First off I never said any of this, so why are you implying that I did?
You never said any of what?
I am only trying to clarify what you are saying. If you don't want me to understand what you are saying then just say so.
And we will all hail the mystical Samson who speaks in parables.
Neither World Trade 1, 2 or 7 toppled over.
Isn't the pic you posted showing part of the WTC toppling over?
Please explain
Didn't you state that they were toppling over?
YES... Look at this picture. The entire upper floors of the building are intact as it is falling and the "toppling lean" those upper floor are in means that the ENTIRE UPPER CHUCK OF THAT TOWER SHOULD HAVE HIT THE GROUND IN ONE PIECE. But it mysteriously is PULVERIZED to dust as teh rest of the building collapses...also how does this small chuck of building have the power to completely destroy all of the many SOLID UNDAMAGED FLOORS BELOW IT???
Well, are you saying the WTC in the pic is toppling over or not?
THey were all brought down by controlled demolition and made to fall into their own footprint.
What is your evidence?
Building 7 had no reason to fall at all
So debris from WTC did not hit it? There was no fire?
and no one has explained why it fell when there was at best only a small fire inside the building and no plane hit it.
Where you in the building?
Do you know how big the fire was?
Do you know how many floors were burning?
Do you know the damage done by the fire?
Do you know the damage done by the debris?
Do you have access to that info?
Does a plane have to hit it for it to fall? (based on past experience in general with you I feel i should explain this question otherwise your mystical intellect might call it retarded. You said the building had no reason to fall when ..... no plane hit it. So I am asking you if a plane needed to hit it to fall)
You have not read the many explanations written and approved by the scientific community explaining this?
Are you saying these explanations are all illusion we are all seeing and in reality no one has ever explained it?
Are you saying we are under some sort of spell and cannot see that no one has explained why is fell?
Is the NIST just a figment of our imagination?
Are we really on earth?
This question shows complete retardedness. Exactly what are you asking here?
I am asking exactly what i asked. If you cannot answer it just say so. go back and re-read. Slower this time.
The question should be why is the concrete pulverized to dust?....that has never happened before except in control demolition take downs.
You mean we have had similar episodes of 110 story buildings being hit by thousands of tons of speeding fully fueled air planes that collapsed and did NOT have pulverized concrete?
You mean that force built up all this shouldn't have cause pulverized dust?
"The only factor involved in the destruction of the lower floors?"
you said:
also how does this small chuck of building have the power to completely destroy all of the many SOLID UNDAMAGED FLOORS BELOW IT???
OK, I will rephrase: Was the small chunk, (obviously comparative to the rest of the building because that small chunk looks like 15 stories or more) the only factor in the cause for the lower floors collapsing?
You need to rephrase this question because not only does it not make sense, it seems you are just pulling things out of the air that are not relevant to the topic.
No, I am just asking you to explain your assertions. In your blabber, you have many of them. I want you to explain why they are valid.
Go back and re-read carefully, I am not in the mood to list them. If you can't figure out what they are, that speaks volumes. (as if you haven't already spoken volumes in 99% of your posts
)
oh and PS:
means that the ENTIRE UPPER CHUCK OF THAT TOWER SHOULD HAVE HIT THE GROUND IN ONE PIECE.
Why?
