing semantics right now. Even if the PM guy said what you say he said, it's irrelevant. He misspoke. You can't spell. Hey! No one's perfect.

We're all aware of the core columns.

What. Is. Your. [Rule8]ing. Point.

[kookbreaker]

What. Is. Your. [Rule8]ing. Point.

The point is that he'll lie as much as possible to make it seem as if others are the ones lying.

[firecoins]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yV2PJ71z85s - jelly doughnut
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVTKoPK7gaQ - 9/11

[Gravy]

Compared to the building the fires were tiny

Docker, why do you lie about the events of 9/11?

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/8790453a3a857b6c3.jpg

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/87904509e0b508441.jpg

[Docker]

The fire didn't make it break into a million pieces, which you would know if you had read the NIST report.

I asked you this in another thread but you didn't answer. Docker, what was the mechanism of collapse in the towers, according to NIST?

Oh, and what do you get out of lying about the events of 9/11? There must be some personal benefit for you in behaving like this. What is it?

Just asking questions and demanding answers.

You're in no position to demand anything from me. Deal with it.

I am not lying.

[realitybites]

Docker, why do you lie about the events of 9/11?

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/8790453a3a857b6c3.jpg

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/87904509e0b508441.jpg

Here's a glass of water Gravy. See if you can't put that out.

.... Thanks.

[kookbreaker]

You're in no position to demand anything from me. Deal with it.

So you are a coward and a liar. You can't dish it out and you sure as heck can't take it.

I am not lying.

Yes, you are. You've made several untrue statements knowing they were untrue. That makes you a liar. Simple as that.

[Docker]

Docker, why do you lie about the events of 9/11?

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/8790453a3a857b6c3.jpg

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/87904509e0b508441.jpg



Right in your picture of the building burning, the fires are uneven. So please explain how that caused a symmetrical, total and fast collapse destroying everything. Steel fails slowly. Even in an earthquaske total collapse doesn't happen that way. If you believe that, you are gullible.

[mortimer]

I stopped reading the thread at page 4. Docker, you haven't provided a shred of evidence so far. Where is it?

I smell troll.

[stateofgrace]

You're in no position to demand anything from me. Deal with it.

I am not lying.

Yes you are. You a viscous evil liar who is mocking the deaths of 3000 of your country men

Deal with it.

[Docker]

Yes you are. You a viscous evil liar who is mocking the deaths of 3000 of your country men

Deal with it.

/reported

[TjW]

Rough translation: oh dear, docker has a point
Perhaps a hat would cover it.

[kookbreaker]

Right in your picture of the building burning, the fires are uneven.

Irrelevant


So please explain how that caused a symmetrical,


Symetrical? You might have noticed the block tilting on one of the buildings' collapses.


total and fast collapse destroying everything.


I wouldn't expect the collapse to be partial or slow.

Steel fails slowly.

No, it does not. When it fails it fails dramaticly. Structural failures tend to do that. Look at the Kader toy factory.


Even in an earthquaske total collapse doesn't happen that way.

This was not an earthquake.


If you believe that, you are gullible.

If you doubt 99.9% of the worlds structural engineers then you are a complete idiot.

[Docker]

Yes you are. You a liar who is mocking the deaths of 3000 of your country men

Deal with it.

By the way. they are not my countrymen. I am not viscious and evil because I disagree with you.

[Piggy]

So please explain how

Why, Docker?

Why should anyone feel obliged to "explain how" when you have never explained how any of your claims could be true?

You have also not explained how there could be bombs that don't make noise.

You have also not explained how a bomb could make the walls bow inward, as they do in the 2 realtime videos we've seen.

You have also not explained how a debris pattern consistent with collapse is evidence of a bomb.

So please explain how.

[Piggy]

I am not viscious and evil because I disagree with you.
That's the first correct thing you've said all day.

You are vicious and evil for entirely different reasons.

Please, keep the discussion civil.

[Docker]

That's the first correct thing you've said all day.

You are vicious and evil for entirely different reasons.

/reported

[Pardalis]

/reported

Great, now the mods could maybe tell us if you're really Pdoherty76. :)

[stateofgrace]

/reported

Really?

Well I'm all shook up that you find it somewhat annoying that you can accuse your fellow countrymen of mass murder without a shred of evidence.


And do excuse me while I don't give you the time of day to spread your garbage. And further more let me just sit here will you make a total mockery of this event.

Save your self righteous garbage pal. You are a troll and a malicious one at that. You have not backed a single claim.

You are a liar, a mocker of the dead and you should hang your head in shame.

[Docker]

Great, now the mods could maybe tell us if you're really Pdoherty76. :)

If I were I wouldn't be here since he was banned.

[Gravy]

Great, now the mods could maybe tell us if you're really Pdoherty76. :)
The posting style certainly is different, but the content is the same, and the name "Doherty" is often pronounced "Dockerty," at least in Ireland.

[Docker]

Really?

Well I'm all shook up that you find it somewhat annoying that you can accuse your fellow countrymen of mass murder without a shred of evidence.


And do excuse me while I give you the time of day to spread your garbage. And further more let me just sit here will you make a total mockery of this event.

Save your self righteous garbage pal. You are a troll and a malicious one at that. You have not backed a single claim.

You are a liar, a mocker of the dead and you should hang your head in shame.

Hate to do it but you are the first person I have put on ignore.

[Docker]

The posting style certainly is different, but the content is the same, and the name "Doherty" is often pronounced "Dockerty," at least in Ireland.

More paranoid drivel. I have been killtown and Alex Jones alreadt today.

[stateofgrace]

Hate to do it but you are the first person I have put on ignore.

I was the first person that PD put on his ignore list too. I am honoured.

[Piggy]

/reported

Fine by me. You are simply reporting my commentary on your behavior and statements, which have earned those adjectives in spades.

[Pardalis]

371 posts in two days, that must be a record.

Got some evidence for # 372?

[Piggy]

/reported
Also, I find it very enlightening that you are able to respond immediately to a perceived slight by me, getting in on the very next post of this highly active thread... but you are somehow unable to respond in any way to my repeated questions:

Why no boom?

Why did the walls bend inward?

Why does the debris pattern match a collapse?

Why, Docker?

Why?

[DavidJames]

371 posts in two days, that must be a record.It may be, but when you add in all the claims, without a shred of supporting evidence, clearly a world record. A record not to be taken lightly when you consider the competition of geggy, ts1234, killtown and who I believe is the previous record holder, SBrown.

I have not included pdoherty76's post in with Doc's - just to make it a fair fight.

[Gravy]

Right in your picture of the building burning, the fires are uneven. So please explain how that caused a symmetrical, total and fast collapse destroying everything.For the third time, what does NIST say was the mechanism of collapse? If you do not reply, we will assume you haven't bothered to learn.

Steel fails slowly.In which universe? http://craneaccidents.com/bigblue.mpg

One of the most common structures today is the strip mall built with steel bar joists and metal deck roofs. A serious fire in one of these structures should be expected to produce roof collapse in as little as 5 to 10 minutes. Firehouse.com Sept. 1998 (http://www.firehouse.com/magazine/archives/1998/September/tactics.html)Even in an earthquaske total collapse doesn't happen that way. Which earthquake on 9/11 are you speaking of?

If you believe that, you are gullible.Present your evidence.

Oh, and what benefit are you getting out of your behavior here? You're just spewing crap. You are unable to back your claims with any evidence. It was explained to you as soon as you started posting here that arguments from personal incredulity hold no water with us.

So why are you doing this?

Just asking questions and demanding answers.

[gumboot]

Even in an earthquaske total collapse doesn't happen that way.


That's because in an earthquake the foundations of the building are undermined and it collapsed bottom-up.

Much like a controlled demolition.

The buildings on 9/11, however, collapsed top-down, from the point of impact, as one would expect.

-Gumboot

[Docker]

For the third time, what does NIST say was the mechanism of collapse? If you do not reply, we will assume you haven't bothered to learn.

In which universe? http://craneaccidents.com/bigblue.mpg

Which earthquake on 9/11 are you speaking of?

Present your evidence.

Oh, and what benefit are you getting out of your behavior here? You're just spewing crap. You are unable to back your claims with any evidence. It was explained to you as soon as you started posting here that arguments from personal incredulity hold no water with us.

So why are you doing this?

Just asking questions and demanding answers.

You do not own these forums and I am braeking no rules.

[Piggy]

Why, Docker?

How, Docker?

Is that what you're saying, Docker?

[Docker]

That's because in an earthquake the foundations of the building are undermined and it collapsed bottom-up.

Much like a controlled demolition.

The buildings on 9/11, however, collapsed top-down, from the point of impact, as one would expect.

-Gumboot

Except building 7 that noone can understand the collapse of.

[Piggy]

Answer my questions, Docker.

[Pardalis]

Dockerty, what is your purpose here?

[Gravy]

For the third time, what does NIST say was the mechanism of collapse? If you do not reply, we will assume you haven't bothered to learn.
You do not own these forums and I am braeking no rules.
Is that your final answer, Docker?

[Oliver]

Except building 7 that noone can understand the collapse of.

I can - especially because the "looked like a CD". ;)

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Except building 7 that noone can understand the collapse of.

Please do not move the goalposts. This thread is discussing the picture you posted in the OP, not WTC 7.

[gumboot]

Except building 7 that noone can understand the collapse of.


It makes sense to me. The building suffered far more extensive structural damage than either WTC1 or WTC2 (relative to overall building size) and far more extensive fires (again, relative to overall building size). If it's logical that WTC1 and WTC2 collapsed (I believe it is) it would be VERY odd if WTC7 DIDN'T collapse. Indeed - if WTC7 had NOT collapsed I would feel that would SUGGEST that NIST's analysis of WTC1 and WTC2 was wrong.

-Gumboot

[Pardalis]

Please do not move the goalposts. This thread is discussing the picture you posted in the OP, not WTC 7.

Just a thought... In the picture of the OP, we do see WTC7 very well, does anyone have seen a picture from the same photographer/same angle of the collapse of the second tower? does anybody know who that photographer is? It seems to me that if he/she took a picture of the second collapse, or even later, we would have a perfect view of the damage to WTC7.

carry on

[Docker]

It makes sense to me. The building suffered far more extensive structural damage than either WTC1 or WTC2 (relative to overall building size) and far more extensive fires (again, relative to overall building size). If it's logical that WTC1 and WTC2 collapsed (I believe it is) it would be VERY odd if WTC7 DIDN'T collapse. Indeed - if WTC7 had NOT collapsed I would feel that would SUGGEST that NIST's analysis of WTC1 and WTC2 was wrong.

-Gumboot

And you dont think it's odd that no other building has ever collapsed due to fire. Your doing better than NIST, because they don't have a clue why 7 collapsed. They are even forced to investigate possible blast scenarios now.

[Docker]

Is that your final answer, Docker?

Yes it is.

[Oliver]

I see the penthouse, Pardalis. You´re sure that this is 7?


http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/11107453edf4a2df85.jpg

[Pardalis]

I see the penthouse, Pardalis. You´re sure that this is 7?


http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/11107453edf4a2df85.jpg

I would think so.

[stateofgrace]

And you dont think it's odd that no other building has ever collapsed due to fire. Your doing better than NIST, because they don't have a clue why 7 collapsed. They are even forced to investigate possible blast scenarios now.

You forgot the bit about the debris from the Towers dropping on top of it.

Besides the final report as not been published yet, so how do you know they haven't got a clue what caused WTC7 to collapse?

[Gravy]

The posting style certainly is different, but the content is the same, and the name "Doherty" is often pronounced "Dockerty," at least in Ireland.Hmm, and the current juvenile delinquent also doesn't live in the US. http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2035660&postcount=52

[Piggy]

Why no boom?

Why did the walls bend inward?

Why does the debris pattern match a collapse?

[Gravy]

I see the penthouse, Pardalis. You´re sure that this is 7? http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/11107453edf4a2df85.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/11107453edf4a2df85.jpg)It is.

[Docker]

Hmm, and the current juvenile delinquent also doesn't live in the US. http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2035660&postcount=52

Who am I now? Hugo Chavez?

[Piggy]

Who am I now? Hugo Chavez?

You are someone who won't answer the questions:

Why do your bombs make no sound?

Why do your bombs make walls bow inward?

Why do your bombs create debris patterns consistent with collapse?

[gumboot]

And you dont think it's odd that no other building has ever collapsed due to fire. Your doing better than NIST, because they don't have a clue why 7 collapsed. They are even forced to investigate possible blast scenarios now.


Have you read NIST's interim report on WTC7?

Perhaps you are confused. FEMA stated in THEIR report that they had no idea why WTC7 collapsed. NIST have released a relatively detailed interim report on WTC7 which includes their hypothesis on what caused collapse.

WTC7 did not collapse due to fire. It collapsed due to extensive structural damage AND fire.

Plenty of buildings, all through history, have collapsed due to fire. Indeed, buildings collapse for many reasons. The myriad of causes, myriad of different building types, combined with modern safety standards (that make collapses from any cause relatively rare in this day and age), make repetitions of exact scenarios highly unlikely.

For example, in 1995 a shopping mall in Seoul collapsed, killing over 100 people and injuring nearly 1000. I would be quite surprised if such a scenario has exactly repeated itself anywhere else, as I imagine shopping mall collapses are rather rare.

Does that make this collapse rather suspicious? No, it doesn't.

Or, looking at 9/11...

9/11 was the first time anyone had EVER purposefully flown a commercial airliner into a building. And yet on this one day it happened three times.

-Gumboot

[defaultdotxbe]

And you dont think it's odd that no other building has ever collapsed due to fire.
i take you didnt bother to look up the kader toy factory that was mention earlier

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

And you dont think it's odd that no other building has ever collapsed due to fire. Your doing better than NIST, because they don't have a clue why 7 collapsed. They are even forced to investigate possible blast scenarios now.

WTC 7 did not collapse solely due to fire. It suffered structural damage from falling debris from WTC 1 & 2, and had unfought fires. Additionally, WTC 7 was a cantilever design building, thus making it more susceptible to structural damage than a standard building.

[Pardalis]

Does anybody know who took that picture in the OP?

[gumboot]

WTC 7 did not collapse solely due to fire. It suffered structural damage from falling debris from WTC 1 & 2, and had unfought fires. Additionally, WTC 7 was a cantilever design building, thus making it more susceptible to structural damage than a standard building.


The diesel fuel tanks and questionable fire protection are probably worth mentioning too.

Frankly, when you look at the facts, WTC7 was MORE likely to collapse than WTC1 or WTC2.

-Gumboot

[Dog Town]

Who am I now? Hugo Chavez?

Nope! But do ya recognize this?
erm why was i suspended?

because u mummys boys kept reporting my posts even though i had u on ignore and wasnt sad enough to report other peoples posts

eventually i shall rejoin with perfect behaviour

This perhaps?
dog town it is the only possible reason i could have been banned

i have a plan tho
One more for giggles...
dog town u couldnt handle me

i will be back and i will make sure my posts are unreportable, get over it
Someone here loves "the get over it" line as well.Hmmm...

Just ask'en!

[Docker]

Nope! But do ya recognize this?


This perhaps?

One more for giggles...

Someone here loves "the get over it" line as well.Hmmm...

Just ask'en!

Dog Town you seem inordinately obsessed with me. I don'y care what or who you think I am. Please accept this. I don't care.

[Piggy]

I don't care.
Do you care why both videos shot in real time on site show the walls bending inward rather than exploding outward?

Do you care why there is no explosion before the collapse, even though the mics record the sound of the collapse and people's voices nearby?

Do you care why the debris pattern matches a collapse rather than an explosion?

Do you care why the relative building heights in the photo in the OP show a building collapsing out from under a debris cloud, meaning there was no upward plume?

[Oliver]

I don´t know how accurate my 3d-Model is. But if this is the right horizontal angle, where is the other huge building next to building 7 on the photograph?

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/11107453ee688728bb.jpg

[Pardalis]

It think it is WTC7, the other building behind it doesn't seem high enough to appear in the picture of the OP.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_8886453eea45657fa.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=2205)

[Oliver]

You´re right - it is an error within the 3d-model...

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/11107453eecb50a999.jpg

[Pardalis]

Nice picture, never saw that one before.

It would be great if we could find a picture from the same photographer as the one in the OP...

[Oliver]

@Docker: Where did you download the original picture?
Any links?

[Oliver]

Is this you, Docker?

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e155/stokie292/me.jpg

[Docker]

Is this you, Docker?

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e155/stokie292/me.jpg

Nope I am far better looking than him. Who is this man?

[Oliver]

Nope I am far better looking than him. Who is this man?

He´s the guy where you had the Original-Picture from.

[Docker]

He´s the guy where you had the Original-Picture from.
Oh right

[Oliver]

Oh right

This guy also seems to be a CT-Fan:
http://s39.photobucket.com/albums/e155/stokie292/

How did you find the OP and his site? I´m searching for the Photographer of the OP...

[Docker]

This guy also seems to be a CT-Fan:
http://s39.photobucket.com/albums/e155/stokie292/

How did you find the OP and his site? I´m searching for the Photographer of the OP...

I cant remember. I stole that single photo from another forum. I just thought it illustrated my little arse from elbow thing perfectly.

[tim]

.....

[Oliver]

I cant remember. I stole that single photo from another forum. I just thought it illustrated my little arse from elbow thing perfectly.

Which forum was that?

[Oliver]

Folks, less of the bickering, please. Remain civil.


???

[Pardalis]

indeed ???

[Bell]

At first sight I thought it was a picture, and thought why the hell is there a picture with my name in it? :o

[Oliver]

At first sight I thought it was a picture, and thought why the hell is there a picture with my name in it? :o

??????? :boggled:

[tim]

Ignore it - typo error on code. The message was to calm down and remain civil.

[Oliver]

At first sight I thought it was a picture, and thought why the hell is there a picture with my name in it? :o

I guess the Admins are laughing at us... :D

[Oliver]

Ignore it - typo error on code. The message was to calm down and remain civil.

Everything is fine in this thread ... So why should somebody calm down? :confused:

[defaultdotxbe]

Everything is fine in this thread ... So why should somebody calm down? :confused:
think it was this:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2035592#post2035592

[Mancman]

For example, in 1995 a shopping mall in Seoul collapsed, killing over 100 people and injuring nearly 1000. I would be quite surprised if such a scenario has exactly repeated itself anywhere else, as I imagine shopping mall collapses are rather rare.

Does that make this collapse rather suspicious? No, it doesn't.


And look at the result of this collapse, no recognisable remains of intact floorslabs:
http://encyclopedia.quickseek.com/images/Sampoong.jpg

[Skibum]

And look at the result of this collapse, no recognisable remains of intact floorslabs:
http://encyclopedia.quickseek.com/images/Sampoong.jpg


By george its all dust, no recognizable macroscopic concrete at all.

[gumboot]

By george its all dust, no recognizable macroscopic concrete at all.


Must have been the Super-Ion Disruptor Monkeys.

You fiends!

-Gumboot

[Docker]

By george its all dust, no recognizable macroscopic concrete at all.

Erm what about the parts of the building that are still standing?

[Skibum]

Erm what about the parts of the building that are still standing?

What about them, they obviously weren't involved with the collapse.

[Docker]

What about them, they obviously weren't involved with the collapse.
Well they aren't dust so how does it relate to the wtc?

If anything, it's just an example of partial collapse.

[Mancman]

Well they aren't dust so how does it relate to the wtc?

If anything, it's just an example of partial collapse.

It's an example of floorslab pancaking:

"At about 5:00 p.m. Korea Standard Time (UTC+9:00), the fourth floor ceiling began to sink, resulting in store workers blocking customer access to the fourth floor. However, when the building started to produce cracking sounds at about 5:50 p.m., workers began to sound alarm bells and evacuate customers. Around 6:05 p.m., the roof gave way, and the air conditioning unit crashed through into the already-overloaded fifth floor. The main columns, weakened to allow the insertion of the escalators, collapsed in turn, and the building's south wing pancaked into the basement."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampoong_Department_Store_collapse#Collapse

501 victims. :eek: :(

[Oliver]

Nope I am far better looking than him. Who is this man?

He´s the guy where you had the Original-Picture from.

Oh right

This guy also seems to be a CT-Fan:
http://s39.photobucket.com/albums/e155/stokie292/

How did you find the OP and his site? I´m searching for the Photographer of the OP...

I cant remember. I stole that single photo from another forum. I just thought it illustrated my little arse from elbow thing perfectly.

Whaddaya mean you stole ´em?

GOT YOU! :D

So you admit that you are the owner of this Photobucket-Account.

http://s39.photobucket.com/albums/e155/stokie292/

And therefore this IS you:

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e155/stokie292/me.jpg

[Oliver]

D@mn! I did a search at Google for the Filename of the Picture
and i found the Forum you referred to:

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=70623&pid=1227853&mode=threaded&show=&st=&

It is a THREAD OF CHRISTOPHERA! :eek:


Conspiracy! :D

[Docker]

D@mn! I did a search at Google for the Filename of the Picture
and i found the Forum you referred to:

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=70623&pid=1227853&mode=threaded&show=&st=&

It is a THREAD OF CHRISTOPHERA! :eek:


Conspiracy! :D

Christophera gets about doesn't he

[Oliver]

Christophera gets about doesn't he

I don´t know. With all the crap he posts in here i can rarely imagine that he has time to post his crap elsewere. :boggled:

[Skibum]

I don´t know. With all the crap he posts in here i can rarely imagine that he has time to post his crap elsewere. :boggled:


LOL, he pointed me to this forum.
I was at a different forum and he posted a thread whining about this one, so I said to myself "if that place annoys him that much, it can't be too bad" So here I am.

[Oliver]

LOL, he pointed me to this forum.
I was at a different forum and he posted a thread whining about this one, so I said to myself "if that place annoys him that much, it can't be too bad" So here I am.

Muhawawaw. That means he´s getting tired if he starts whining about us. :D


What thread was that?

[Skibum]

Actually he didn't start the thread but heres his post.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/single.php?post=2297919

[Oliver]

DELICIOUS! :D


There is a way to tell who is paid and who isn't, or at least get a good clue. Ordinary people do not have time or reason to monitor and counter data posted on BB's. Ordinary people DO NOT WORK TOGETHER. Admitted, the right wing has an agenda and will organize to a degree but when the integrity of the posted data is questioned as to it's support of illegal government, they most often back off. The ones that are not paid do not have a reason to fight the principles they deeply believe in and so will give up and go away.

I started arguing 9-11 in 2002 on courttv.com. There was average resistence from a number of posters. It was easy to tell they were cooperating, but, when I started talking about the US Constitution and its spiritual/sacred meanings, the opposition ususally reacted by stopping the BS opposition, or showing respect for my intentions and identifying them as their own. The hard core right might jump in every now and then to try and diss a point but it was brief and clear that there was minimal cooperation.

Now, anywhere you go (particuarly in the last year) there are at least a half dozen that are incessant with the confusion, distraction and bogus opposition. Bogus meaning; no evidence, selective use of evidence, unwillingness to recognize priorities of lawfulness in government, posting BS images to take up space and push relevant information off the last page. What gives away their cooperation is that they generally start this up at the same time, after their attempts to dismiss the information have failed, or when other genuine posters show agreement.

The worst I've ever seen is,

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57426

randi.org is supposed to be a forum that honors intellectual pursuits and academic methods. However it appears as a debunkers toilet where undesireable concepts, (no matter how well evidenced) are quickly flushed (attempted) by a well organized and prepared group. It's easy to tell some are military people also. What is most obvious is that there is not one supporter on the thread. Usually there is at least one.

The thread I've linked to I started some weeks back, whereupon I was suspended for a few days for using hot links, now I'm suspended for reporting unreasonable posts taking up space on the thread. Opposition posting pictures of cats or baking recipes because they cannot produce a reasonable argument and mine are so compelling they must do something. That behavior is typical.

The site handicaps posters by requiring that images be uploaded and images over a certain size or having too long of a url are not accepted. the forum software has also set to not carry the quoted material upon reply. Meaning that a series of exchanges are not easy to keep coherent and show a history of errors, manipulations or deceptions.

LoneGunMan, thank for starting this thread. It is a service to truth, justice and liberty.

[Piggy]

Erm what about the parts of the building that are still standing?

Better yet, what about the videos shot on site which show the walls bowing in, not exploding out, just as the building begins to fall?

What about the fact that no explosions are heard, even though the mics pick up voices and the deep rumbling of the collapse?

What about the fact that the debris patterns are consistent with collapse?

What about that, Docker?

[Horatius]

Ordinary people DO NOT WORK TOGETHER

What definition of "ordinary" is he using?

[Piggy]

There's no need for us to be "organized" and especially "prepared" to dismantle their bogus arguments, any more than sharks need to be "organized" and "prepared" to tear apart a wounded fish.

Any individual who reviews the evidence and thinks critically will be able to demonstrate the fatal flaws in this CT.

And now that all these unsupportable arguments have been reposted on this board so many times, we've seen them all, and seen their refutations, and read the relevant sources.

So when they do it yet again, of course we're all able, individually, to dismantle the thing.

They'd get the same result if they posted flat earth theory, Capricorn One, or geocentrism.

[beachnut]

/reported

more facts?

[stateofgrace]

think it was this:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2035592#post2035592

You are correct and docker I apologies for my outburst at you. I accept you are not what I accused you of being.

You maybe delusional,slightly misguided and have a very seriously distorted view on humanity but other than that you seem a fairly reasonable individual.

Since I am on your ignore list you will never read this and never know how I have humbled myself before you and bowed before your superior intellect.

Oh well such is life, maybe you should leave your computer for a moment and get one.

[CurtC]

Erm what about the parts of the building that are still standing?
Doesn't that prove that the building was demolished by thermonuclear bombs, or Star-Wars like energy weapons? After all, cars burned on the front but not the back are supposed to prove that, right?

[Piggy]

I accept you are not what I accused you of being.

I don't.

In my book, leveling unwarranted accusations at people of intentionally murdering 3000 innocent civilians... and persisting in this, even when your errors have been pointed out to you... that's vicious, and it's evil.

This CT is not some game. It's not some diversion, some reality-show episode.

People are being sucked into it. People who don't have time to check the facts are being persuaded by the CTers' media campaign that their government murdered thousands of its own people.

That's vicious, and it's evil.

[Bell]

Hey, Piggy. I missed Ducker's answer to your questiosn and have a hard time finding it in this thread. But I'm sure you have a direct link to his post? Could you please post it?

[Christophera]

Even Rougher Translation: Oh dear, Docker has no evidence to back up his claims. So, when someone points out that his posts are merely Arguments from Repetition, he endorses it as a score for his side.

OMG! Evidence of high explosives. Everybody must know it was a demoliton by now.

http://forums.randi.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=3755&stc=1&d=1161801419

[Garb]

OMG! Evidence of high explosives. Everybody must know it was a demoliton by now.

http://forums.randi.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=3755&stc=1&d=1161801419

That isn't evidence of high explosives.

And audio accounts don't help you either.

[realitybites]

OMG! Evidence of high explosives. Everybody must know it was a demoliton by now.

http://forums.randi.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=3755&stc=1&d=1161801419
You gotta love the use of the still-frame photograph by the CT crowd.

Yeah, I'll admit. If I didn't know what exactly was happening in that photograph, I'd say it kinda looks like the top section of the tower is exploding.

But it's quite clear what you're seeing when it's set in motion.

[Piggy]

OMG! Evidence of high explosives. Everybody must know it was a demoliton by now.

Christophera, please view the 2 videos which have been linked on this thread.

When you do, I have a couple of questions for you.