Creative Speculation

Bolo Boffin

(23,849 posts)

14. All very good reasons NOT to blow up that building. n/t

Reply to canoeist52 (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 06:01 PM

Dec 2011

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

52 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Solving the Mystery of Building 7 [View all] Richard Charnin Dec 2011 OP

Thanks for posting n/t Pachamama Dec 2011 #1

Very powerful video. Old and In the Way Dec 2011 #2

exactly libodem Dec 2011 #21

I hope some day soon Politicalboi Dec 2011 #3

Actually all 3 fell with resistance. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #4

True but... Richard Charnin Dec 2011 #5

"can only happen in a controlled demolition" Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #6

The top part (penthouse?) seemed to sink first Rosa Luxemburg Dec 2011 #15

The collaspe was already happening inside the building. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #16

These buildings weren't awfully well built? Rosa Luxemburg Dec 2011 #18

Well, they were for normal circumstances. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #19

WTC7 wasn't designed to withstand thermal stress William Seger Dec 2011 #20

The shear studs were designed to take the lateral loads, so the girder seat didn't need to be. Ace Acme Dec 2013 #37

How do 7 floors fail in freefall? NIST did NOT explain it. Ace Acme Dec 2013 #34

Not true William Seger Dec 2011 #7

Two videos by David Chandler which expose the NIST "analysis of WTC 7 Richard Charnin Dec 2011 #26

Yes, Chandler is a major source of "freefall = controlled demolition" idiocy William Seger Dec 2011 #29

Nobody says the perps blew out 8 floors while the building was already falling. Ace Acme Dec 2013 #35

Gage's solution to the mystery: Magical silent explosives William Seger Dec 2011 #8

Anyone that watches this video and concludes that it is anything teddy51 Dec 2011 #9

Anyone who LISTENS to the videos and concludes that it's a controlled demolition William Seger Dec 2011 #10

They weren't silent, a large number of witnesses said they heard teddy51 Dec 2011 #11

Baloney William Seger Dec 2011 #13

That is just not true zeemike Dec 2011 #23

You're making things up. zappaman Dec 2011 #24

Many sounds of explosions Richard Charnin Dec 2011 #27

No firemen described "a series of small bangs" emanating from WTC 7. n/t zappaman Dec 2011 #28

Everything I said is true William Seger Dec 2011 #25

What piqued my interest was what was housed in Building 7. canoeist52 Dec 2011 #12

All very good reasons NOT to blow up that building. n/t Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #14

Apparently they were destroying all the evidence Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2011 #17

Why do you need tons of explosives? Ace Acme Dec 2013 #38

I'd heard there was a bunch of libodem Dec 2011 #22

and gold Remember Me Dec 2011 #30

Last night, I listened to 2 UTube interviews.... gblady Dec 2011 #32

You forgot the CIA and the DoD on the 25th floor. Ace Acme Dec 2013 #36

I accept the eyewitness accounts of massive structural damage and multiple large fires hack89 Dec 2011 #31

You are more accepting than is FEMA or NIST Ace Acme Dec 2013 #39

Care to substantiate that statement. hack89 Dec 2013 #42

I'm saying FEMA did not quote any of those statements, nor did NIST. Ace Acme Dec 2013 #44

But such damage fits into NIST's explanation hack89 Dec 2013 #46

Dr. Griffin has pointed out that the FDNY accounts are mutually exclusive and all over the map. Ace Acme Dec 2013 #48

Dr Griffin is a CT loon hack89 Dec 2013 #49

Dr. Griffin's alleged lunacy can not make contradictory statements consistent. Ace Acme Dec 2013 #50

No, it couldn't have been the massive, uncontrolled fires that took WTC7 down cpwm17 Dec 2011 #33

There were no massive fires. Ace Acme Dec 2013 #40

Who are you going to believe? cpwm17 Dec 2013 #41

I am going to believe my informed eyes, and understand that what looks like smoke Ace Acme Dec 2013 #43

Apparently you didn't watch the video cpwm17 Dec 2013 #45

I watched the video years ago. Ace Acme Dec 2013 #47

Obviously you didn't watch this video cpwm17 Dec 2013 #51

I watched the video years ago, and I watched it now, and everything I said was correct. Ace Acme Dec 2013 #52