911 inside job - for what?

[regeneratia]

I wish you had nothing to say as it'd be preferable to some of the rather ignorant things you do say such as: "That makes me sad, that love is not in your life." Now if this was a normal conversation and you were a normal commenter I'd ask you to back up with evidence your mistaken assertion here, but you've already said that you're not big on rationality when you can use feelings and intuition instead, so I guess all I can respond to you with is a shrug.

I simply know that there are indeed other ways of knowing things, and that knowing is not within the realms of the rational and digitally copied to present as a pseudo TRUTH here. If you refuse to honor that there are other ways of knowing things, I honor your ability to make those choices. That does not mean I consider you right nor that I consider myself "debunked". I am internally driven as far as what I think goes, not looking for extrenal validation that people will or will not give me.

I am balanced on rationality., balancing it with other ways of knowing. I did not say I didn't have rationality. I said that I don't rely on solely rationality. Shrug away, if it makes you feel better and supports your needs, I have no effect of it on this end.

Western thinking required reason. But I do believe that that manner of thinking has some serious drawbacks. I have read the philosophers about reason. I know what they idolized.

I instinctively and immediately koew that we were not getting the truth on 9-11. While everyone else was searching for the evidence, I had it within me to know.

Edited March 25, 2013 by regeneratia

[Stundie]

What lies? Prior to the impacts, point out the timelines anywhere in the videos where explosions are heard. If you are unable to point out to us the sound of explosions prior to the impacts, then you have no case.

So if people say they witness a tree collapsing in a forest, but there is no video of this tree collapsing. Does that mean there is no evidence of a tree collapsing?

Does evidence only consist of videos? lol

Are eyewitnesses no longer considered evidence, unless they witness something which you believe to be true, like the leaning of the WTC 7??

Here is another witness to the ones already posted who says a bomb went off before the plane hit.

Here is a compilation of people saying there was multiple explosions and bombs in the subway, some say before the plane hit.

[media=]

I also think William Rodriguez also says there was an explosion before the plane hit too.

Edited March 25, 2013 by Stundie

[skyeagle409]

So if people say they witness a tree collapsing in a forest, but there is no video of this tree collapsing. Does that mean there is no evidence of a tree collapsing?

It doesn't take a technical person to determine if a tree fell or not.

Does evidence only consist of videos?

The overwhelming evidence involves photos and videos and seismic monitors among many others.

Are eyewitnesses no longer considered evidence,...

Not if they are not knowledgeable enough to understand the technical aspects of the evidence. Remember, you can have witnesses to an automobile accident and there will be conflicts between witnesses..

unless they witness something which you believe to be true, like the leaning of the WTC 7??

Here is another witness to the ones already posted who says a bomb went off before the plane hit.

The videos of depicting American 11 and United 175 striking the WTC buildings did not detect the sound of explosions prior to the impacts and seismic detectors in the area did not detect bomb explosions.

I also think William Rodriguez also says there was an explosion before the plane hit too.

William Rodriquez is no longer considered a reliable witness and has been caught lying.

William Rodriguez - Last Man Out: Discovered a Fraud!

We have more then a few things we have discovered about Mr. William Rodriguez, alleged last man out of the world trade center on 9/11 which are extremely suspicious, but none as suspicious as when one draws a simple gracious time-line of William Rodriguez's very own tale of the events and compares it to probability verses possibility verses impossibility. . Unfortunately, no matter how one does the equation of William Rodriguez's tale of events of September the 11th, 2001, last man out, there is no available possibility that his story is true. There is literally no other possibility then that his tale of events is a staggering national hoax and at the crux of an international conspiracy.

His file is growing every day we look into this national hero of 9/11. When one lies and is caught in their lie, there is humiliation. But when one tells a lie thousands and thousands of times, and makes a fat living off of it for 10 years straight, who can describe the humiliation? William Rodriguez has told his lie, on National TV, International TV and beyond. He is by far one of the more prolific liars of the 21st century.

http://letsrollforum...uez-t24680.html

William Rodriguez

We're not quite sure what the suggestion is here. Why would a bomb in the basement be required to go off as the plane hit? What's the point? It wasn't aimed to demolish the building, presumably. It increased the risk of detection, required more effort in planting and hiding it, careful timing, and yet (if there were bombs elsewhere in the building) would achieve nothing at all.

It might weaken the structure, you're saying? Why? The towers collapsed from the impact point down, not from the base. There’s nothing a bomb 90+ floors below could do to affect that. And remember, the very base of the towers were left standing. This part of the structure is all that remained, which is why a few people survived in the lower stairwells and basement levels. No sign of it being weakened there.

Still, that's another argument. Our first concern with Rodriguez is the way his story has expanded since its first hearing, reported soon after the attacks.

http://www.911myths...._rodriguez.html

I might add that the sounds of explosions have been attributed to falling elevators that had nothing to do with explosives.

Accounts of Explosions

911Myths.com visitor Brandon Wright discovered a video of another collapse preceded by what sounds like enormous explosions (and were described by at least one witness as “like bombs”), yet actually came from metal failing under extreme stress.

http://www.911myths....explosions.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WTC Elevators and Shafts

We heard the explosion and within a matter of seconds after that impact, I heard – and as well as everybody else heard – this noise, this increasing sound of wind. And it was getting louder and louder. It was like a bomb, not quite the sound of a bomb coming down from a bomber. It was a sound of wind increasing, a whistling sound, increasing in sound.

I’m looking from the lobby up to a mezzanine area or the second floor where they lined up all the people to go up to the rooftop, and I’m looking up expecting something, building parts to be coming down, because I wasn’t quite sure what that noise was.

But I found out later, when the plane came through the building, it cut the hoist ropes, the governor ropes, of (the) 6 and 7 cars, which was the observation cars.

What we heard was 6 and 7 car free-falling from the 107th floor and they impacted the basement at B-2 Level. And that’s the explosion that filled the lobby within a matter of two or three seconds, engulfed the lobby in dust, smoke.

https://sites.google...celevatorshafts

So once again, people reporting the sound of explosions which were later attributed to things other than explosives.

Edited March 26, 2013 by skyeagle409

[Stundie]

It doesn't take a technical person to determine if a tree fell or not.

And it doesn't take a genius to work out that if people heard an explosion, they heard an explosion......lol

The overwhelming evidence involves photos and videos and seismic monitors among many others.

Are you intentionally ignorant and incapable of answering a straight question?? lol

The videos of depicting American 11 and United 175 striking the WTC buildings did not detect the sound of explosions prior to the impacts and seismic detectors in the area did not detect bomb explosions.

The stupidity is intentionally hilarious.

Was there video in the basements prior to AA11 and UAL175 to detect the sounds of explosions?? lol

William Rodriquez is no longer considered a reliable witness and has been caught lying.

No he hasn't, his character has been assinated by internet warriors who can't handle the things he has to say...lol

I might add that the sounds of explosions have been attributed to falling elevators that had nothing to do with explosives.

Another load of crock!!

Explosions heard before the planes hit the WTC can't be elevators falling if there is no sign the plane hit the building yet genius!!.

So once again, people reporting the sound of explosions which were later attributed to things other than explosives.

Another hilarious case of an internet warrior who was not at GZ claiming he knows better than those at GZ.

These guys do not attribute the sounds of explosions to other things, such as falling elevators.

[skyeagle409]

And it doesn't take a genius to work out that if people heard an explosion, they heard an explosion.....

On the contrary, they heard what they thought were explosions, and once again, not even demolition experts in the area at that time heard any explosions, which jives with the fact that seismic monitors in the area didn't detect bomb explosions either.

Are you intentionally ignorant and incapable of answering a straight question??

I know when someone fails to understand what is presented to them so I reply in kind. You see, it is like this: I have been in war to know what a real bomb explosion sounds like and what I saw and heard in the WTC videos did not depict bomb explosions at all.

Was there video in the basements prior to AA11 and UAL175 to detect the sounds of explosions??

Seismic detectors detected the collapse of the WTC buildings but did not detect bomb explosions and there is no sound of bomb explosions in any 911 video. And as I have said before, you can have a number of witnesses to an automobile accident and in most cases, their accounts will not agree with one another.

Eyewitness accounts are not as reliable as you think, especially from those who are not knowledgeable enough to understand the nature of what they heard or saw.

Edited March 26, 2013 by skyeagle409

[Stundie]

On the contrary, they heard what they thought were explosions, and once again, not even demolition experts in the area at that time heard any explosions, which jives with the fact that seismic monitors in the area didn't detect bomb explosions either.

So when people where thrown by the blasts, they were not thrown, they thought they were thrown.

When people suffered from blasts, they thought they suffered from the blasts.

Oh how you have to love internet debunking warrior logic...lol

I know when someone fails to understand what is presented to them so I reply in kind. You see, it is like this: I have been in war to know what a real bomb explosion sounds like and what I saw and heard in the WTC videos did not depict bomb explosions at all.

Sorry personal incredulity is not really an argument....lol

Although you no doubt think that is the strongest evidence ever....lol

Seismic detectors detected the collapse of the WTC buildings but did not detect bomb explosions and there is no sound of bomb explosions in any 911 video.

Utter nonsense...lol

And as I have said before, you can have a number of witnesses to an automobile accident and in most cases, their accounts will not agree with one another.

So if multiple witnesses see an car accident, they didn't see a car accident because there accounts might differ?? lol

You and logic....at it's twisted best!! lol

Eyewitness accounts are not as reliable as you think, especially from those who are not knowledgeable enough to understand the nature of what they heard or saw.

They are not as reliable as an internet warrior who wasn't there but thinks he knows better. ...lol

[skyeagle409]

So when people where thrown by the blasts, they were not thrown, they thought they were thrown.

You have to understand that it has already been proven beyond any doubt that no explosions due to explosives were heard. To prove my point, you are unable to refute that fact with evidence.

[Stundie]

You have to understand that it has already been proven beyond any doubt that no explosions due to explosives were heard. To prove my point, you are unable to refute that fact with evidence.

Well you'll have to tell that to these firefighters who were there at GZ.

And I have already refute what you think is a fact, with evidence like the above.

What I can't do is convince you that this evidence from those who were actually at GZ, is a much better, stronger and convincing case than a pantomime internet debunking warrior, whose only evidence is his own delusions of grandeur and self importance...lol

[skyeagle409]

Well you'll have to tell that to these firefighters who were there at GZ.

[media=]

[/media]

And I have already refute what you think is a fact, with evidence like the above.

What I can't do is convince you that this evidence from those who were actually at GZ, is a much better, stronger and convincing case than a pantomime internet debunking warrior, whose only evidence is his own delusions of grandeur and self importance...lol

That is not evidence! Seismic monitors did not detect bomb explosions nor are explosions seen or heard in any WTC video. To sum that up;

1. No bomb explosions are seen in the videos

2. No explosions are heard in the videos

3. Seismic monitors did not detect bomb explosions

4. Demolition experts in the area stated they heard no bomb explosions

5. No evidence of explosives were found in the rubble of the WTC buildings.

Edited March 26, 2013 by skyeagle409

[Stundie]

That is not evidence! Seismic monitors did not detect bomb explosions nor are explosions seen nor heard in any WTC video.

So according to your own logic....lol

• Eyewitnesses are NOT evidence when they hear and feel explosions knocking them about........lol
  
• Eyewitnesses are evidence when they saw the WTC bulging ...
  

Another day, another contradiction...lol

And again, why do you keep repeating the lie that no explosions are not heard in any video......lol

[media=]

[/media]

Unless this is an elevator collapsing?? lol

You are a terrible liar and a pantomime debunker of the highest order...lol

Edited March 26, 2013 by Stundie

[skyeagle409]

So according to your own logic...

• Eyewitnesses are NOT evidence when they hear and feel explosions knocking them about........lol
  
• But eyewitnesses are evidence who saw the WTC bulging ...
  

Another day, another contradiction...lol

On the contrary, how many witnesses have said that American 77 passed north of the gas station and how many witnesses have disagreed? What group did the data and physical evidence support? Those who have said that American 77 did not pass north of the gas station.

In regards to the WTC buildings and the sound of explosions,we can apply the same logic because demolition experts in the area have said they heard no bomb explosions, so we can used data and other evidence to prove who is right and who is wrong.

Video and audio recorders in addition to seismic detectors in the area did not depict bomb explosions, which coincide with demolition experts who've said they heard no sound of bomb explosions and the fact that no evidence of explosives were found in the rubble of the WTC buildings.

Just because someone said they heard explosions doesn't make it so as we found out from those who've later said the sound of explosions they heard were attributed to elevators and failing structural components of the WTC buildings.

Edited March 26, 2013 by skyeagle409

[Stundie]

On the contrary, how many witnesses have said that American 77 passed north of the gas station and how many witnesses have disagreed?

What group did the data and physical evidence support? Those who have said that American 77 did not pass north of the gas station.

I have no idea, but subject shifting doesn't mean that the fire fighters are wrong or that these eyewitnesses are not evidence...lol

It's just poor debunking Skyeagle and very poor form which highlights the desperate lengths you will go to discredit those who were at GZ to hold on to your precious theory.

In regards to the WTC buildings and the sound of explosions,we can apply the same logic because demolition experts in the area have said they heard no bomb explosions, so we can used data and other evidence to prove who is right and who is wrong.

You are not applying logic, you are applying pantomime debunking in which you ignore evidence which doesn't support what you believe, but holding onto any evidence which supports your belief as gospel. lol

You have zero analytical or critical thinking skills which is evident every time you post...lol

Video and,audio recorders in addition to seismic detectors in the area did not depict bomb explosions, which coincide with demolition experts who've said they heard no sound of bomb explosions and the fact that no evidence of explosives were found in the rubble of the WTC buildings.

Sorry but if you think Brent Blanchard disproves all of the eyewitnesses at GZ, then you are a bigger moron than I thought....lol

Just because someone said they heard explosions doesn't make it so as we found out from those who've later said the sound of explosions they heard were attributed to elevators and failing structural components of the WTC buildings.

And based on the same arguement, just reversed....

Just because some people thought heard the sound of elevators falling, doesn't mean it was the sound of elevator were falling. lol

Edited March 26, 2013 by Stundie

[skyeagle409]

I have no idea, but subject shifting doesn't mean that the fire fighters are wrong or that these eyewitnesses are not evidence...

Statements of some firefighters were later revised to reflect that fact they misidentified the sound of falling elevators as explosions, but I guess you missed that as well.

[skyeagle409]

Just because some people thought heard the sound of elevators falling, doesn't mean it was the sound of elevator were falling. lol

It was already a proven fact.

Firefighter, “So we’re standing there in the lobby getting all together, all of a sudden we hear [simulates explosive sound], I look down to my right and the elevator has exploded like something like out of a Bruce Willis Die Hard movie.”

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Elevators were disaster within disaster

By Dennis Cauchon and Martha T. Moore, USA TODAY

The World Trade Center had one of the world's great elevator systems — 198 of the biggest, fastest elevators ever built. On the morning of Sept. 11, this technological marvel turned against the people who worked there. USA TODAY estimates that at least 200 people died inside World Trade Center elevators, the biggest elevator catastrophe in history.

Some people plunged to their deaths after elevator cables were destroyed by the hijacked jets that crashed into the buildings. Others burned to death as flames shot down shafts. And some who were trapped inside stalled elevators died when the buildings collapsed.

http://usatoday30.us...ator-usat_x.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Elevator Man's Tale

The Elevator Man's Tale

Featuring the unabridged transcript and audio.

Robert Jones

Age: 52

Hometown: Montgomery

Family: Two children

Occupation: Elevator mechanic for Ace Elevator in the World Trade Center

Was in the south tower when the first plane hit.

As I turned around to go back toward the core of the building in the lobby, the second plane hit, and that shook the building.

We heard the explosion and within a matter of seconds after that impact, I heard – and as well as everybody else heard – this noise, this increasing sound of wind. And it was getting louder and louder. It was like a bomb, not quite the sound of a bomb coming down from a bomber. It was a sound of wind increasing, a whistling sound, increasing in sound.

I’m looking from the lobby up to a mezzanine area or the second floor where they lined up all the people to go up to the rooftop, and I’m looking up expecting something, building parts to be coming down, because I wasn’t quite sure what that noise was.

But I found out later, when the plane came through the building, it cut the hoist ropes, the governor ropes, of (the) 6 and 7 cars, which was the observation cars.

Every night they would park those two cars up on the 107th floor. At the time the plane impacted B Tower, the observation deck wasn’t open yet, which was another life-saving factor. At the time it impacted the building, they hadn’t opened the observation deck.

Had they, there would’ve been many, maybe another 1,000, 2,000 people on the rooftop, because it was a clear day. It was a beautiful day.

What we heard was 6 and 7 car free-falling from the 107th floor and they impacted the basement at B-2 Level. And that’s the explosion that filled the lobby within a matter of two or three seconds, engulfed the lobby in dust, smoke.

And apparently from what I talked to with other mechanics, they saw the doors, the hatch doors blow off in the lobby level of 6 and 7 car.

http://www.thrnewmed...ember/jones.htm

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Many things can sound like explosions, but not be produced by explosions, in an elevator shaft during an event like 9/11. One example from 2000, when an elevator missed its stop and hit the shaft ceiling:

Others [present] described the crash as sounding like a horrendous "boom."

People "thought it was a bomb," said Kim Dunlap, a receptionist on the 100th floor. It rocked the building. There's never a dull moment at the World Trade Center."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The report issued by Lamont-Doherty includes various graphs showing the seismic readings produced by the planes crashing into the two towers as well as the later collapse of both buildings. WhatReallyHappened.com chooses to display only one graph (Graph 1), which shows the readings over a 30-minute time span.On that graph, the 8- and 10-second collapses appear—misleadingly—as a pair of sudden spikes. Lamont-Doherty's 40-second plot of the same data (Graph 2) gives a much more detailed picture: The seismic waves—blue for the South Tower, red for the North Tower—start small and then escalate as the buildings rumble to the ground. Translation: no bombs.

Read more: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - World Trade Center - Popular Mechanics

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fire, Not Extra Explosives, Doomed Buildings, Expert Says

By John Fleck

Journal Staff Writer

A New Mexico explosives expert says he now believes there were no explosives in the World Trade Center towers, contrary to comments he made the day of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack.

"Certainly the fire is what caused the building to fail," said Van Romero, a vice president at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. The day of the attack, Romero told the Journal the towers' collapse, as seen in news videotapes, looked as though it had been triggered by carefully placed explosives.

Subsequent conversations with structural engineers and more detailed looks at the tape have led Romero to a different conclusion. Romero supports other experts, who have said the intense heat of the jet fuel fires weakened the skyscrapers' steel structural beams to the point that they gave way under the weight of the floors above. That set off a chain reaction, as upper floors pancaked onto lower ones.

My link

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

David Kravette, a managing director of Cantor Fitzgerald, the bond trading firm that occupied the upper floors of the North Tower and lost about 700 people, or more than two thirds of its 1,000 U.S.-based employees addressed what he saw in the lobby as the first plane hit. I have provided this quote from the Mercury News New York Bureau since it is the only reference I have seen to the free falling elevators and the fire ball at the lower levels of the tower.

“I saw a couple of elevators in free fall; you could hear them whizzing down and as they crashed, there was this huge explosion, like a fireball exploding out of the bank of elevators,” Kravette said. “People were engulfed in flames.”

http://www.engr.psu....Fitzgerald.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As you can see, people were confusing the sound of crashing elevators as bomb explosions.

Edited March 26, 2013 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

You are not applying logic, you are applying pantomime debunking in which you ignore evidence which doesn't support what you believe, but holding onto any evidence which supports your belief as gospel. l

You have zero analytical or critical thinking skills which is evident every time you post..

You seem to have forgotten that it is I, who has been supplying facts, data, and evidence. You say that witnesses have said that they heard bomb explosion, but I have supplied accounts from structural engineers and demolition experts who heard no bomb explosions, which explains why no bomb explosions were registered on seismic monitors.

Sorry but if you think Brent Blanchard disproves all of the eyewitnesses at GZ, then you are a bigger moron than I thought...

One of the world's top demolition experts whose expertise is sought by demolition companies around the world, has debunked WTC demolition theories with evidence and I might add that those seismic monitors was operated by his company.

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

Edited March 26, 2013 by skyeagle409

[Stundie]

Statements of some firefighters were later revised to reflect that fact they misidentified the sound of falling elevators as explosions, but I guess you missed that as well.

Some fire fighters may have saw an elevator falling, but that doesn't discount every other person who heard, saw and felt explosions.

Especially when you consider that not everyone was near a lift when they heard, saw or felt the explosions! lol

[Stundie]

It was already a proven fact.

It is not a proven fact at all....lol

As you can see, people were confusing the sound of crashing elevators as bomb explosions.

Oh dear, not every single person you attribute to confusing the sound of the elevator crashing, are actually elevators crashing.

Robert Jones doesn't say an elevator was crashing, he says that he heard from others (Which isn't evidence, but HEARSAY!! hahahahahaha!! Which makes a completel mockery of what you think consists as evidence!) that the explosion blew off the doors to the elevator, that is not evidence the elevator was crashing down. Talk about misconstruing evidence to shoe horn into your everyone heard elevators falling.

• The account of Kim Dunlap is from an incident in 2000 in which an elevator slammed into a ceiling. Are you suggesting that elevators slammed into ceilings on 9/11?
  
• Like you, popular mechanics were not at GZ and the explosions in the WTC back in 93 didn't produce any seismic evidence, making the entire point moot.
  
• Van Romero who initially said the building was demolished with explosive, changes his mind and wasn't there at GZ on 9/11. So not sure how his opinion disproves that of the many people who heard/saw/felt explosions.
  
• Then you have a single quote from David Kravette who says he saw a couple of elevators on fire which caused an explosion.
  

So out of all of that, there is one piece of evidence from a witness at GZ, which you constitute as fire fighters later revising their accounts and some how this person prove that every single person at GZ did not hear or see or even felt the blasts of the explosions are all wrong?

Jesus, it's amazing that you seriously think you are debunking anything when all you are doing is showing everyone on the forum that you are dishonest...lol

If you really want to be taken seriously, you've seriously got to be a little more honest!

[Stundie]

You seem to have forgotten that it is I, who has been supplying facts, data, and evidence.

No, you have been supplying bunk which you have deluded yourself is evidence...lol

You say that witnesses have said that they heard bomb explosion, but I have supplied accounts from structural engineers and demolition experts who heard no bomb explosions, which explains why no bomb explosions were registered on seismic monitors.

No you haven't, you have provided nothing of a sort.

So tell us, in the videos I posted where people talk about hearing explosions and being blasted by material from the explosions, where they all deluded and none of them heard or were actually blasted by materials at GZ? Did they suffer from some sort of mass hallucination, or is it as I suspect, you that is hallucinating?? lol

One of the world's top demolition experts whose expertise is sought by demolition companies around the world, has debunked WTC demolition theories with evidence and I might add that those seismic monitors was operated by his company.

Brent Blanchard is not an expert and he has been debunked by Jim Hoffman.

http://911research.w...iews/blanchard/

A man who has physcially demolished exactly the same amount of buildings as Brent Blanchard.

Edited March 26, 2013 by Stundie

[Babe Ruth]

That is not evidence! Seismic monitors did not detect bomb explosions nor are explosions seen or heard in any WTC video. To sum that up;

1. No bomb explosions are seen in the videos

2. No explosions are heard in the videos

3. Seismic monitors did not detect bomb explosions

4. Demolition experts in the area stated they heard no bomb explosions

5. No evidence of explosives were found in the rubble of the WTC buildings.

That is completely wrong Sky, and we've discussed here before, I think with Raven.

For the record, Gordon Ross and Craig Furlong did seismic analysis, and their research showed that INDEED there was a significant seismic event recorded BEFORE the first plane struck.

Why do you make claims that have already been proved wrong? Why do you present videos that are spoofed and inaccurate?

[Stundie]

That is completely wrong Sky, and we've discussed here before, I think with Raven.

For the record, Gordon Ross and Craig Furlong did seismic analysis, and their research showed that INDEED there was a significant seismic event recorded BEFORE the first plane struck.

Why do you make claims that have already been proved wrong? Why do you present videos that are spoofed and inaccurate?

I didn't realise that Gordon Ross had done a seismic analysis....

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/ExplosionInTowerBeforeJetHitByFurlongAndRoss.pdf

I've just read through it and I thought that there was no seismic evidence because the bombs at the WTC back in 93 didn't register either...(If I recall correctly!)

Thanks for that.

Stundie

[skyeagle409]

That is completely wrong Sky, and we've discussed here before, I think with Raven.

I am right on the money. There are no explosions in the videos nor were bomb explosions heard.

For the record, Gordon Ross and Craig Furlong did seismic analysis, and their research showed that INDEED there was a significant seismic event recorded BEFORE the first plane struck.

Seismic monitors that was operated by Protec, did not record a hint of bomb explosions at ground zero.

[skyeagle409]

No, you have been supplying bunk which you have deluded yourself is evidence...

On the contrary, facts and evidence have already shown that I am correct.

So tell us, in the videos I posted where people talk about hearing explosions and being blasted by material from the explosions, where they all deluded and none of them heard or were actually blasted by materials at GZ? Did they suffer from some sort of mass hallucination, or is it as I suspect, you that is hallucinating??

First of all, no evidence of explosives was found at ground zero, so where do you think the sounds could have been coming from? Could it be from problems that New York City has suffered from for years?

Brent Blanchard is not an expert and he has been debunked by Jim Hoffman.

http://911research.w...iews/blanchard/

No he hasn't and it shows how easily you are duped, In fact, investigators have sided with Brent Blanchard in his conclusion.

[skyeagle409]

I didn't realise that Gordon Ross had done a seismic analysis....

http://www.journalof...longAndRoss.pdf

I've just read through it and I thought that there was no seismic evidence because the bombs at the WTC back in 93 didn't register either...(If I recall correctly!)

Thanks for that.

You should thank me for this.

The report issued by Lamont-Doherty includes various graphs showing the seismic readings produced by the planes crashing into the two towers as well as the later collapse of both buildings. WhatReallyHappened.com chooses to display only one graph (Graph 1), which shows the readings over a 30-minute time span.

On that graph, the 8- and 10-second collapses appear — misleadingly — as a pair of sudden spikes. Lamont-Doherty's 40-second plot of the same data (Graph 2) gives a much more detailed picture: The seismic waves — blue for the South Tower, red for the North Tower — start small and then escalate as the buildings rumble to the ground. Translation: no bombs.

[Stundie]

I am right on the money. There are no explosions in the videos nor were bomb explosions heard.

Of course they were not explosions in the videos.

Everyone at GZ was just suffering from mass hallucination, it's a good job we have an internet debunking warrior armed with his pantomime skills to set everyone else straight. lol

Seismic monitors that was operated by Protec, did not record a hint of bomb explosions at ground zero.

I'll tell you the problem here sonshine....

Protec have never shown us these seismic records they claim to have!

Of course, with your fantastic imagination, you will pretend they exist. lol

[Stundie]

On the contrary, facts and evidence have already shown that I am correct.

• Robert Jones doesn't say an elevator was crashing, he says that he heard from others (Which isn't evidence, but HEARSAY!! hahahahahaha!! Which makes a completel mockery of what you think consists as evidence!) that the explosion blew off the doors to the elevator, that is not evidence the elevator was crashing down. Talk about misconstruing evidence to shoe horn into your everyone heard elevators falling.
  
• The account of Kim Dunlap is from an incident in 2000 in which an elevator slammed into a ceiling. Are you suggesting that elevators slammed into ceilings on 9/11?
  
• Like you, popular mechanics were not at GZ and the explosions in the WTC back in 93 didn't produce any seismic evidence, making the entire point moot.
  
• Van Romero who initially said the building was demolished with explosive, changes his mind and wasn't there at GZ on 9/11. So not sure how his opinion disproves that of the many people who heard/saw/felt explosions.
  
• Then you have a single quote from David Kravette who says he saw a couple of elevators on fire which caused an explosion.
  

Out of all of these, there is only one fact which supports your assertion...lol..But what you fail to understand is that others there are plenty of others who witnesses explosions who were not near any lifts. lol

First of all, no evidence of explosives was found at ground zero, so where do you think the sounds could have been coming from?

No evidence was found because none was looked for.

The sounds of explosions came from many different places. Those at GZ seem think there were bombs or explosives.

Could it be from problems that New York City has suffered from for years?

What internet debunking warriors in a panto stylee who think they know better?? lol

No he hasn't and it shows how easily you are duped, In fact, investigators have sided with Brent Blanchard in his conclusion.

Jim Hoffmans critque of Blanchard is perfectly founded and the fact that Blanchard has not responded to his criticisms shows us all that he suffers from the same problems as you...lol