ANZACs and war and stuff

[Laava]

Can I become a pophet? Too easy, sorry.

Anyhoo, this thread is about to take a turn you're not gonna like Ed, and the blame lays squarely on your shoulders.

Aren't you already someones poppet?

[mashman]

Do you often hear voices in buckets?

Do they tell you that you're full of shit....?

Only bleating and only when you're around. Go figure.

Like I said, they bleat... and to be more specific, they bleat nonsense.

[Katman]

I should perhaps ignore him and if I was sure everyone recognises he is using misinformation and false implications in an agenda against me and therefore will ignore him too, I would.

Misinformation and false implications? They're your words Ed.

Anyway, have a look at those videos - I've got some physics questions for you.

[jonbuoy]

How much do you understand about freefall Ed?

Watch these videos and when you've done so I've got some questions for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXTlaqXsm4k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3mudruFzNw

Well most people have already made up their minds and won´t be changed but - the footage of the collapse in those videos you posted is quite poor but it does look like it happens from the base upwards but how about these two?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Mz0_x7313I

The tower appears to collapse from the top to the bottom - here it collapses from the bottom to the top (skip to 55 for movement!)?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJA5jKfn1u8

[Katman]

Well most people have already made up their minds and won´t be changed but - the footage of the collapse in those videos you posted is quite poor but it does look like it happens from the base upwards but how about these two?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Mz0_x7313I

The tower appears to collapse from the top to the bottom - here it collapses from the bottom to the top (skip to 55 for movement!)?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJA5jKfn1u8

Is that a serious rebuttal?

The links I've posted to are talking specifically about the collapse of Building 7 and the questions I have are specifically about the collapse of Building 7.

[jonbuoy]

Is that a serious rebuttal?

The links I've posted to are talking specifically about the collapse of Building 7 and the questions I have are specifically about the collapse of Building 7.

Yes - do you want to discuss it in an adult fashion or not? So you only think building 7 was brought down by explosives - not the twin towers?

[Drew]

Is that a serious rebuttal?

The links I've posted to are talking specifically about the collapse of Building 7 and the questions I have are specifically about the collapse of Building 7.

Wait. We were meant to be serious.

Fuck sakes you cunts, am I not on the goddamn memo list or summat?

[Katman]

Yes - do you want to discuss it in an adult fashion or not? So you only think building 7 was brought down by explosives - not the twin towers?

I don't know about the twin towers but if Building 7 was brought down by explosives why would you not suspect that explosives might be involved in the twin towers?

[jonbuoy]

I don't know about the twin towers but if Building 7 was brought down by explosives why would you not suspect that explosives might be involved in the twin towers?

Anything´s possible - but it doesn't look that way from the video? The big show for the public would have been the twin towers - the rest - incidental. Why bother to blow up a nearby building - to destroy evidence? You would think people capable of planning this would know how to wipe hard drives and shred papers.

[Katman]

Anything´s possible - but it doesn't look that way from the video? The big show for the public would have been the twin towers - the rest - incidental. Why bother to blow up a nearby building - to destroy evidence? You would think people capable of planning this would know how to wipe hard drives and shred papers.

Forget the twin towers for a moment.

Do you accept that there's a distinct possibility that Building 7 was brought down by explosives?

[jonbuoy]

Forget the twin towers for a moment.

Do you accept that there's a distinct possibility that Building 7 was brought down by explosives?

I don´t know - the building looks like it collapses from the lower levels what caused the damage - that argument will carry on for ever I expect. The twin towers however look like they collapse from the damaged areas downwards - most likely from the damage caused by the aircraft, fuel, fires.

Can you think of a logical reason to plant explosives and demolish the building in that way? If you wanted to destroy it and not raise questions - why not just use incendiary devices?

[puddytat]

This is as good a theory as any....

http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-referenc...xt-folder.html

[mashman]

Fuck sakes you cunts, am I not on the goddamn memo list or summat?

Yer names not down. Get the fuck out of Ed's thread.

[Katman]

I don´t know - the building looks like it collapses from the lower levels what caused the damage - that argument will carry on for ever I expect. The twin towers however look like they collapse from the damaged areas downwards - most likely from the damage caused by the aircraft, fuel, fires.

Can you think of a logical reason to plant explosives and demolish the building in that way? If you wanted to destroy it and not raise questions - why not just use incendiary devices?

Stick with me here.

Building 7 clearly falls for a number of seconds in freefall. NIST originally denied the freefall theory until they were confronted with the laws of physics.

They now accept that the building did fall for a number of seconds in freefall.

Freefall is, by definition, subject to the forces of gravity - i.e. falling with zero resistance.

A building pancaking on itself floor by floor would not exhibit zero resistance.

[jonbuoy]

Stick with me here.

Building 7 clearly falls for a number of seconds in freefall. NIST originally denied the freefall theory until they were confronted with the laws of physics.

They now accept that the building did fall for a number of seconds in freefall.

Freefall is by definition subject to the forces of gravity - i.e. falling with zero resistance.

A building pancaking on itself floor by floor would not exhibit zero resistance.

No - but I assume heavily damaged foundations or structural damage on lower levels would have the same effect as explosives - pulling the rug out from underneath. I just cant see a reason for planting explosives in the building - or doing it in a way that would look suspicious - they would know how many cameras and eyewitnesses would be looking and sifting through the evidence.