1999 replies to this topic

[skyeagle409]

Wandering, on 13 June 2012 - 12:02 AM, said:

How on earth do you get Q24s quote with my name at the top?

What not add you in on the fun? Now, let's get down to business. What evidence can you produce that implicates the Israelis in the 9/11 attacks. If you have such evidence, please forward that evidence to your local news station and to the FBI so we can watch the breaking news on our TV sets, otherwise, admit that you do not have such evidence.

Edited by skyeagle409, 13 June 2012 - 12:33 AM.

[turbonium]

skyeagle409, on 09 June 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

Since it has been determined that fire and impact damage caused the collapse of the WTC buildings, you had better think twice.

No.  It has been determined that random fire and impact damage cannot have caused the collapse.

Accept the facts, no matter how brutal they be. It is far better than this constant denial. . .   .
\

  . \

skyeagle409, on 09 June 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

Ever wondered why I posted pictures of buildings in Iraq that withstood multiple bomb strikes and remained standing? Ever wondered why one of the WTC towers remained standing in 1993 despite the detonation of more than 1000 pounds of explosives beneath that building?

To again show why random damage does not cause a total collapse!

Like any random damage, That means WTC 1,2 and 7 didn't  - couldn't - have collapsed from just random fire and damage.

[skyeagle409]

turbonium, on 16 June 2012 - 05:38 AM, said:

No.  It has been determined that random fire and impact damage cannot have caused the collapse.

It was not only determined, it was proven. Not only that, were was no indication on the columns that explosives were used and there were no seimic spikes of bomb explosions. In addition, demolition experts on the scene have stated for the record that there was no evidence of explosives.

Quote

Accept the facts, no matter how brutal they be. It is far better than this constant denial.

Considering that we have evidence of fires and impact damage on the WTC buildings before they collapsed, but no evidence of explosives, is another reason why I have accepted the fact that fires and impact damage brought down the WTC builidings, not explosives.

Read this report from one of the world's top demolition experts regarding the collapse of the WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7, which proves that it is YOU, who is living in a world of denial..


'A Critical Analysis of the Collapse of WTC Towers, 1, 2 & 7 From an Explosives and Demolition Industry Viewpoint'.

http://www.implosion... of 9-8-06 .pdf


Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy theories and Controlled Demolition Myths

Photographic evidence proves beyond a doubt that floors sagged, pulling perimeter columns in. An event some conspiracy sites suggest never happened.

http://www.debunking911.com/sag.htm

Edited by skyeagle409, 16 June 2012 - 07:38 PM.

[turbonium]

skyeagle409, on 16 June 2012 - 07:18 PM, said:

It was not only determined, it was proven. Not only that, were was no indication on the columns that explosives were used and there were no seimic spikes of bomb explosions. In addition, demolition experts on the scene have stated for the record that there was no evidence of explosives.



Considering that we have evidence of fires and impact damage on the WTC buildings before they collapsed, but no evidence of explosives, is another reason why I have accepted the fact that fires and impact damage brought down the WTC builidings, not explosives.

Does random damage cause total collapse? Yes or no?

After I see your answer, we can move ahead

So which is it, then?....

[skyeagle409]

turbonium, on 17 June 2012 - 08:15 AM, said:

Does random damage cause total collapse? Yes or no?

Not in the case of the WTC buildings. Apparently, you didn't bother to read that report from Brent Blanchard, of Protec, who is one of the top demolition experts in the world. In fact, demolition companies  come to him and his company for advice and assistance. And, you must understand the facts.

Quote

August 8, 2006: No Explosives Used in WTC Collapse, Says Demolition Industry Leader

Brent Blanchard, a leading professional and writer in the controlled demolition industry, publishes a 12-page report that says it refutes claims that the World Trade Center was destroyed with explosives. The report is published on ImplosionWorld.com, a demolition industry website edited by Blanchard. Blanchard is also director of field operations for Protec Documentation Services, Inc., a company specializing in monitoring construction-related demolitions. In his report,

Blanchard says that Protec had portable field seismographs in “several sites in Manhattan and Brooklyn” on 9/11. He says they did not show the “spikes” that would have been caused by explosions in the towers. Blanchard also takes aim at the claim that Building 7 of the WTC was demolished, writing: “Several demolition teams had reached Ground Zero by 3:00 pm on 9/11, and these individuals witnessed the collapse of WTC 7 within a few hundred feet of the event. We have spoken with several who possess extensive experience in demolition, and all reported hearing or seeing nothing to indicate an explosive detonation precipitating the collapse.”

http://www.implosion... of 9-8-06 .pdf

Edited by skyeagle409, 17 June 2012 - 04:57 PM.

[Wandering]

skyeagle409, on 17 June 2012 - 04:50 PM, said:

Not in the case of the WTC buildings. Apparently, you didn't bother to read that report from Brent Blanchard, of Protec, who is one of the top demolition experts in the world. In fact, demolition companies  come to him and his company for advice and assistance. And, you must understand the facts.

Oh **** we are back to Brent "Never demolished a building" Blanchard.


I've watched alot of open heart surgery on TV Sky, next time your valves need replacing come see me. I'll do you a good deal mate.

[skyeagle409]

Wandering, on 17 June 2012 - 11:45 PM, said:

Oh **** we are back to Brent "Never demolished a building" Blanchard. I've watched alot of open heart surgery on TV Sky, next time your valves need replacing come see me. I'll do you a good deal mate.

There you go slamming one of the top demolition experts in the world. It takes a top expert in the field of building implosions to cover details about the demolition process, which Brent Blanchard is very good at, so is it any wonder then, why demolition companies depend upon the expertise of Brent Blanchard's and his company? You need to understand that  Brent Blanchard is one of the top leaders in the world of implosion demolition, and the demolition industry also depend upon his news articles,and reports for updated information, so slamming Brent Blanchard exposes the weakness of your position.

Quote

Brent Blanchard

Over the past 24 years, Mr. Blanchard's photographic images depicting demolition projects have won numerous national and international awards, and collections of his team's work have been showcased in The Philadelphia Museum of Art and The Franklin Institute Science Museum, among other prestigious venues.

He has also appeared on internationally broadcast television documentaries such as Demolition Day (CBS News), Demolition (NBC/Dateline), Blastmasters (The Learning Channel) and The Art & Science of Blasting (Discovery Channel) as an authority on the explosive demolition industry.

http://www.implosion...om/history4.htm


How Building Implosions Work

Special thanks to Brent Blanchard at Protec Documentation Services for all his help with this article. According to Brent Blanchard, an implosion expert with the demolition consulting firm Protec Documentation Services, virtually every building in the world is unique. And for any given building, there are any number of ways a blasting crew might bring it down.

http://science.howst...g-implosion.htm


News from Professional Demolition International

Implosions, Brent Blanchard, reports

http://www.zoominfo....argetid=profile


IMPLOSIONWORLD
Why is Implosionworld.com's Brent Blanchard hanging around with Brad Pitt?

Welcome to the explosive demolition industry’s worldwide source for news and information on building implosions, blowdowns and all other types of structural blasting projects.

Implosionworld.com publishes news, feature articles and non-proprietary technical information. In addition, there’s the award-winning photography captured by Protec Documentation Services as well as many outside contributors. Throughout this website, you’ll find images designed to capture the essence of each unique project, as we work to present an insightful look into the world of explosive demolition with perspective and integrity.

http://www.implosion...d.com/body.html

Quote

I've watched alot of open heart surgery on TV Sky, next time your valves need replacing come see me. I'll do you a good deal mate.

It takes an expert to operate on heart valves, an experience that you cannot obtain from just watching TV, but on the other hand, demolition companies depend upon Brent Blanchard for his expertise, which clearly, he did not obtain from watching TV.

About Brent Blanchard.

Quote

Brent Blanchard

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Brent L. Blanchard currently serves as Operations Manager for Protec Documentation Services Inc., Rancocas Woods, New Jersey. The firm performs vibration consulting, structural survey and photographic work for contractors throughout the United States and abroad.

In addition, Mr. Blanchard is a senior writer for implosionworld.com, a website that publishes news and information related to the explosive demolition industry. His team's work is also regularly published in various periodicals such as The Journal of Explosives Engineering (ISEE-USA), Explosives Engineering (IEE-UK), Demolition Magazine, Demolition & Recycling International, Constructioneer and Construction News.

Over the past 24 years, Mr. Blanchard's photographic images depicting demolition projects have won numerous national and international awards, and collections of his team's work have been showcased in The Philadelphia Museum of Art and The Franklin Institute Science Museum, among other prestigious venues. He has also appeared on internationally broadcast television documentaries such as Demolition Day (CBS News), Demolition (NBC/Dateline), Blastmasters (The Learning Channel) and The Art & Science of Blasting (Discovery Channel) as an authority on the explosive demolition industry.

http://implosionworld.com/history4.htm


Brent Blanchard
Senior Writer
Implosionworld.com

The history of implosionworld.com dates back to 1970, when the core team at Protec Documentation Services first began documenting construction and demolition sites.

Although participating on "implosion" projects has always been interesting work, in the early years the photographic aspect was seen as little more than a challenging diversion from the more technical responsibilities of vibration monitoring and inspecting adjacent structures prior to a blast.

As Protec grew, the company continued to expand its reputation as an international leader in the fields of vibration prediction, monitoring, structure inspections, and perhaps equally as important, capturing the types of images that clearly illustrated how precise and dependable this form of demolition could be.

In 1996, Protec producers developed What A Blast, the first documentary to showcase a variety of blasting specialists performing world-class projects. The four-part series was then augmented by a spin-off of the firm's corporate website, titled Protec's World of Explosive Demolition, which was updated monthly with the latest structural blasting photographs and industry-related information.

You cannot obtain surgery skills by simply watching TV and since the demolition industry depends heavily upon the expertise of  Brent Blanchard and his news articles and detailed reports, it is clear that Brent Blanchard didn't obtain his demolition experience via the TV set either.

Common sense dictates that it takes a demolition expert to write news articles and to publish detailed reports on the demolition process, which the demolition industry depends upon, and since the demolition industry heavily depends upon the expertise of Brent Blanchard show just how fast common sense has passed you by.

As I have said before, your keywords gave away your position, which clearly does not rely on facts and evidence, just fantasy..

Edited by skyeagle409, 18 June 2012 - 07:44 AM.

[Babe Ruth]

I'll lie, and you swear to it!

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 18 June 2012 - 12:41 PM, said:

I'll lie, and you swear to it!

Well, did  you claim that no aircraft crashed at Shanksville despite the evidence? Did you claim that there was no damage to the surrounding trees near the crash site of United 93? Did you claim that American 77 did not crash into the Pentagon? Did you imply that explosives could have brought down light poles near the Pentagon?

If the answer is yes, then we can tie your comment to the questions above.

[Babe Ruth]

That one went right over your head Sky, but that's OK.

I say that no 757 crashed at Shanksville BECAUSE of the evidence, not despite the evidence.  More accurately because of the ABSENCE of evidence, and the statements of a handful of first responders who were there, and the statements and video records of those flying overhead the site.

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 18 June 2012 - 08:53 PM, said:

That one went right over your head Sky, but that's OK.

I say that no 757 crashed at Shanksville BECAUSE of the evidence, not despite the evidence.

The evidence proves that United 93 crashed at Shanksville and there are no ACARS messages of United 93 landing anywhere else. We have remains of a B-757 in the markings of United Airlines and those of the passengers and crew  of United 93, and of course, United Airlines confirmed the loss of United 93 at Shanksville and substantiated by recovery crews at the crash site, which explains why the FAA has deregistered the tail number of the airframe of United 93.

So the question is: What gave you the idea hat no B-757 crashed at Shanksville when all of the eivdence proved otherwise?

Quote

...,   More accurately because of the ABSENCE of evidence,...

You mean, like the absence of evidence of what you see here at Shanksville during the recovery of United 93?







DNA recovered from the crash site of United 93.

Quote

...and the statements of a handful of first responders....

.

[W Tell]

skyeagle409, on 09 June 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

Since it has been determined that fire and impact damage caused the collapse of the WTC buildings, you had better think twice. Ever wondered why I posted pictures of buildings in Iraq that withstood multiple bomb strikes and remained standing? Ever wondered why one of the WTC towers remained standing in 1993 despite the detonation of more than 1000 pounds of explosives beneath that building?

I've wondered. You use it as an example that buildings don't fall that way in the past.

turbonium, on 16 June 2012 - 05:38 AM, said:

To again show why random damage does not cause a total collapse!

Someone actually calls you on it..

skyeagle409, on 16 June 2012 - 07:18 PM, said:

Considering that we have evidence of fires and impact damage on the WTC buildings before they collapsed, but no evidence of explosives, is another reason why I have accepted the fact that fires and impact damage brought down the WTC builidings, not explosives.

You come back with this.

Honostly Sky, does impact damage and fire make buildings fall or not?

I'm curious now.

[Erudite Celt]

BFB, on 18 January 2012 - 10:20 AM, said:

Can someone please answer this question for me?

Why didn't the sprinklers work in WTC 7?

Because someone disabled them? Or perhaps the water mains were taken out when the towers collapsed?

[booNyzarC]

W Tell, on 19 June 2012 - 12:25 AM, said:

Honostly Sky, does impact damage and fire make buildings fall or not?

I'm curious now.

Why can't it?  Of course impact and fire damage can make buildings fall.

And why have you and all the other conspiracy theorists avoided, ignored, or missed my outline of just this kind of question?

Should I quote it for you?  Nah.  Do some research.  It was in one of the most recent responses I had to Stundie before he disappeared to who knows where.

[skyeagle409]

W Tell, on 19 June 2012 - 12:25 AM, said:

I've wondered. You use it as an example that buildings don't fall that way in the past.

Honostly Sky, does impact damage and fire make buildings fall or not?

I'm curious now.

In the case of the WTC buildings, yes. Remember, not all buildings are designed alike.

Edited by skyeagle409, 19 June 2012 - 01:06 AM.