Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Dr Hulsey WTC7 findings for people who not aware of this new study.

Options
1…4647495152…61

Comments

  • Options
    #1442
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Controlled demolition is not unreasonable. It goes on all the time and it is a known mechanism to collapse all types of buildings..



    Wow

    Controlled demolition happens all the time
    Secret controlled demolition disguised as a fire collapse has never happened before

    So why are you trying to conflate the two? That is very dishonest.
    Fire bringing down a steel framed building high rise never happened before or after 9/11.

    Secret controlled demolitions have never happened before. This has been explained to you so many times. It's actually not possible given your level of english and ability to express yourself that you don't understand this - you are absolutely playing games


  • Options
    #1443
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Wow

    Controlled demolition happens all the time
    Secret controlled demolition disguised as a fire collapse has never happened before

    So why are you trying to conflate the two? That is very dishonest.

    Which one happens most often and one that never happens fire bringing down a steel framed buiilding? Of course your mind there nothing to see here!


  • Options
    #1444
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Which one happens most often and one that never happens fire bringing down a steel framed buiilding? Of course your mind there nothing to see here!

    Controlled demolitions happen all the time

    Secret controlled demolition disguised as fire-induced fall has never happened

    You are now completely trolling if you are pretending they are the same thing


  • Options
    #1445
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »


    Secret controlled demolitions have never happened before. This has been explained to you so many times. It's actually not possible given your level of english and ability to express yourself that you don't understand this - you are absolutely playing games

    English got very little to do with it. Intelligence is not just about how you write. It been able to see things clearly and obviously you guys can't here.


  • Options
    #1446
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    English got very little to do with it. Intelligence is not just about how you write. It been able to see things clearly and obviously you guys can't here.

    Now suddenly you have some magic ability to "see" things others can't

    1. Give an example of a controlled demolition, any will do
    2. Now give an example of a secret controlled demolition disguised to look like a fire-induced collapse, go ahead

    Now explain to us in clear English why you can't provide an example of 2.

    Then explain why your logic is broken when you claim that buildings can't collapse due to plane strikes because it's never happened before



    To reiterate, it's not possible to logically debate with someone who is incapable of basic logic, or worse, who pretends not to be when it suits.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1447
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Now suddenly you have some magic ability to "see" things others can't

    1. Give an example of a controlled demolition, any will do
    2. Now give an example of a secret controlled demolition disguised to look like a fire-induced collapse, go ahead

    Now explain to us in clear English why you can't provide an example of 2.

    Then explain why your logic is broken when you claim that buildings can't collapse due to plane strikes because it's never happened before



    To reiterate, it's not possible to logically debate with someone who is incapable of basic logic, or worse, who pretends not to be when it suits.

    I obviously do have more intelligence because i can see the difference here..

    507645.png

    NIST collapse model does not look like the actual collapse on 9/11.
    507646.png

    Maybe thats the problem debunkers lateral thinking is faulty? To claim thats the same collapse i am lost?


  • Options
    #1448
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    I obviously do have more intelligence because i can see the difference here

    Deflection is dishonesty. Not with us, but with yourself

    Here are the Q's again

    1. Give an example of a controlled demolition, any will do
    2. Now give an example of a secret controlled demolition disguised to look like a fire-induced collapse, go ahead

    I'll give you a clue, there are no examples of 2.

    Your logic is this: planes crashing into buildings to cause them to collapse hasn't happened before so it couldn't happen

    Therefore, by that logic: secret controlled demolitions disguised to look like fire-induced collapses hasn't happened before so it couldn't happen

    If you can't grasp that simple logic then, no offense, you probably shouldn't be debating this subject

    If you are playing games, which I suspect, then whatever


  • Options
    #1449
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Deflection is dishonesty. Not with us, but with yourself

    Here are the Q's again

    1. Give an example of a controlled demolition, any will do
    2. Now give an example of a secret controlled demolition disguised to look like a fire-induced collapse, go ahead

    I'll give you a clue, there are no examples of 2.

    Your logic is this: planes crashing into buildings to cause them to collapse hasn't happened before so it couldn't happen

    Therefore, by that logic: secret controlled demolitions disguised to look like fire-induced collapses hasn't happened before so it couldn't happen

    If you can't grasp that simple logic then, no offense, you probably shouldn't be debating this subject

    If you are playing games, which I suspect, then whatever

    Building seven was not struck by a plane. Two planes hit the towers.
    I know you prefer to jump to talking about something else now.
    Use your intellect here.
    47 floors dropped from top to bottom inside the building. What would happen next?
    Present a theory that make sense. Explain how that would not affect the front of the building on all sides? Is the energy from the floor collapses not powerful enough to smash windows (examples)
    Debunkers never want to explore the NIST theory. When they are confronted the run away. 


  • Options
    #1450
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Building seven was not struck by a plane.

    Stop playing games :)


  • Options
    #1451
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Stop playing games :)

    Just confirmed my statement about debunkers:)

    It was just two questions and could even get an honest answer from you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1452
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Fire bringing down a steel framed building high rise never happened before or after 9/11.
     
    But you see, you are ignoring the point again and just ranting off on soundbites.
    You keep saying this.
    But it's also the first time in history for all of those other things too.

    Stop dodging this very simple question:
    There is no building in history that has been destroyed by a secret demolition.
    There is no building in history that has been destroyed by thermite of any kind.
    There is no building in history that has been destroyed in a secret demolition using thermite after the building had two other giant buildings collapsing next to it.

    There is no building in history that "fell at free fall."

    Please point out which one of these is not correct.
    Or confirm that they are all correct.

    You don't have to put anything else in your post. Just an answer to that question.
    Anything other than a response to this question will not get a response.


  • Options
    #1453
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,598 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Which one happens most often and one that never happens fire bringing down a steel framed buiilding? Of course your mind there nothing to see here!

    It wasn't just fire though was it? There was structural damage due to large parts of the north tower falling over 200m through the sky and landing on WTC7.


  • Options
    #1454
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    The Nal wrote: »
    It wasn't just fire though was it? There was structural damage due to large parts of the north tower falling over 200m through the sky and landing on WTC7.

    Nal the building was hit just after 10am.
    The collapse started at 5.19pm. 
    All studies agree here. The small bits of tower wreckage hit the building is not what brought the building down. 
    To bring down the entire building, you have to remove all the structural columns. 
    NIST claims that was achieved by progressive collapse. 
    Hulsey theory a demolition brought it down ( 8 floors) taken out underneath. 

    That's why NIST gutted out the interior from east to west.
    They could not explain the collapse any other way. They also they needed a trigger event so they focused on floor 13 and girder A2011. That theory flawed too. 


  • Options
    #1455
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Hulsey theory a demolition brought it down ( 8 floors) taken out underneath. 
    But you've already conceded that Hulsey's study was a fraud...:confused:

    And we all know it's impossible as no building has every been destroyed by secret thermite demolition.


  • Options
    #1456
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,598 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Nal the building was hit just after 10am.
    The collapse started at 5.19pm. 
    All studies agree here. The small bits of tower wreckage hit the building is not what brought the building down. 
    To bring down the entire building, you have to remove all the structural columns. 
    NIST claims that was achieved by progressive collapse.

    "All studies agree".

    Agree with what? Any reasonable study thats been done has concluded that the damage from the north tower and fire brought it down.

    Btw - "small bits of wreckage". lol!
    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
     
    Hulsey theory a demolition brought it down ( 8 floors) taken out underneath. 

    Hulsey, his financial backers and his team are frauds.


  • Options
    #1457
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    King Mob wrote: »
    But you've already conceded that Hulsey's study was a fraud...:confused:

    When?


  • Options
    #1458
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    The Nal wrote: »
    "All studies agree".

    Agree with what? Any reasonable study thats been done has concluded that the damage from the north tower and fire brought it down.

    Btw - "small bits of wreckage". lol!



    Hulsey, his financial backers and his team are frauds.

    False, whoever told you that is lying. The southwest damage was only a few corner side walls.
    All mainstream studies believe the collapse started at the eastside corner. Some differ what floor but it’s the same side.


  • Options
    #1459
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    The Nal wrote: »

    Hulsey, his financial backers and his team are frauds.

    They aren't! secret Nazi's brought it down. The same one's who didn't kill that many Jews.


  • Options
    #1460
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,598 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    They aren't! secret Nazi's brought it down. The same one's who didn't kill that many Jews.

    I thought it was old Larry "Pull it" Silverstein?

    I really must keep up.


  • Options
    #1461
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    They aren't! secret Nazi's brought it down. The same one's who didn't kill that many Jews.

    Why are you not answering my questions right now:confused: Is too difficult for you to solve?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1462
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    The Nal wrote: »
    I thought it was old Larry "Pull it" Silverstein?

    I really must keep up.

    Oh originally George Bush, the US president, was part of the conspiracy, but now the plot has been changed so that he was one of the intended targets by these "Nazi's", and they were trying to use one of the planes to assassinate him..

    Wonder how they got the guy in the plane to pull off such a suicide mission, must be mind control


  • Options
    #1463
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Why are you not answering my questions right now:confused: Is too difficult for you to solve?

    I'm not the one in here suggesting history is wrong and something else entirely happened

    Feel free at any time to detail your conspiracy theory


  • Options
    #1464
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Oh originally George Bush, the US president, was part of the conspiracy, but now the plot has been changed so that he was one of the intended targets by these "Nazi's", and they were trying to use one of the planes to assassinate him..

    Wonder how they got the guy in the plane to pull off such a suicide mission, must be mind control

    47 floors dropped from the top to bottom inside the building. What would happen next?
    Present a theory that make sense.

    Explain how this would not affect the front of the building on all sides?
    Is the energy from the floor collapses not powerful enough to smash glass windows? (examples)

    Still waiting?

    You have a visual image guide to help you. Take some time with it no rush. Why are these windows not broken? You can use the NIST study to explain it. ;)

    507662.png


  • Options
    #1465
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Present a theory that make sense.

    Hijackers flew planes into buildings, buildings then fell down.

    But you are claiming something else happened, that modern day Nazi's secretly blew all the towers up. Which of course is absolutely mental, and is demonstrated by the fact that you can't support it in any way.

    What else is there to say?


  • Options
    #1466
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Hijackers flew planes into buildings, buildings then fell down.

    But you are claiming something else happened, that modern day Nazi's secretly blew all the towers up. Which of course is absolutely mental, and is demonstrated by the fact that you can't support it in any way.

    What else is there to say?

    My position is the plane hijacking operation was set up years before by Saudi elites with religious ties. They used Al Qaeda to carry out the operation on 9/11..

    Rogue US establishment people protected the info,  of their arrival, so they would not be caught. The evidence is CIA withholding intelligence from the FBI. Establishement later claimed an intelligence failure was the cause and CIA and FBI not sharing info. That does not stop the CIA from stopping a terrorist attack inside the United States! The narrative we got is pure bull****.

    The second operation the demolitions i consider someone else did that. ( i think the 9/11 event was hijacked by another group) Probably post war Nazis (crazy as thats sound to you)  They just replaced the SS uniform after war and became ( international bankers and criminals) they used their wealth for bad things. They don’t act lke Nazis in public, they hide in the shadows for decades, hiding out in different countries in South America places like that. 


  • Options
    #1467
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

    The second operation the demolitions i consider someone else did that. ( i think the 9/11 event was hijacked by another group) Probably post war Nazis (crazy as thats sound to you)  They just replaced the SS uniform after war and became ( international bankers and criminals) they used their wealth for bad things. They don’t act lke Nazis in public, they hide in the shadows for decades, hiding out in different countries in South America places like that. 

    And the evidence that is..

    Some Nazi's left Germany after the war, so they (well, their kids, because it's 55 years later) secretly hijacked someone else's conspiracy in order to make their own conspiracy to perfectly rig the entire World Trade Center towers in secret, along with the whole of building 7 with some sort of secret silent explosives because they wanted to what, boost Bush's approval rating after the attack?

    That is more mental and insane than anything I've heard from Alex Jones.

    Do you say these things to family/friends/colleagues?


  • Options
    #1468
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    And the evidence that is..

    Some Nazi's left Germany after the war, so they (well, their kids, because it's 55 years later) secretly hijacked someone else's conspiracy in order to make their own conspiracy to perfectly rig the entire World Trade Center towers in secret, along with the whole of building 7 with some sort of secret silent explosives because they wanted to what, boost Bush's approval rating after the attack?

    That is more mental and insane than anything I've heard from Alex Jones.

    Do you say these things to family/friends/colleagues?

    What's making you think they change their belief system after WW2? They don't just disappear, they have families later. Where did all that wealth go? They always want to have another fourth Reich. Causing trouble benefits them. A clash of civilizations. The buildings were demolished for some reason that just a fact.


  • Options
    #1469
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Enlighten yourself.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-nazis-created-basic-plan-for-the-european-union-ukip-mep-gerard-batten-says-a7032221.html

    Indisputable Evidence Proving the EU Was Created by Nazis
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Indisputable-Evidence-Proving-Created-Nazis-ebook/dp/B07MMHNL96


  • Options
    #1470
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Conspiracy and fact.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ODESSA


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1471
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    When?
    After you ran away from every point made against it and were unable to address any of the flaws or general shady behavior from Hulsey et al.


Advertisement