What's new

9/11 Total lie, Scientifically proved by Indian Scientist.

.
i said one year before that 9/11 was fake and al qaeda is the result of U.s.
Few american posters including TruthSeeker bashed me:lol:.
you cant fool the world and there are lot of proof available.
 
.
This is exactly what I mean when I said that leave alone for a while, someone is going resurrect the same debunked crap as if new. Some 'scientist' or 'engineer' is going to repackage the same debunked crap as new and the same old crowd will just eat it all up.
 
.
.
Debunked in ur perceptions only,,,!!! Good that u r convinced these r debunked, so now lay-off... U don't need to waste ur posts anymore,,, coz it's ALL DeeeeBbbuuunnnkkkedd ... already.
No...Debunked for real. It is only YOUR perception that the issue is worth pursuing when all the demolition companies in the world does not agree, not one architectural/construction/engineering firm specializing in tall towers stepped forward, and the man who led the WTC Towers' construction, Leslie Robertson, wanted nothing to do with you. So why should the public take you seriously?
 
. .
They already knew it was gonna come down,,, including the jewish owner Silverstein who bought these buildings just a little while back & insured them against actsof terrors & who in his own words gave the ORDERs to PULL it...
Aaahhh...The 'pull it' line again...

NOVA Online/Kaboom!/Loizeaux Interview
NOVA: A common misconception is that you blow buildings up. That's not really the case, is it?

Stacy Loizeaux: No. The term "implosion" was coined by my grandmother back in, I guess, the '60s. It's a more descriptive way to explain what we do than "explosion." There are a series of small explosions, but the building itself isn't erupting outward. It's actually being pulled in on top of itself. What we're really doing is removing specific support columns within the structure and then cajoling the building in one direction or another, or straight down.

NOVA: How do you do that?

SL: Well, you just pull it away, you peel it off. If you have room in the opposite direction, you just let the building sort of melt down in that direction and it will pull itself completely away from the building. It can be done.
In the demolition business, to bring down a structure is to 'collapse' it.

To set off the planted explosive is to 'shoot' it...

NOVA: What can go wrong on a job? What do you have to watch for?

SL: Our biggest problem, when we come right down to the wire with shooting buildings, is ground control.

NOVA: Do you tend to look at blueprints?

SL: Well, 90 percent of the time we don't have them. A lot of times those plans have been misplaced or have disintegrated into dust. But when we do have them, yeah, we use them but we don't rely on them. There's a difference between 'as drawn' and 'as built'. And you never trust the drawings. That's why we do test shots, which is going in and picking out a few key columns and actually loading them with explosives and shooting them ahead of time, to understand the loads within the columns.

And the word 'pull' is a descriptor for the mode of collapse, not to order to set off the explosive.

Is there any wonder why no demolition company in the world took what Silverstein usage of 'pull' to mean what you loony conspiracy theories believers say it mean?
 
.
dum fat american keep watching fox news and eat more brugers.
 
. .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom