University Study Finds Fire Did Not Cause Building 7's Collapse on 9/11

[BADecker]

....
Hey, thanks for the welcome. But I have done it several times, now. Perhaps you could explain for each piece of dust and each girder, exactly how 8th grade science fits it. I mean, explain it for all of the trillions of specks of concrete dust individually.

No thanks. You don't have a conspiracy theory that requires that.

Actually, you have a rather interesting theory, but one which is implausibly complicated, and which requires science beyond our current understanding. In fact, if we just decided to create the absolute most impossible way to do 911, we really probably wouldn't get close to the impossible that you came up with.

If you are talking about nano-thermite as being science beyond our understanding, you are mistaken. Besides, just because you and I don't know something about some science, doesn't mean that others haven't figured it out. Nobody is required to tell us everything they know.

So, just be glad that the University presented a scientifically accurate model that shows that fires didn't bring Bldg. 7 down.

[Spendulus]

....the University presented a scientifically accurate model that shows that fires didn't bring Bldg. 7 down.

You mean two Chinese disinformation agents produced a propaganda report.

Their names are right there on it.

[BADecker]

....the University presented a scientifically accurate model that shows that fires didn't bring Bldg. 7 down.

You mean two Chinese disinformation agents produced a propaganda report.

Their names are right there on it.

No, I mean the University that accepts the study as correct. See the OP.



EDIT: Do you and your significant other sleep on separate shifts, just so that he can wake you whenever a new post from BADecker comes in?

[BluePowder]

What's going on 8th graders ?

I posted images of pentagon with no sign of planes 10hrs ago and I haven't been debunked by someone with a gr8 education ?

What the hell is going. at least call me a conspiracy theorist or bow to the master at once.

[Spendulus]

What's going on 8th graders ?

I posted images of pentagon with no sign of planes 10hrs ago and I haven't been debunked by someone with a gr8 education ?

What the hell is going. at least call me a conspiracy theorist or bow to the master at once.

Posting pictures is common with 911 conspiracy theorists.

However, a picture is not a question, an assertion, or a proof. a picture is ... a picture. You may see things in a picture or consider them some how as proof, but that may not be obvious to others.

So, like... What's up, Dude?

[BluePowder]

In other words, destroyed again.

You sniffed around for a new theory again but danced away from the issue. The issue being that the hole and explosion is consistent with a blast not at plane.

What's going on 8th graders ?

I posted images of pentagon with no sign of planes 10hrs ago and I haven't been debunked by someone with a gr8 education ?

What the hell is going. at least call me a conspiracy theorist or bow to the master at once.

Posting pictures is common with 911 conspiracy theorists.

However, a picture is not a question, an assertion, or a proof. a picture is ... a picture. You may see things in a picture or consider them some how as proof, but that may not be obvious to others.

So, like... What's up, Dude?

[Spendulus]

...the hole and explosion is consistent with a blast not at plane.

....

What explosion? What building? What hole?

[BluePowder]

All of them but the most obvious would be

[Spendulus]

All of them but the most obvious would be

A picture. Which means zero.

[BADecker]

All of them but the most obvious would be

A picture. Which means zero.

Your just ignore it way is easier than saying all thousand of the words... A picture is worth a thousand words.

[Spendulus]

All of them but the most obvious would be

A picture. Which means zero.

Your just ignore it way is easier than saying all thousand of the words... A picture is worth a thousand words.

Absolutely, let's ignore it. I don't have any interest in a rather idiotic posting of some random photograph, with no explanation, context, or specific question or assertion.

[BADecker]

All of them but the most obvious would be

A picture. Which means zero.

Your just ignore it way is easier than saying all thousand of the words... A picture is worth a thousand words.

Absolutely, let's ignore it. I don't have any interest in a rather idiotic posting of some random photograph, with no explanation, context, or specific question or assertion.

Almost 3,000 people killed, real estate damaged, gold stolen, and a lie being foisted on Americans, and you want to ignore it?

We have your number, Spendy. Your true colors are showing. And they show traitor.

[BluePowder]

In every post where you stepped up you were humiliated, mostly by your own doings. you weren't even able to offer anything besides a one line denial or subject change, they got shorter over time to just a couple of words.

It doesn't even matter what the context or conspiracy, the question is, is it consistent with a plane crash or an explosive. its clear to 99.9% of the viewers that its an explosive.

Thank you

Destroyed

All of them but the most obvious would be

A picture. Which means zero.

[Spendulus]

In every post where you stepped up you were humiliated, mostly by your own doings. you weren't even able to offer anything besides a one line denial or subject change, they got shorter over time to just a couple of words.

It doesn't even matter what the context or conspiracy, the question is, is it consistent with a plane crash or an explosive...

What is consistent?

[BluePowder]

So why even take part in this thread, one words replies don't exactly make you look good. When you're in a corner and can't get out you just find a word to pick out of the post and ask why or where or how.. Of course nobody is fooled but you.

Nothing random about those pics,, straight from your boy Donald via the FBI .. if they're new to you it further shows how you're not on the same field as me. I'm playing with the pro's and you're fumbling around with grade 8 players

In every post where you stepped up you were humiliated, mostly by your own doings. you weren't even able to offer anything besides a one line denial or subject change, they got shorter over time to just a couple of words.

It doesn't even matter what the context or conspiracy, the question is, is it consistent with a plane crash or an explosive...

What is consistent?

[Spendulus]

So why even take part in this thread, one words replies don't exactly make you look good. ...

You said,

It doesn't even matter what the context or conspiracy, the question is, is it consistent with a plane crash or an explosive...

What is the "it", exactly?

[BADecker]

So why even take part in this thread, one words replies don't exactly make you look good. ...

You said,

It doesn't even matter what the context or conspiracy, the question is, is it consistent with a plane crash or an explosive...

What is the "it", exactly?

How in the world insane are you? If Blue Powder is an authority on it, why don't you believe him? If he isn't, how silly you are to ask his opinion!

[BluePowder]

since you replied to my pic about no planes at pentagon, "it" would be the pics.

So why even take part in this thread, one words replies don't exactly make you look good. ...

You said,

It doesn't even matter what the context or conspiracy, the question is, is it consistent with a plane crash or an explosive...

What is the "it", exactly?

[Spendulus]

since you replied to my pic about no planes at pentagon, "it" would be the pics.

So why even take part in this thread, one words replies don't exactly make you look good. ...

You said,

It doesn't even matter what the context or conspiracy, the question is, is it consistent with a plane crash or an explosive...

What is the "it", exactly?

What is the time and date the picture was taken, and where was it taken?

You should get these kinds of questions if you don't post a link, just a picture...

But through google images I locate your pic as a recently released FBI picture of "an inner wall" of the Pentagon after the 911 hijacked plane struck it.  It's in a group of pictures along with lots of crumbled up airplane parts. I didn't see any detail on where that hole was exactly, related to the angle of and direction of impact of the aircraft.

So yeah, what about this pic. Some inner wall of the pentagon. I'm not seeing anything at all there that you can hang a conspiracy theory on. I'm not seeing enough data to address your (poorly framed) question about whether the picture "is consistent with..." A better way to ask might be "is there anything here that directly shows an explosion." The answer to that is no, there are none of the fractured or shattered appearances that would indicate pressure waves faster than the speed of sound in the materials, such as would be the case with a 50,000 fps gas shockwave.  Oops, sorry, that's not at the 8th grade level.

I am seeing something else, which is "don't bother trying to damage the Pentagon by ramming planes into it."

Now, you ask about a pic of a hole in a wall, next to hundreds of crumpled airplane parts, whether that pic is consistent with an airplane crash. Do you think some guys snuck into the Pentagon in the middle of the night with a disassembled Boeing jet, sneakily assembled it, then planted explosives, then in the morning blew it all up?

That seems rather complicated to me and would require some guys working a night shift. They don't like to work night shifts and want more more for them.

[BluePowder]

No plane parts worth mentioning.. the parts shown are small enough to fit in the trunk of a car. Just like in PA where they dumped a tail wing on the field.

No sneaking in the pentagon required either, that part was empty and under renovations, why would there be bare brick walls and no furniture in that part if it was being used.

The part to note, which you beat around the bush again and avoided was the size of the hole in the pentagon, which is barely the size of a minivan,, both side walls intact so where would a plane have gone ?

In the other pic with the hole, which is ground level, there is also black spray paint around the whole, its not proof of anything but its like a "cut here" or blast here marker.  the floor looks perfect, hardly a crash site, again only a fool would believe this is a commerical airliner crash

I figured date and time were obvious since the fire hoses are still spraying.

since you replied to my pic about no planes at pentagon, "it" would be the pics.

So why even take part in this thread, one words replies don't exactly make you look good. ...

You said,

It doesn't even matter what the context or conspiracy, the question is, is it consistent with a plane crash or an explosive...

What is the "it", exactly?

What is the time and date the picture was taken, and where was it taken?

You should get these kinds of questions if you don't post a link, just a picture...

But through google images I locate your pic as a recently released FBI picture of "an inner wall" of the Pentagon after the 911 hijacked plane struck it.  It's in a group of pictures along with lots of crumbled up airplane parts. I didn't see any detail on where that hole was exactly, related to the angle of and direction of impact of the aircraft.

So yeah, what about this pic. Some inner wall of the pentagon. I'm not seeing anything at all there that you can hang a conspiracy theory on. I'm not seeing enough data to address your (poorly framed) question about whether the picture "is consistent with..." A better way to ask might be "is there anything here that directly shows an explosion." The answer to that is no, there are none of the fractured or shattered appearances that would indicate pressure waves faster than the speed of sound in the materials, such as would be the case with a 50,000 fps gas shockwave.  Oops, sorry, that's not at the 8th grade level.

I am seeing something else, which is "don't bother trying to damage the Pentagon by ramming planes into it."

Now, you ask about a pic of a hole in a wall, next to hundreds of crumpled airplane parts, whether that pic is consistent with an airplane crash. Do you think some guys snuck into the Pentagon in the middle of the night with a disassembled Boeing jet, sneakily assembled it, then planted explosives, then in the morning blew it all up?

That seems rather complicated to me and would require some guys working a night shift. They don't like to work night shifts and want more more for them.