To those who believe WTC 7 didn't fall due to fire, how did it fall?

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I claiming nano thermite was found. We have that identified for sure was used.

I don't rule out explosives + nano thermite were both used. I even told you that weeks ago.

Great, how much explosive and nano thermite was used? Where was it placed? When? How?
Was it Nano thermite? Thermite? Thermate? Gel Thermite? When was it set off and by what mechanism?
What explosives were used? When were they set off? Where from and by who?

Why did you reject Dr Judy Wood: Expert Extraordinaire's research again?
Cause she couldn't answer questions like those?

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

My god man you're all over the place to the point where you are disagreeing with your own "witnesses "!!!

Yes, he found melted steel in the rubble. By the way, NIST denies anyone saw melted steel so you should think about that before you rush in posting thinking you caught me out on something

I don't expect this guy to be thinking demolition caused it. He is a blue collar guy he probably thought the fire did that to the steel.

GreeBo

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Do you think this guy is a liar? He was head of one of the removal companies who took the steel away?

This guy?
http://letsrollforums.com//richard-riggs-t14417.html?amp;

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Yes, he found melted steel in the rubble. By the way, NIST denies anyone saw melted steel so you should think about that before you rush in posting thinking you caught me out on something

I don't expect this guy to be thinking demolition did to this steel. He is a blue collar guy he probably thought the fire did that to the steel.

So he's too dumb to trust when he says the cause, but we have to absolutely trust him when he claims that he saw molten steel....?

You can't have it both ways Cheerful you can't reject part of his statement.
That's being dishonest.

I think you didn't even watch your own video and never even realised that he said that...

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I claiming nano thermite was found. We have that identified for sure was used.

I don't rule out explosives + nano thermite were both used. I even told you that weeks ago.

What? Where is this evidence?

GreeBo wrote: »

This guy?
http://letsrollforums.com//richard-riggs-t14417.html?amp;

Did you even read that post? It just some random poster on a conspiracy site who believes he was part of the conspiracy!

Quote
There is something really bizarre and N.W.O. about the guy that I can't quite articulate. They assign him the title "debris removal specialist."

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Yes, he found melted steel in the rubble. By the way, NIST denies anyone saw melted steel so you should think about that before you rush in posting thinking you caught me out on something

I don't expect this guy to be thinking demolition caused it. He is a blue collar guy he probably thought the fire did that to the steel.

So if he is just a "blue collar guy" how would he know what melted steel looks like? How many other metals were in the buildings that would be molten at a much lower temperature?

GreeBo

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

If you think fires reached 1500c + that fine please produce some evidence for that, documentation anything and we will go from there.

The evidence is that there are melted steel beams.

Next question.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Did you even read that post? It just some random poster on a conspiracy site who believes he was part of the conspiracy!

Quote
There is something really bizarre and N.W.O. about the guy that I can't quite articulate. They assign him the title "debris removal specialist."

But again, you've randomly accused Dr Judy Wood: Someone More Qualified Than You of being part of the conspiracy too...

Why are you allowed to make such baseless, nutty accusation like that?

King Mob wrote: »

So he's too dumb to trust when he says the cause, but we have to absolutely trust him when he claims that he saw molten steel....?

You can't have it both ways Cheerful you can't reject part of his statement.
That's being dishonest.

I think you didn't even watch your own video and never even realised that he said that...

You trust nobody who says something different about what happened on 9/11.

Is he lying or do you believe NIST when they said nobody saw melted steel?

GreeBo

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Did you even read that post? It just some random poster on a conspiracy site who believes he was part of the conspiracy!

Quote
There is something really bizarre and N.W.O. about the guy that I can't quite articulate. They assign him the title "debris removal specialist."

I did, it shows that your single expert witness is a demolitions man and the video you supplied shows that he thinks fire melted the steel.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So if he is just a "blue collar guy" how would he know what melted steel looks like? How many other metals were in the buildings that would be molten at a much lower temperature?

Or more likely, he misspoke and confused "glowing" steel with "molten" as he doesn't say it was a big puddle of it or anything.

This witness has been trotted out by conspiracy theorists lots of times before. He is often held up as being of impeachable trustworthiness until it's pointed out he says it was cause of fires, then he's rejected as not knowing anything.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

You trust nobody who says something different about what happened on 9/11.

Is he lying or do you believe NIST when they said nobody saw melted steel?

I don't care about him to be honest. It's more important to point out how 1. his testimony is not compatible with your theory and 2. that you are a hypocrite by calling your own witness a liar after whining about use supposedly doing the same.

You've also seemed to have missed some rather important questions:

Great, how much explosive and nano thermite was used? Where was it placed? When? How?
Was it Nano thermite? Thermite? Thermate? Gel Thermite? When was it set off and by what mechanism?
What explosives were used? When were they set off? Where from and by who?

Why did you reject Dr Judy Wood: Expert Extraordinaire's research again?
Cause she couldn't answer questions like those?

Do you believe 9/11 firefighters are truthful and honest people?

So you believe NIST? Nobody saw molten steel or Steel melted? NIST claims no video or photographic evidence exists

What this then, an imaginary video a video send here to earth from the twilight zone?

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Do you believe 9/11 firefighters are truthful and honest people?

But aren't these the same firefighters who were involved in the conspiracy?
Cause if we are to believe Larry Silverstien's confession, a chief in the FDNY was the one who pushed the button on WTC7.

And why do none of the firefighters ever report any demolition charges? Or Thermite? Or stuff like the intense blinding flare of the thermite burning? Or the sounds of the demolition charges going off?

Also, don't bring up a new topic when you've questions yet to answer:
Great, how much explosive and nano thermite was used? Where was it placed? When? How?
Was it Nano thermite? Thermite? Thermate? Gel Thermite? When was it set off and by what mechanism?
What explosives were used? When were they set off? Where from and by who?

Why did you reject Dr Judy Wood: Expert Extraordinaire's research again?
Cause she couldn't answer questions like those?

Otherwise it rather looks like you are running away...

Also. please provide some evidence that thermite or a controlled demolition can actually result in metal being molten for days after the fact.
A peer reviewed paper on the matter would be fine. Thanks.

Before you state, I am a liar.

This is NIST John Gross claiming nobody saw Melted steel.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Do you believe 9/11 firefighters are truthful and honest people?

So you believe NIST? Nobody saw molten steel or Steel melted? NIST claims no video or photographic evidence exists

What this then, an imaginary video a video send here to earth from the twilight zone?

They saw what they thought was molten steel, it could have been any metal, are they steel experts who could tell just by looking at it?

Start answering questions instead of always asking.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

They saw what they thought was molten steel, it could have been any metal, are they steel experts who could tell just by looking at it?

Start answering questions instead of always asking.

Did you watch the NIST video. Gross denied the temp were that hot to melt steel he said fire could not have melted steel. He did even know NASA had recorded temps of 700c and above 6 days after the event. He asked the guy who asked him the question to send him documentation of this. NIST is a joke.

Timberrrrrrrr multiple eyewitnesses saw it clean up crews, firefighters, architects and engineer investigators but they are all lying according to NIST.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Did you watch the NIST video. Gross denied the temp were that hot to melt steel he said fire could not have melted steel. He did even know NASA had recorded temps of 700c and above 6 days after the event. He asked the guy who asked him the question to send him documentation of this. NIST is a joke.

Proof that thermite is able to do this please.

Also again:
But aren't these the same firefighters who were involved in the conspiracy?
Cause if we are to believe Larry Silverstien's confession, a chief in the FDNY was the one who pushed the button on WTC7.

And why do none of the firefighters ever report any demolition charges? Or Thermite? Or stuff like the intense blinding flare of the thermite burning? Or the sounds of the demolition charges going off?

Also, don't bring up a new topic when you've questions yet to answer:
Great, how much explosive and nano thermite was used? Where was it placed? When? How?
Was it Nano thermite? Thermite? Thermate? Gel Thermite? When was it set off and by what mechanism?
What explosives were used? When were they set off? Where from and by who?

Why did you reject Dr Judy Wood: Expert Extraordinaire's research again?
Cause she couldn't answer questions like those?

Otherwise it rather looks like you are running away...

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Timberrrrrrrr multiple eyewitnesses saw it clean up crews, firefighters, architects and engineer investigators but they are all lying according to NIST.

You also accuse them all of being liars when it suits.
Anyone who reports fires in places you reject.
Anyone who reports the lack of thermite or demo charges.

You even accused the people who saw a 757 hitting the pentagon as being lairs back when you believed that nonsense.

King Mob wrote: »

Or more likely, he misspoke and confused "glowing" steel with "molten" as he doesn't say it was a big puddle of it or anything.

This witness has been trotted out by conspiracy theorists lots of times before. He is often held up as being of impeachable trustworthiness until it's pointed out he says it was cause of fires, then he's rejected as not knowing anything.

Leslie Roberston who designed the twin towers also misspoke according to your version of events. I guess everyone who saw molten steel and melted steel is wrong. I guess FEMA (The Federal Emergency Management Agency) was wrong also according to you?

Leslie Robertson

Les Robertson, in presentation at Stanford University, confirms that he saw a "river of molten steel" at the B1 level of the WTC debris pile. This video also has a clip of Robertson confirming that the WTC Towers were designed to absorb the impact of a Boeing 707, the largest airplane of its time.

FEMA investigator Abolhassan Astaneh saw melted girders at ground zero? You think he is also a liar?

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Leslie Roberston Blah blah blah

Not an answer to any of my questions.

Post all the videos you like Cheerful, they just prove you more and more wrong.

The idea of melted steel staying hot for days isn't compatible with your theory.
Thermite can't do that.

You were asked to provide proof that it can, but you can't do that. You ignored the question because you are a dishonest hypocrite.

Your theory is no different that Dr Judy Wood's. In fact, it's got much much less evidence and support behind it.
Your own arguments show that your theory is nonsense.
Either you realise this and you are just too dishonest and cowardly to face it, or you simply don't have the ability to understand what a joke your theory is.

32 pages in and you haven't provided what was asked for in the OP.

(Also, a Beoing 707 is much smaller than the planes that hit the buildings. Do you need to have size and mass explained to you also?)

King Mob You don't believe eyewitnesses. Will Photograph evidence help?

This is Molten steel example

This is river of molten steel on 9/11.

You can even see the cleanup workers are near the steel columns and near them flowing is a liquid that looks exactly like molten steel Same colour and everything.

It flowing exactly like how the firefighters described it.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

King Mob You don't believe eyewitnesses. Will Photograph evidence help?

Again, it's not that I don't believe the eyewitnesses, I just don't believe your narrow, dishonest interpretation of what they say.
And no, I don't believe unsourced grainy photos posted by a known liar.
And I don't believe your interpretation of said still, grainy photo when you've shown that you don't understand basic science.

Please post proof that Thermite is able to produce these things.
A peer reviewed paper would be great.

Otherwise, all those videos just prove your theory is more of a joke that the space laser theory.

If you're not going to post it, say so. At least show some spine when you're going to dodge a question.

Also in case you've forgotten:
But aren't these the same firefighters who were involved in the conspiracy?
Cause if we are to believe Larry Silverstien's confession, a chief in the FDNY was the one who pushed the button on WTC7.

And why do none of the firefighters ever report any demolition charges? Or Thermite? Or stuff like the intense blinding flare of the thermite burning? Or the sounds of the demolition charges going off?

Also, don't bring up a new topic when you've questions yet to answer:
Great, how much explosive and nano thermite was used? Where was it placed? When? How?
Was it Nano thermite? Thermite? Thermate? Gel Thermite? When was it set off and by what mechanism?
What explosives were used? When were they set off? Where from and by who?

Why did you reject Dr Judy Wood: Expert Extraordinaire's research again?
Cause she couldn't answer questions like those?

King Mob wrote: »

Again, it's not that I don't believe the eyewitnesses, I just don't believe your narrow, dishonest interpretation of what they say.
And no, I don't believe unsourced grainy photos posted by a known liar.
And I don't believe your interpretation of said still, grainy photo when you've shown that you don't understand basic science.

Please post proof that Thermite is able to produce these things.
A peer reviewed paper would be great.

Otherwise, all those videos just prove your theory is more of a joke that the space laser theory.

If you're not going to post it, say so. At least show some spine when you're going to dodge a question.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Yup. You are a dishonest hypocrite.
You can't answer any questions about your theory. You can just copy and paste crap you've read on the internet without an original or critical thought. Then you dodge and deflect and run away from every single point you make.

You are no different from Dr Judy Wood.
Everyone reading this thread sees you as exactly the same.

Your theories are jokes.

If you decide to grow up, actually think for yourself, then my questions will be there for you to answer.

King mob you don't look hard enough.

There 118 accounts in this PDF

http://www.ae911truth.org/images//PDFs/090116-118Witnesses.pdf