Quote from: zimmah on August 11, 2014, 08:59:26 PM

Quote from: rpietila on August 08, 2014, 04:36:03 PM

Quote from: nioc on August 08, 2014, 04:01:40 PM

Ebola is spread only through the exchange of bodily fluids. Therefore it doesn't spread as easily as the flu which you can catch through airborne water droplets when somebody coughs. Getting rid of paper currency doesn't do anything. Remember not to touch your eyes as this is the only part of your body that exposes the inside of your body and therefore is the primary gateway for all types of nasties.

Truth does not matter. The U.S. demolished WTC 1, 2 and 7, blaming it on ragheads that supposedly flew 2 planes towards WTC 1 and 2. (Note that the number of buildings demolished exceeds the number of planes by 1.) As a consequence, billions of security searches are now conducted throughout the world annually, with the main goal of conditioning people to accept ridiculous and unfounded orders as a part of their job, and ridiculous and unfounded procedures as a condition of exercising a very basic human right - to travel around the world. (And this was just an example, the real atrocities are found in other parts of Patriot Act, nicely prepared before the event.)

even without the evidence of planes, and the fact that a single planestrike does not make a tower collapse, the main point of evidence is this:

It is a very hard science to make a tall building explode in a controlled demolition in such a way that it does not damage anything near it. (Or at least does minimal collateral damage). The only way to make a building collapse in a controlled way is by many small timed explosions. It takes a team of highly specialized engineers weeks if not months of preparation to get it right.

Apparently two planes managed to do it just like that. Quite odd, isn't it?

If you don't buy my story about controlled demolition, why don't you check out videos on youtube and see how often it goes wrong? Note that those jobs are always done only by experts, and even they get it wrong sometimes. The odds of having a plane strike cause a perfect collapse (or any kind of collapse at all) is highly unlikely.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDuUR7l3bgc

note especially the second building, this is what happens VERY OFTEN, and this is what you would expect to happen when only the top part of the building is severely damaged, the top will just slide off, and do no damage to the bottom. Especially if the top part is not nearly as heavy as the bottom part (which is always the case, because the bottom has much more support, and is therefore heavier, not to mention the top part only a few stories, it did not have nearly enough mass to destroy the complete tower beneath it). Trust me i'm an engineer. The top part would need to be at least 40 times heavier to be able to crush the bottom part like it did, unless all the support was blown away at precisely timed intervals with small explosions starting at the bottom of the tower.

Regarding the bolded point, did you notice how the top part of the S. Tower falling over and then suddenly the building starts to fall straight down? This made no sense to me, as clearly the least resistance would be to continue falling over and not go straight down. Looks like I wasn't the only one to notice that.

http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2010/11/26/tilting-south-tower-gives-away-demolition-of-trade-center-towers/
snippet:

Quote

When the South Tower started to collapse at 9:59 a.m., just 56 minutes after it was hit, the top of the building began to tip over (as you can clearly see in the photo above). And, according to Sir Isaac Newtons law of the conservation of momentum, it should have kept tipping over. There was nothing that could have stopped the momentum of this rotation. Except explosives.

The only way we didnt have the top 34-floor section lying in a heap beside the tower is that it fell apart or more likely blew apart at the beginning of the collapse. The reason weve let this fact slip by most of us is that the top of the building is quickly disappears amid all the smoke and debris. We never see it again.

But heres the most important point: Newton wouldnt be able to reconcile this tilting top with the symmetrical collapse that followed. With the top tilting at approximately 23 degrees, how could it be exerting a uniform, symmetrical pressure on the floors below? In fact, how could it exert any force at all? And how could all of the buildings 47 core columns fail uniformly given that the collapse wasnt symmetrical when it started.

Further: http://home.comcast.net/~skydrifter/collapse.htm
snippet

Quote

- therefore the energy from the structure above would in theory - be adequately diverted so as NOT to induce a continued - and total - vertical collapse of the remainder of the structure, below. In theory, the cap should have torn loose and independently fallen. However, if there had been an independent - and nearly simultaneous - collapse of the core, the collapse would continue - vertically. The cap tilted by approximately 22 degrees, but did not fall off; it collapsed "in formation - with the rest of the structure. The simultaneous "fall" of the two sections tells a story, by itself. The 'center of gravity' of the "cap" abruptly found a vertical path to the ground! The most probable reality being that the core collapsed, inducing the tilt of the "cap."

If the "cap" had tilted first, the mechanical tilt of the cap should have relieved a major portion of the purely vertical stress from above; alleviating any tendency for the immediate lower structure to pancake; as was witnessed. It is not difficult to imagine the floors collapsing over a period of time - but NOT simultaneously!