Topic: University Study Finds Fire Did Not Cause Building 7's Collapse on 9/11 - page 22. (Read 2858 times)

to put explosive charges into a building. demolition crews would not just let offices workers mingle around all day. while they lay the charges..
people would notice charges strapped to the columns.
people will notice demolition guys strapping things to columns

for badecker to think that hundreds-thousands of people saw nothing.. but only badecker and his motley crew of youtube armchair theorists seen it all.. shows less awareness of badeckers own actions than of anything else he thinks could have happened
yep i said it badecker cant even work out his own actions. let alone something he has no experience or first person knowledge over..
and thats the part that makes me laugh

The idea that 9/11 was a demolition is really weird, and actually pretty funny. Because somehow it has to have the planes hit the towers, AND THEN THE DEMOLITION CHANGES SET OFF.

It's like an incredibly complicated and ridiculous conspiracy theory. I guess the Chinese or the Iranians are pouring a lot of huge amount of money into keeping it afloat.

dang you have a real memory loss problem
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54127072

Please explain better. Your wording could mean many things. And you don't have a link to the witness video you were talking about. But in a previous post I have listed videos that show the opposite of what you are saying. In addition, you seem to contradict yourself in several of the things you say, right in your post I am quoting.

Thanks for your understanding, and your desire to do a better job.

That building 7 was designed originally one way, then over time was hollowed out to create a huge interior atrium. Guess what? They took a lot of the supporting structure away when they did that. There were questions about that work, too. But it was signed off on and done.

badecker.

WITNESS video footage of the building 7 shows structural defects. and a collapse of the south side (left of video) several seconds first

the conspiracy geeks computer model does not
thus the computer model does not represent actual events.

the WITNESS video footage of buildin 7 showed no boom boom boom that comes with demolition charges.
those are two FACTS that are plane to see..


the conspiracy site you wish you believe in. showed 2 computer models. 1 of how a building is supose to callapse down on itself. and one that shows it leaning over which is not a normal construction thing.
the conspiracy geeks want to tell a story that the fall down model only occurs in demo. and leaning only occurs non demo

again wrong wrong wrong.

buildings are not designed to lean like a lost game of jenga. there are rules and regulations and material criteria and architectural design involvement done that allows a building to be made so tall without much risk to neighboring buildings.
they wouldnt be allowed to be built in the first place if the design was to lean over under a structural malfunction//damage


atleast wise up
then stop drinking bleach

so stop trying to dig deeper down this path. because you are only digging a hole for yourself.
atleast realise ur trying to bury yourself neck deep in dirt. and actually accept that you need to just stop falling

^^^ Yes, but, the proof is in that 9/11 was a demolition activity from the inside.

Badecker has so far created three separate threads on this forum each on a "miracle cure" for Covid-19.

1) a licorice extract
2) MMS2
3) vitamin C

And then, claimed that the symptoms of covid-19 were really those of zinc deficiency, using a chart with bogus information. Any medical study, and most nurses could immediately state the symptoms of zinc deficiency.

we get it badecker wants to show this forum 'the other side of the story'
problem is he is grabbing at the shelves of the sci-fi/fantasy section of the library

we know badecker is super religious
in a library there is sections that talk about religion philosopically. some have it in the childrens section where its made into child friendly stories. some have it in horror and disaster sections like stories of plagues/noahs ark..

but badecker is only grabbing at the fantasy/scifi section for all his knowledge about everything.
he wouldnt know where the philosophy section was even if someone pointed him in its direction.

let alone know where to look for actual fact

You wouldn't know what propaganda was if it jumped up and bit you in the eyeball.

Be my guest, post more Chinese propaganda.

What is it with you? I simply reported an article so that people can see the other side of the story. But it somehow hurts your itty-bitty feewings enough that you are trying to make a personal thing out of it. What's the matter? Are you one of those Americans that fought in WW2 or Viet Nam or Korea, and you just can't believe that there would be somebody in the USA government who would dishonor you so badly?

Wake up, buddy. They are playing you. And the longer you let them, the bigger of a play it will be.

You are trying to shift the subject to the Towers. The subject... YOUR subject... is building 7.

It's not me that has to make you a mind. It's You. You said the Chinese spies were "Proof", now you are trying to use an alternate "proof", Youtube videos. They are about the towers, not building 7. But somehow something there supports your ideas?

I don't think so. But what do I know? You have some Youtube videos made by more Chinese disinformation agents or those they paid?

oh badecker.

it must really hurt when someone calls you out on your lack of common sense.
i do like how you flip flop to try hiding that you ever were as dumb on the flop as you pretend not to be on the flip. but a couple days later you return back to the flop again. and it just makes your whole comedy routing stale.

try some new material. its become obvious you dont know 99.9% of the stuff you talk about
atleast spend a couple days trying to learn something. and just make a little effort in actually trying to provide something useful and factual

Well, make up your mind. First you say its from paid Chinese spies, and now you say it isn't.

You were there? Listening for bangs in the Towers? Other witnesses say there were bangs in the Towers. Watch the videos, or search. You know how, right?

So now the "proof" is not from paid Chinese spies disinformation to "Youtube proof."

And no, there wasn't any bang-bangs in those towers. But if there were, then can you please provide all that info to the US military? They might want to be sure that our troops only shoot an enemy when a land mine is going off under his feet. You know, just to be sure?

If you were close enough to see this, you would be dead, long before you recognized what you saw.


But if you want to see the explosive residue found in the Twin Towers, watch this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkaX5n3pfZE and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOWWSjol6Ps.


These buildings were designed to withstand plane hits like the ones that happened on 9/11.


Demolition experts can barely cause buildings to fall the way they want when the whole demolition is controlled. So you think that the design from years before could make the buildings fall... like the designers had a crystal ball? If you get any sillier... oh go ahead. We need some more laughs.



Explosions in the Towers before the collapses: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A9X_8flGeM, and the explosions, themselves, this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnyiT9gCYlA.

Sorry franky1. You better go back to school. What!? You never attended school? I take off my hat to you. You are doing very well for somebody who never went to school.

is badecker still being ignorant

ok one more time..
the computer generated model was not a model of exact representation of exact events.
instead it was a model of a building falling equally
which is the case for all sky scrapers for all main reasons of structure defect or demolition (both)

the other computer mode was a random model of a leaning building which is not even typical expectants to occur in most real life situations

the leaning building model was then told to be 'what should happen'
and the fall model was told as 'only should happen under demolition'

both statements are false
watching the actual video. it shows the building got damaged. and the side nearest the towers(south) took the brunt of it. and the east side just had a couple floors of fire billowing out

9-11 consiracists think the east side showing a bit of fire was the side that the towers were on.. it was not
most of the damage was on the south side.

the south side fell first. which then weakened the rest of the building. and then it a came down. as designed it should do

More likely they were paid disinformation agents, who fabricated results to concoct an anti-American story that naive, ignorant and gullible people might believe.

They simply found more proof that the whole 9/11 thing was an inside job.