Creative Speculation

cpwm17

(3,829 posts)

47. A couple – not even close

Wed Jul 31, 2013, 09:28 AM

Jul 2013

Here's the Final Report on the Collapse of WTC7: http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610

Are the numerous contributers to this report in on your conspiracy theory?

As I asked above:

why did it collapse?

What problems do you have with their conclusions?

What qualifications do you have to doubt the conclusions of the engineering and scientific community, as represented in this report?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

68 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Official Video: ReThink911 September 2013 [View all] damnedifIknow Jul 2013 OP

thanks and k & r! eom wildbilln864 Jul 2013 #1

Interesting.. truebrit71 Jul 2013 #2

LOL, only 30% of people still have questions about 9/11? Big deal. 30% of Americans.... Logical Jul 2013 #3

"That means 70% of Americans think it is full of crap" - no it doesn't ConcernedCanuk Jul 2013 #7

LOL, ok, 30% is a lot. n-t Logical Jul 2013 #8

Yep. It is a lot. Practically 1 in each 3 individuals. n/t ocpagu Jul 2013 #17

LOL, 30% of people believe Cloud Computing involves actual Clouds..... Logical Jul 2013 #19

Only 1% of Americans have PhDs Ace Acme Oct 2013 #53

the k Berlum Jul 2013 #4

According to the engineers that studied WTC 7 cpwm17 Jul 2013 #5

What is the "engineering and scientific community"? ocpagu Jul 2013 #18

A couple – not even close cpwm17 Jul 2013 #47

Right. ocpagu Jul 2013 #48

Not everyone who does any work for the US Government is in on some big conspiracy cpwm17 Jul 2013 #49

One problem is that the computer models show the building folding up like a wet paper bag Ace Acme Oct 2013 #54

"Rethink" Richard Gage's version of 9/11? Why? William Seger Jul 2013 #6

Not only the event of 9/11 damnedifIknow Jul 2013 #9

All the more reason... William Seger Jul 2013 #10

We've never...... Frank_Norris_Lives Jul 2013 #11

Because we've never... William Seger Jul 2013 #12

Actually..... Frank_Norris_Lives Jul 2013 #13

We've never had 767s flying at 500+ mph... William Seger Jul 2013 #14

You're right! Frank_Norris_Lives Jul 2013 #20

Friction. AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #23

Undoubtedly there is.... Frank_Norris_Lives Jul 2013 #36

Where else COULD it smoulder? AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #37

Damn, my scoutmaster lied to me.... Frank_Norris_Lives Jul 2013 #41

Your scoutmaster is the reason people will run over a pit full of hot coals with their car AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #43

Fire is hot, water is wet, and other revelations William Seger Jul 2013 #26

As I have sworn.... Frank_Norris_Lives Jul 2013 #35

He clearly made a mistake about that paper, but AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #38

WTF? William Seger Jul 2013 #39

Here's evidence-based... Frank_Norris_Lives Jul 2013 #40

It must be hard to find evidence when you deliberately avoid it William Seger Jul 2013 #42

That's not actually paper anymore. AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #44

I've heard that claim, too, but I don't think so William Seger Jul 2013 #45

Oh, that's a good point. AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #46

Untrue. AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #16

Back at you bro..... Frank_Norris_Lives Jul 2013 #21

Again, all the steel framed components exposed to fire in Madrid Tower collapsed 3 hours into the AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #22

Actually, there are no photos of fires in WTC7 until noon, and those fires didn't last Ace Acme Oct 2013 #55

Cite your spectacular high rise fires, building by building. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #57

And even fought by 600 firefighters it was a conflagration and burned all night Ace Acme Oct 2013 #58

You apparently never saw the side of the building facing the main towers. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #59

Yes I saw it, and unlike you I didn't believe the people who lie about it Ace Acme Oct 2013 #60

Talk of explosions is not verboten, and never was. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #62

NIST's discounting of charges was based on the use of RDX, Ace Acme Oct 2013 #64

RDX is a common and widely available explosive, with similar properites to many other explosives. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #66

Why would you expect first-class demolitionists to use WWII-era explosives? Ace Acme Oct 2013 #67

damnedifiknow - Just so you're aware... truth2power Jul 2013 #15

There are sites where 9/11 bullshit goes unchallenged William Seger Jul 2013 #24

From your mouth to God's ear, of course. truth2power Jul 2013 #25

You've seen Gage's "scientific" treatment of the issue William Seger Jul 2013 #27

William... truth2power Jul 2013 #31

So much for "honest discussion" William Seger Jul 2013 #33

I used to say that also when people disagreed with me LanternWaste Sep 2013 #51

It's not just about honest disagreement. i'm sure you know that... truth2power Sep 2013 #52

K&R Over the years since 9/11 I've gone from snappyturtle Jul 2013 #28

In other words, you've been propagandized William Seger Jul 2013 #29

Au contraire! THanks for the links...I've been to 3 of the snappyturtle Jul 2013 #30

Thanks, snappyturtle, for not taking the bait. As you said, so succinctly... truth2power Jul 2013 #32

"Take your best shot" = "bait" ? William Seger Jul 2013 #34

Popular Mechanics? Ace Acme Oct 2013 #56

Yes, Popular Mechanics William Seger Oct 2013 #61

They were straw man arguments Ace Acme Oct 2013 #63

Which "legiimate truth movement" is that? William Seger Oct 2013 #65

You've never heard of the 9/11 Truth Statement? You haven't read the Bronner VF article? Ace Acme Oct 2013 #68

HAHAHA!!! n/t Bully Taw Aug 2013 #50