Physics Professor's Peer Reviewed Paper on WTC CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONSon 9/11

Chad Irby wrote in news:cirby-3446F2.09584524022006
@news-server2.tampabay.rr.com:

In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

Besides, the leaseholder himself, Larry Silverstein, said on camera,
that WTC7 was "pulled"

No, he said to "pull it," meaning "pull the firefighters out of the
building, there's been enough loss of life already and we're not going
to save it."




He didn't say pull "them", he said pull "it".


Here's the video clip of Silverstein from the PBS documentary:
http://www.911blogger.com/files/video/wtc7_pbs.WMV

In the same documentary a clean up worker uses the term "pull" when
preparing for the controlled demolition of Building 6:
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/vide.../pull_wtc6.wmv



According to employees of NIST and FEMA, there were no firefighters in
the building. See here....
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sep...n_answers_wtc7
_charges.htm

In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

Chad Irby wrote in news:cirby-3446F2.09584524022006
@news-server2.tampabay.rr.com:

In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

Besides, the leaseholder himself, Larry Silverstein, said on camera,
that WTC7 was "pulled"

No, he said to "pull it," meaning "pull the firefighters out of the
building, there's been enough loss of life already and we're not going
to save it."

He didn't say pull "them", he said pull "it".

You need to learn more about how the English language works.

TRUTH wrote:

...

Well, it looks like controlled demolitions, all the facts easily support
controlled demolitions, the government provided no real investigation, so
why believe that it wasn't controlled demolitions?


It does NOT look like a controlled demolition. No now who has
seen fooptage of both and paid attention would think they
looked like each other.

The WTC towers collapsed from the top down, controlled demolitions
collapse from the bottom up.

Aside from the fact that it does NOT look a controlled demolition,
the absence of any witnesses who saw preparations for demolition
is ANOTHER good reason to not believe it. Consider, for example,
that for a controlled demolition much the structural steel is cut
through
at the point where the explosives are placed so that the explosives
will reliably finish severing them.

--

FF

wrote in
ups.com:


TRUTH wrote:

...

Well, it looks like controlled demolitions, all the facts easily
support controlled demolitions, the government provided no real
investigation, so why believe that it wasn't controlled demolitions?


It does NOT look like a controlled demolition. No now who has
seen fooptage of both and paid attention would think they
looked like each other.

The WTC towers collapsed from the top down, controlled demolitions
collapse from the bottom up.

Aside from the fact that it does NOT look a controlled demolition,
the absence of any witnesses who saw preparations for demolition
is ANOTHER good reason to not believe it. Consider, for example,
that for a controlled demolition much the structural steel is cut
through
at the point where the explosives are placed so that the explosives
will reliably finish severing them.



Sorry, but it does. Numerous engineering have said that the collapses
resemble controlled demolitions. And that includes the strucural engineer
hired by the WTC leaseholder's insurance company:

Video link of him saying it is he
http://forums.bluelemur.com/viewtopic.php?t=4820

In message , TRUTH
writes
wrote in
oups.com:


TRUTH wrote:

...

Well, it looks like controlled demolitions, all the facts easily
support controlled demolitions, the government provided no real
investigation, so why believe that it wasn't controlled demolitions?


It does NOT look like a controlled demolition. No now who has
seen fooptage of both and paid attention would think they
looked like each other.

The WTC towers collapsed from the top down, controlled demolitions
collapse from the bottom up.

Aside from the fact that it does NOT look a controlled demolition,
the absence of any witnesses who saw preparations for demolition
is ANOTHER good reason to not believe it. Consider, for example,
that for a controlled demolition much the structural steel is cut
through
at the point where the explosives are placed so that the explosives
will reliably finish severing them.



Sorry, but it does. Numerous engineering have said that the collapses
resemble controlled demolitions. And that includes the strucural engineer
hired by the WTC leaseholder's insurance company:

My dad resembled his cousin Bob. Wasn't him, though. Two separate people
with similar faces.

Resemble \= is
Similar \= same

Get a grip (no, not on that, you'll go even more blind than you are
already)

Video link of him saying it is he
http://forums.bluelemur.com/viewtopic.php?t=4820

--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!

TRUTH wrote:
wrote in
ups.com:

TRUTH wrote:
...

Well, it looks like controlled demolitions, all the facts easily
support controlled demolitions, the government provided no real
investigation, so why believe that it wasn't controlled demolitions?

It does NOT look like a controlled demolition. No now who has
seen fooptage of both and paid attention would think they
looked like each other.

The WTC towers collapsed from the top down, controlled demolitions
collapse from the bottom up.

Aside from the fact that it does NOT look a controlled demolition,
the absence of any witnesses who saw preparations for demolition
is ANOTHER good reason to not believe it. Consider, for example,
that for a controlled demolition much the structural steel is cut
through
at the point where the explosives are placed so that the explosives
will reliably finish severing them.



Sorry, but it does. Numerous engineering have said that the collapses
resemble controlled demolitions. And that includes the strucural engineer
hired by the WTC leaseholder's insurance company:

Video link of him saying it is he
http://forums.bluelemur.com/viewtopic.php?t=4820

"Resembled" doesn't mean it was, OK? The fact remains there is NO
proof of "controlled demolition" of WTC1 or WTC2 and it's time you
admitted it. All you have is people telling you it looked like it.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

TRUTH wrote:

Sorry, but it does. Numerous engineering have said that the collapses
resemble controlled demolitions. And that includes the strucural engineer
hired by the WTC leaseholder's insurance company:


I resemble Jesus Christ, and Osama - I have the same body parts and same
general appearance. Resemble doesn't mean I'm either one.

But - didn't you say you were leaving?