patrick.net

bgamall4 says

Egads, you read this Bob fellow and realize that you will one day turn into him. It is just a matter of time, Egads, or Roberto or whoever you are. Just a matter of time.

Egads can aspire to such a high order of improvement in his life, but achieving it will be very difficult.

The Professor says

If fire were to cause such a building to collapse, the onset would be gradual, whereas the videos show that WTC 7, after being completely stable, suddenly came down in virtual free fall.

Why does it have to be gradual? And more to the point, the collapse visibly progressed from the side with the penthouse and then rippled across the building.

The Professor says

This building’s straight-down, symmetrical collapse, with the roofline remaining essentially horizontal, shows that all 82 of WTC 7’s support columns had been eliminated by the time the top started down.

Essentially horizontal? Ha. Look at the video below. What visibly collapses first? What does that say is happening beneath it in the internal structure of the building? Do you see the top of the building bow? Be honest.

I think the video I first posted up in Bgamall's deletion friendly thread paints a rather clearer picture of what actually happened than the story the two of you enjoy peddling on here:

http://www.youtube.com/embed/OUkvnfV606w

The Professor says

In its Final Report,4 NIST provided a detailed analysis and graph that conceded that WTC 7 came down at free-fall acceleration for over 100 feet, or about 2.25 seconds, consistent with the findings of Chandler and Jones.

Conceded? You mean they broke down the descent into its three main parts. You 'truthers' claim the whole collapse was at freefall speed. No, it wasn't. There isn't anything in the NIST report that is contrary to the basic laws of physics as you 'truthers' so often claim. At or near gravitational acceleration simply indicates that there was little structural support during a portion of the collapse.

Was the total time of the collapse the same as free fall or not? Nothing you've posted up disproves what NIST has said. They haven't changed the statement that the total time was 40% longer than free fall. Are you saying that wasn't the case?

I hope your tongue was firmly planted in your cheek when you posted that.

And from an actual quality journal:

http://www.thepsychologist.org.uk/archive/archive_home.cfm/volumeID_23-editionID_190-ArticleID_1694-getfile_getPDF/thepsychologist/0710swam.pdf

You and Bgamall would probably best be served not reading it. Bgamall in particular given his love of every conspiracy theory imaginable.

The Professor says

I have been here for over a year and no one has offered any credible evidence that the official conspiracy theory is true.

You've been shown plenty. Read the pdf to see why you ignore it all.

Ha, ha, ha. 'The huge explosion' that apparently was so huge it wasn't recorded on that video.

bgamall4 says

My view is that the most powerful power is the Anglo-American_Zionist empire. Now it is clear that the British view the square mile as the seat of world financial power. It is also clear that this financial power has taken advantage of the United States with the housing bubble.

The Zionist part of the Empire has taken advantage of Americans because the neocons in the US, including Cheney, adopted the militant Zionist view of Oded Yinon.

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

I hope your tongue was firmly planted in your cheek when you posted that

Your tongue is firmly planted in the hind quarters of the NWO.

And there we have the conspiracy nut par excellence.

The Professor says

For those of you that are not aware of the controversy:

Yeah, because 741 comments later in a single thread, there are, of course, people on this forum unaware of the 'controversy.' That 'controversy' being between those people who believe that 3 silent controlled demolitions (or in Bgamall's case multiple CDs in each building) brought down the WTC buildings vs those people who still have the ability to think rationally.

I guess you still haven't read the pdf. I'm sure it'll ring some bells for you though.

bgamall4 says

Cecil Rhodes advocated a New World Order. The Rhodes Scholarship is named after him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Order_%28conspiracy_theory%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodes_Scholarship

Cecil Rhodes is my personal hero. Anyone who marched off to form a new nation because south africa wasn't racist enough is to be held in awe.

I must say I have completely misjudged you and your intentions. I believed you were simply an alien denier who had turned his back on his own people. Now I know you were merely marshalling your resources to present in a completed form. I should have known that as a wee lad growing up half alien in area 57 you had incredible access to technology and knowledge base. This new world order stuff is just awesome. I haven't been this excited since I turned 21 and my parents told the that the sears catalogue had a lingerie section WITH PICTURES (in all fairness this became a sticky mess in short order, as a child I had wondered why sears sent a new catalogue every year. These the the memories we cherish).

I have to say that you are just awesome to come up with some of this stuff. Much is obviously from the world control network that can only accessed by the jewish cabal that runs the world, how did you get access (I'm sure you are not allowed to answer that). Great work.

I'm sure that if I look at the sources I will be able to come up with much more. Thanks so much for providing me with such a wealth of material. To think I doubted you were on my side. Let's look at what I've learned so far from your link.

The Protocols is to claim that they "really" come from some group other than the Jews such as fallen angels or alien invaders.

Since the late 1970s, extraterrestrials from other habitable planets or parallel dimensions (such as "Greys") and intraterrestrials from Hollow Earth (such as "Reptilians") have been included in the New World Order conspiracy, in more or less dominant roles, as in the theories put forward by American writers Stan Deyo and Milton William Cooper, and British writer David Icke.

aliens have been among us for decades, centuries or millennia, but a government cover-up enforced by "Men in Black" has shielded the public from knowledge of a secret alien invasion.

Motivated by speciesism and imperialism, these aliens have been and are secretly manipulating developments and changes in human society in order to more efficiently control and exploit human beings. In some theories, alien infiltrators have shapeshifted into human form and move freely throughout human society, even to the point of taking control of command positions in governmental, corporate, and religious institutions, and are now in the final stages of their plan to take over the world

A mythical covert government agency of the United States code-named Majestic 12 is often imagined to be the shadow government which collaborates with the alien occupation and permits alien abductions, in exchange for assistance in the development and testing of military "flying saucers" at Area 51, in order for U.S. armed forces to achieve full-spectrum dominance.

the convergence of New World Order conspiracy theory and UFO conspiracy theory is a product of not only the era's widespread mistrust of governments and the popularity of the extraterrestrial hypothesis for UFOs but of the far right and ufologists actually joining forces.

bgamall4 says

bob2356 says

I should have known that as a wee lad growing up half alien in area 57 you had incredible access to technology and knowledge base.

I grew up near Fresno. I met my wife in Orange County. I went to UCSB for a time. I have only been in Las Vegas for a little over a year.

So, easy with the conspiracy. And take your meds.

You are telling me to go easy on conspiracy? Please don't ever say anything that funny again, I spat half a glass of chocolate milk on my desk and almost drowned on the other half before I could stop laughing.

Denying your heritage is a sad thing. Why did you post all the new world order stuff verifying what I have been saying all along if you are truly not a product of the area 57 human alien breeding experiment? Where did you get all this information from without having been brought up with it? Why do you deny truth?

The Professor says

I meant this "Pinocchio Nose".

That looks a lot more like the head of my dick than Pinocchio's nose.

There are of course robotic aliens. Do you suppose some robotic aliens mistook the wtc for a female robotic alien in heat? Perhaps they were actually having alien robotic sex with the wtc without consent and things got out of hand? Maybe the "molton metal" was actually alien semen. Have to ask bigmouth about it since he is half alien.

The Professor says

bob2356 says

Maybe the "molton metal" was actually alien semen

"Molton Metal" and "Alien Semen" where actually two DIFFERENT Death Metal bands from the 80's. Where do you get your info?

I've never heard of either of those death metal bands, what where some of their albums? There was a death metal band called intestinal alien reflux that did a song called blood semen orgasm.

The Professor says

This video is important. It actually shows who is behind the attacks and why they targeted the buildings in the way they did. Follow the money and it will lead you to the truth!

You really watched a 49 minute movie on this stuff? You're kidding right? You're without a doubt single.

The Professor says

I watched a lot of videos. Some were off the deep end; alien lizards with heat weapons kind of stuff. You have to glean the truth from the lies.

I find alien lizards with heat weapons much much more creditable the the ONI investigating securities fraud. How else could have there been such pinpoint accuracy in the explosions at all the security dealers? The evidence can't be refuted.

Since bgalien will never let these videos be posted on his thread for obvious reasons, I'll try to post them here....

http://www.youtube.com/embed/nY4bKUyzp0I

http://www.youtube.com/embed/EvaMPIJIbL4

http://www.youtube.com/embed/qFqCU4VdFqo&list=PL53E205410EC46DBD

The Professor says

I think we can rule out aliens and fires causing WTC7, a steel framed buildings, to collapse as if imploded in a controlled demolition.

Really? You don't think aliens MIGHT have the technology to simulate a controlled demolition?

Are you really that naïve?? Or are you an alien too???

bgamall4 says

You have lost it. You know Neocons aren't aliens.

You'd like to think that, wouldn't you? The bottom line is that we know it wasn't a controlled demolition. So, unless you think WTC7 was brought down by office fires--then all that's left is aliens.

Watch the videos then get back with me.

bgamall4 says

tatupu70 says

Really? You don't think aliens MIGHT have the technology to simulate a controlled demolition?

Are you really that naïve??

You have lost it. You know Neocons aren't aliens.

Exactly how do you tell, they seem pretty alien to me. Are really going to claim darth cheney is human? I don' think so.

Aliens who are here possess the technology for interstellar travel.

It takes much less technology to simulate a NeoCon - "Durrh! Save Israel! Attack everybody! Why do you hate our troops?! I'm always right!" - than it does to travel dozens of parsecs; the same goes for controlled demolitions.

I have researched this.

It defies credulity to believe that aliens did not (a) perform a controlled demo on WTC7, and (b) make it look like a collapse.

No sensible person, having researched the evidence, could believe otherwise.

As to why they showed up that day to destroy WTC7 on the exact same day the hologram airplanes hit the towers, I'm afraid I don't know.

HydroCabron says

It takes much less technology to simulate a NeoCon - "Durrh! Save Israel! Attack everybody! Why do you hate our troops?! I'm always right!" - than it does to travel dozens of parsecs; the same goes for controlled demolitions.

So you are saying neocons are holograms. That actually makes a lot of sense in the context of this thread.

bgamall4 says

it was a free fall, therefore had to be a controlled demolition. Here is the deal, Tat, all the supports collapsed at once. That cannot happen unless all supports are touched. Since all the supports of this building as big as a football field were not touched by fire, they had to be imploded

Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. We know it wasn't a controlled demolition. Since it couldn't have been a simple office fire, all that's left is aliens.

Did you watch the videos that I posted??

Personally, I'm quite suspicious of your motives. Why are you so hell bent on ignoring all the evidence of alien cooperation? Do you stand to gain with the alien new world order??

How much did it take for you to turn your back on the human race? You're sick.

bgamall4 says

tatupu70 says

Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. We know it wasn't a controlled demolition. Since it couldn't have been a simple office fire, all that's left is aliens.

You need meds you fool.

Sounds like I hit a nerve. Seriously how much did it take for you to abandon your race?

bgamall4 says

As I argued on another thread with Bigsby before he went away with his tail between his legs

Hardly. I just got sick and tired of dealing with your utter idiocy.

bgamall4 says

all the supports collapsed at once.

No, they didn't.

bgamall4 says

All supports fell at the same time, as the floors stayed equidistant from each other on the way down. Therefore it could not be pancaking, and fire didn't touch every support. Therefore, it had to be explosives.

And the owner admitted as much.

Yet more conspiracy gibberish and misrepresentation. What a surprise.

bgamall4 says

Therefore, it had to be explosives.

Silent explosives at that! And you forgot to mention that you believe they brought down the penthouse and the other roof structures in separate controlled demolitions.

bgamall4 says

And besides, the owner said they decided to Pull It, in his worlds. So if they decided to pull it they had to put the explosives in before that day.

Perhaps you'd like to remind casual readers who he was speaking to when he said that.

bgamall4 says

Abandoning race by abandoning militant Zionism

You know bloody well what I'm talking about. Abandoning the human race in favor of your new alien masters.

bgamall4 says

But you are arguing that that penthouse had a pancake effect. And I have told you that is impossible based on the rate of collapse and based upon the fact that the floors stayed equally distant from each other.

You've told people many things. The problem is that it's all conspiracy nonsense, just like the above post. Part of the lower internal structure of the building collapsed, resulting in the collapse of the penthouse into the INTERNALS of the building. There was a progressive collapse of INTERNAL structures that rippled through the building as evidenced by video of the roof structures across the building dropping and the building bowing. Finally, the entire building collapsed. And guess what, there weren't any sounds of a controlled demolition (let alone the 2 or 3 separate ones you've been claiming) when all this happened.

The Professor says

It seems to me that NIST ignored evidence. They conclude that there could not have been any explosives because they did not hear any. This contradicts earwitness and video evidence.

They then go on to say it could not have been explosives because "most, if not all, interior columns" must be destroyed, which directly contradicts their own story of how heat "caused thermal expansion of the steel beams" followed by a "series of structural failures" resulting in "all of the columns fail[ing] in the core of the building".

In other words, "A fire brought the whole thing down but it would have taken massive amounts of explosives to do the same thing".

Are you mocking your own argument now?

bgamall4 says

tatupu70 says

You know bloody well what I'm talking about. Abandoning the human race in favor of your new alien masters.

I wish you would not waste space in this thread to talk about aliens.

I wish you'd understand what he is doing.

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

No, they didn't.

You are lying.

How am I lying? Video evidence clearly shows the roof structures collapsing in a progressive fashion as a result of structures much lower giving way. That right there disproves your assertion that ALL supporting structures gave way at the same time.

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

Video evidence clearly shows the roof structures collapsing in a progressive fashion as a result of structures much lower giving way.

Wrong. If that were the case you would have had to have pancaking, which clearly did not occur. If you just undermine the lower floors, the building would topple over.

Duh. 'If you undermine the lower floors.' What is that supposed to even mean?

For the amusement of everyone on here (apart from your fellow conspiracy nuts), please explain the videos that show the penthouse and then the rest of the roof structures dropping into the internal structure of the building, and then the entire building bowing just before the collapse.

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

You've told people many things. The problem is that it's all conspiracy nonsense, just like the above post. Part of the lower internal structure of the building collapsed, resulting in the collapse of the penthouse into the INTERNALS of the building.

Listen to yourself. That is total BS. I can't imagine that you can believe that crap. All the building had to let loose at once for the floors to maintain the distance they kept as they fell. None of your bullcrap explains that.

Eh? Of course it can explain how it happened. The official reports give a clear explanation of how they believe it happened. Your explanation is that separate silent demolitions did it. Hmm...

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

I wish you'd understand what he is doing.

I don't give a shit what he is doing.

Then stop complaining about it you plum.

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

as a result of structures much lower giving way.

You just said this Bigsby. Now you are arguing with me that the floors at the bottom weren't undermined? You just said they gave way. Were they undermined you stupid idiot?

Eh? Why the choice of that word was obviously my point. It was weakened by uncontrolled fires. Is that what you meant by 'undermined?'

And perhaps you'd like to respond to my other point in that post.

You still haven't responded to my question about who the owner of WTC7 was talking to when he said the words 'pull it.'

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

It was weakened by uncontrolled fires. Is that what you meant by 'undermined.'

I am saying undermined. You say by fire, and I say by detonation. Regardless, that would not permit the building to fall into it's own footprint. What permits a building to fall into its own footprint is the release of support throughout the building. The entire building had to release, not just the bottom supports.

And there you have my exact point.

And videos clearly show progressive internal collapse across much of the building before the whole building came down, so...

bgamall4 says

bgamall4 says

So that means more than just the bottom floors were released from support. And of course, fire was not everywhere, so that could not have happened without detonation

And I am allowing that fire could have released any of the supports, which in reality is impossible in a reinforced building like this. But since fire was not everywhere, all the supports could not have been released unless by detonation.

Perhaps before you post, you'd actually like to read the official report because judging by what you are saying in these posts, you haven't.

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

Perhaps before you post, you'd actually like to read the official report because judging by what you are saying in these posts, you haven't.

I don't have to. I know a fraud when I see him. And you are him.

Ah right, you are arguing against something you haven't even read. Why am I not surprised?

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

Ah right, you are arguing against something you haven't even read. Why am I not surprised?

No, I am arguing the truth. You are arguing against it with arguments that don't hold water. I listen to your lies in debate, but I won't listen to the NIST lies while they hide behind a ream of paper.

Ha, ha. You have been arguing against something you haven't even read. You frequently ridicule the findings in the report. And now we discover you haven't even read the report. How stupid do you think that makes you look?