Yes there is. Flying east to west and vice versa there is a difference. The only thing that keeps the time the same is the pilot choosing what speed and height to fly to get to his landing window. They are on a schedule. You are going to have to show some data to prove otherwise. Fuel consumption / time / speed / distance traveled. Honestly what causes the time difference is the jet stream. Jet stream is affected by the rotation of the Earth.
It's a documented fact, that Air Force intelligence and the NSA actively sowed disinformation in the UFO community throughout the Cold War from the 1960s until at least the 1980s as a way to mask the legitimate secret information that they occasionally discovered about stealth technology and other technology like laser control of satellites. They did this to discredit them, and throw the Russians off the trail. It got to the point, where nobody knew what was real, and what wasn't.
Based on that, I think that the OP is correct.
I suspect most flat earthers, based on my debates with them, are people taken in by the disinformation.
Over the north pole it is possible not crossing Europe.
Btw: If quantum physics is right, when matter is just atoms and subatomics particles in vibration. So the earth might sometimes act as flat or a globe earth, depending on the observer.
Didn't a recent University of Alaska(?) study just confirm that it is scientifically certain that the freefall speeds must have been triggered via some sort of a controlled demolition and not fires? That the official reasoning in the 9/11 reports is literally impossible to replicate in any way shape or form?
when the system fails it looks like freefall because it is. when the damaged area can no longer support the weight of the building above, it fails spectacularly.
that doesn't mean someone, or a team of someone's was somehow able to spend months cutting holes in drywall to expose critical structural elements, making all the necessary weakening cuts on that critical structure, and rigging the buildings with explosives... while going completely unnoticed by the thousands of people who worked there every day.
when the buildings were damaged the remaining supports in that area were now required to hold extra weight/stresses. when those now stressed elements were then heated they reached a point where they could no longer hold the weight of the building above and the upper building fell through the damaged area.
i don't care how well you design a building, it's not able to "catch" the upper portions of a falling skyscraper.
they tend to be heavy, and inertia is a thing.
also
if you did rig a building with explosives, they would have gone off when the planes hit the building and the buildings would have fell right after the plane impacts.
and
rigging a building for demolition requires hundreds of miles of control wire and/or det cord chains to initiate the charges, which would have been blatantly obvious to the people who worked there.
lastly
if you spent all this time and energy rigging a building for explosion, why would you smash planes into those buildings risking severing the control wires rendering your demolition prep useless... thus risking the post event inspectors could find these devices and your entire plot would be discovered.
nothing about this "controlled demo" theory makes a bit of sense, it's a ridiculous theory designed to make people who question the things that happened that day look like complete morons. it's the reason people make fun of anyone who wants to talk about all the other shady shit that happened that day, or led up to that day, it's forever tainting the entire event so that i can't point out to people that we absolutely shot down that 4th plane without people accusing me of believing in utter nonsense controlled demo theories.
it was intentional, just as the OP here suggests, to discredit all investigations into the day and conspiracy theories in general.
If you haven’t watched “Zeitgeist” I highly recommend it. It gets into all of these questions you raise. Also, there was thermite and direct evidence that explosions took place based on survivor interviews. Have you seen the film I’m referring to? I think it would be very informative to you.
i've watched it, and i've watched corey and dylans lame attempt at selling DVD's... it's all nonsense.
the "evidence" of "thermite residue" is literally someone saying they found aluminum and iron oxide (rust) in the dust of the collapse.
two of the more common metals or metal oxides found in any building in the world.
yes, there are more exotic compositions (in particular using magnesium+aluminum alloy aka mag/al or "magnalium", some use copper oxide rather than iron oxide), however all of them are using the same essential methodology... create a metal fire hot enough to get the lower melt metal to burn, creating enough heat to melt the high melt temp metals to liquidize and flow onto the target.
there is zero evidence of thermatic melt, zero evidence of chain "explosions" caught on audio in the lead up to the collapse, and zero evidence of any of the necessary pre-demo work to make that a viable tactic...
incidentally i'd highly suggest you look into thermite, how it's made (8:3 ratio of iron oxide and aluminum), how it's commonly initiated (usually by using a stepped combustion to bring the temps up high enough to trigger the exothermic reaction in the aluminum... ie e-match -> BP slurry coated sparkler -> thermite), how thermite reacts when you are able to initiate the reaction (hint it doesn't "explode" so you wouldn't hear explosions anyway), etc...
you can add things to the composition mix (like sulfur or other free oxidizers) to lower the ignition temps, but the utilization of thermite in demolitions is essentially just starting an aluminum fire in some form of crucible, that aluminum uses the "oxide" from the iron oxide to burn, producing tremendous heat that is hot enough to leave behind slag/molten iron. this molten iron is then used to either weld things or cut things but it needs gravity to do it... you essentially drip or pour the hot metal onto your target.
if i place a flower pot on the hood of your car filled with thermite, then jab a sparkler into it and light it... the sparkler is hot enough to initiate the reaction and the whole contraption would begin to spit and sputter sparks and molten metal until the reaction worked it's way through the powdered thermite composition and found that little hole in the bottom of the flower pot...
the molten iron then pours out that little hole and burrows a hole through your hood, and most of the way through the top of your engine.
it would look like your engine got hit by a fucking meteorite...
but it doesn't explode.
anyone saying "there was thermite because witnesses say they heard explosions" doesn't understand how thermite works (thermite doesn't explode).
...
in order to rig a building for demo you have to pretty much gut the damn thing. you have to get down to the supporting structure. in order to do this you gotta bust holes in drywall and fireproofing and insulation... then make weakening cuts with a cutting torch or a grinding disk, then attach cutting charges to the remaining structure to complete your cuts.
it's long tedious messy loud noticeable job that takes months even for small buildings.
it takes massive crews the better part of a year to rig a building that size for demo.
thousands of people worked in all three of those buildings every day, that work would have been noticed.
beyond that, in order to control all these cutting charges, you would need to connect these charges to one another or a central blasting box that can initiate the charges using electricity to pass fire to the primary devices (usually e-matches) that initiate the secondary devices.
the only other way to tie all these charges together would be using some type of det-cord chains.
this brings up two major problems with the theory...
if it was ematches and a blasting control box... the planes could have severed the control wires rendering the cutting charges useless. way to big of a risk to take and as i mentioned earlier... this method requires miles of control wires. there would have been a telephone thick truck line of wires running down the stair case by the time you got to the bottom.
it it was det-cord, the impact of the planes and the ensuing fireball from the aerosolized jet fuel fireball would have trigged the det-cord chains and all the shaped charges on impact of the planes... so the buildings would have fallen right away.
lastly... thermite requires that containment to function, you can't just paint things with a thermite paint and expect it to do anything other than briefly heating up the steel... frankly unless you painted it on a few inches thick it probably wouldn't react at all because the powder needs to be loose to allow air to be mixed into the composition for it to function properly... you can't have it locked up in a thin painted on film and expect it to do anything more than just make something hot for a few seconds.
... look... i've been in blasting, demo, and pyrotechnics most of my adult life. i've personally built more thermite devices than i've had birthdays. moreover i know people who've been in the building demo business, who's families have been into blasting and demo, for generations...
none of the people who do this sort of thing for a living have ever found any of the "9/11 controlled demo" theories to be worth a squirt of piss.
we laugh about it.
it's a fucking joke.
i firmly believe the entire thing was planted into conspiracy circles so people would shift focus away from important questions and onto the nonsense they invented.
Wow, thank you for the thorough response man. I will certainly have to look more into all of that but on the surface, unless you are a top tier bull-shitter, it sounds like you know your stuff.
I personally know jack about those reactions and technical factors in controlled demolition but it was an attractive theory along with the support of the Fairbanks study and the claims saying the parameters for the 9/11 commission report have never been able to be duplicated in any independent studies attempting to recreate the event.
Some things I would be curious about your take on in order to attempt to discredit the Zeitgeist movie further if you don't mind taking a crack? Because it sounds like you are knowledgeable and level headed and you're the first person I've encounter who might have facts/ sound theories to back it up.
The basement workers claims of getting blown to shit in the lower levels of the building like a bomb went off. People dying, getting thrown to the ceiling, wall, etc.
The images of the perfectly angled cuts in the supporting beams.
The "rivers" of molten steel within the rubble that looked like a foundry according to the firefighters.
4 The clearly scripted phony interviews with talking points built in given by "witnesses" with those handlers standing behind them.
Reports of tower 7 collapsing before it even happened
Tower 7 collapsing perfectly like a controlled demo via "debris that started a fire".
The free fall speeds that don't support the pancake style collapse (the top layers failing and at least encountering some interference to slow the collapse)
Sure man, not a problem, and i really appreciate your willingness to consider alternate opinions... most people just attack me for not buying the official conspiracy theory.
i'd have to see those reports, and when it happened to weigh in on A: if i believe them and B: what could have caused the phenomenon. if this happened during the collapse as people were running, it could have something to do with the pressure pushing down the central core... but if thats the case i'd believe them a lot less... anyone in the building during the collapse wouldn't have much chance to get out alive to give that statement.
i'd need to see those cuts. I've never seen them but if i did i'd most likely be able to tell what caused them. if it's thermatic melt or the result of a shaped/cutting charge there would be obvious signs on the back of the cut. either splash out/slag or a curling from the force of the charge's "knife" blowing out the back.
It could also be a stress break/tear but that would show it's own signs of warping/deflection at the edges of the fracture. metal doesn't break cleanly like a piece of peanut brittle... it should have tell tale signs on it for whatever caused it.
Link and I can say more.
Zero pictures or video of "molten metal pools" and zero pics or video of them craning out the solidified puddle out of the basement. you gotta remember man these buildings fell into their foundation hole, which was essentially a bathtub designed to keep out the river it was built right next to. If there was any molten metal it would have all collected at the bottom of that tub and solidified down there.
If you remember it took them months to dig down to the bottom of that hole, as it was packed solid with concrete rubble, twisted beams, and mangled rebar. there could not possibly have been firefighters at the bottom of that bathtub to witness the pool of molten metal... and as i said above there's no chance in hell that solidified puddle wouldn't have been photographed and video'ed as they were craning it out of the hole. it would have been a huge deal and it would probably be part of one of those cheesy memorials somewhere in the country.
Never noticed that, but most major events like this you hear witness accounts and a narrative starts to develop with people being interviewed. they all sorta say the same thing with their own spin. mostly because they all witnessed the same thing, but also due to all the chitchat that happens from person to person when something major like this goes down. it's all anyone was talking about (obviously) so most of these people had their own personal schtick pretty nailed down by the time they had a camera shoved in their face, and weather people realize it or not the things we say are influenced by the things we hear others say. if someone is able to clearly articulate a concept or a recount of events in a succinct manner... others will tend to pick that up and parrot it.
But again i'd need to see the video you're talking about, without seeing it thats the only way i can explain that phenomenon without agreeing they were being coached.
This one is easy, the fire crews were all saying it was going to collapse long before it did. Two other buildings just collapsed right next to it and one of those collapses took a giant hole out of the corner of 7 and set multiple floors on fire (including multiple diesel tanks for backup power generation). they knew it was going to fail because the damaged area was barely holding the building up and the fires were heating what was left. structural steel looses it's rather fast as it's heated. if you've ever worked metal before you know the first step is getting it hot, second step is applying massive pressure to it either with a hammer or with a press or bender. in this case the intense pressure was already there having to hold the weight of the building above the damaged area.
It was doomed and they all knew it.
That is actually the source of the "pull it" quote. the fire cheif was saying "pull all the crews out of the building" not "pull down a giant skyscraper in the middle of downtown Manhattan"... fire chiefs have some clout but nobody's public service sector job allows them to writes checks that big.
The physics were the same as in the other two towers. A large area was damaged, that damaged area was set on fire. The damage means that the remaining supporting structure was being asked to hold more weight/stress than they were designed to. the other issue people don't consider is when you damage a building like that, you're point loading the remaining supports in weird ways they weren't designed to handle as well... by that i mean if you design something to hold a vertical load, but then are applying shear load to it, or torsion, or even more compression than it was designed to handle... you are asking for an issue. Once you have all that point loading on systems not designed for it... and then you add lots of heat... those points become points of failure real quick. like if a giant picked up an I-beam and started trying to bend it... but couldn't... and he kept the pressure on it while you heated it...
Eventually you reach a point where the beam can't withstand the pressure anymore and the i beam fails/bends.
Buildings weigh a lot, when the pressure + heat causes the damaged foundation to fail, it does so in a spectacular fashion. imagine the insane pression/tension/force being applied to the supports while they are trying to hold up the weight of entire skyscraper above.
Ever see a steel cable snap? it'll cut you in half if you get in the way... thats a few thousands pounds of force doing that...
Now imagine a few thousand tons.
Now imagine over a million.
Building foundations aren't designed to "catch" a million tons of building falling down onto them...
Thats a fuck ton of mass to stop once it starts moving.
Inertia is a real mother fucker when you're dealing with that much weight.
So it would look EXACTLY like a freefall, because it was. If you were falling from an airplane and hit a bird... would you notice a reduction in speed?
Thanks a lot for the response. I always think it's best to hear ALL arguments with a healthy dose of skepticism, even the ones you think to be factual. Had a high school teacher who preached "don't take my word for it, not your parents, not Fox News, not CNN... etc, read everything, do your own research, try to get as close to the SOURCE as possible, and make up you own mind.". Everyone needs their own assumptions and perspectives to be challenged and doing so in a constructive, open, and uncensored way is the only route to the truth.
So thanks for engaging. To be honest, all of that "evidence" I was pointing out here came from the movie Zeitgeist and the raw footage they included (the pictures of the beams cut, very shady "scripted" looking interviews, firefighters describing the "foundry" of molten steel, the basement workers describing the explosions far prior to the actual collapse).
Maybe you could rewatch that chapter of the movie if you wanted a refresher on what I'm referring to. In the meantime, I'll see if I could find any raw footage or images myself. The way the movie presented the "facts" left no doubt in my mind that this was not something that could be accomplished by a group of self-trained terrorists without a lot of inside (gov alphabet agencies) help. Too many "coincidences" and lack of transparency.
This is what the real people in charge do though, chum/muddy the waters and push and pull different narratives to the point that no one is ever able to distinguish fact from fiction. A very scary thought. That's why I think it's important to keep questioning everything and not be complacent in accepting anything as fact.
Did you just draw a straight line from the US to Japan on a Mercator projection map to come to this conclusion? If so, that is actually retarded.
Retardo Supreme Route
GlobalHomo Route
Flat Earth Route
The globe model and flat model show the same route. You show us your ignorance in flat AND globe models.
/Thread.
Oh snap!
Exactly. I don't claim to know the answers but I know for a fact they are lying about theirs
Have you ever flown before?? Almost every time I fly to French Polynesia it's an hour or so shorter on the way back.
Yes there is. Flying east to west and vice versa there is a difference. The only thing that keeps the time the same is the pilot choosing what speed and height to fly to get to his landing window. They are on a schedule. You are going to have to show some data to prove otherwise. Fuel consumption / time / speed / distance traveled. Honestly what causes the time difference is the jet stream. Jet stream is affected by the rotation of the Earth.
It's a disguise for the fact that the Earth is hollow...
It's a documented fact, that Air Force intelligence and the NSA actively sowed disinformation in the UFO community throughout the Cold War from the 1960s until at least the 1980s as a way to mask the legitimate secret information that they occasionally discovered about stealth technology and other technology like laser control of satellites. They did this to discredit them, and throw the Russians off the trail. It got to the point, where nobody knew what was real, and what wasn't.
Based on that, I think that the OP is correct.
I suspect most flat earthers, based on my debates with them, are people taken in by the disinformation.
How long was the flight there? And how long was it back?
Last time I checked, planes can accelerate and decelerate.
I saw a map on google once. If what I saw was true, Florida was folded upon itself to the West. It’s not a panhandle.
I thought to myself, this is the real map.
And it disappeared as fast as it went up.
Any links for those kind of claims/encounters by early explorers? Seems like a really interesting topic.
Cool cool thanks
Ten days dark, do you think we went to the moon?
You flew from Hawaii
https://pasteboard.co/JSMaDbN.jpg here's how. Flat earth map with your flight path.
Over the north pole it is possible not crossing Europe. Btw: If quantum physics is right, when matter is just atoms and subatomics particles in vibration. So the earth might sometimes act as flat or a globe earth, depending on the observer.
Why try your absolutely correct.
Go to Nebraska. Look at curvature of earth.problem solved.
Show is a screenshot of the ticket.
Or a flight number with dates and times so planefags can verify.
?"The Earth Is Flat & Stationary: Destroying The Freemasonic Luciferian Globalist "Globe" Lie" ? https://www.humorousmathematics.com/post/the-earth-is-flat-stationary-destroying-the-freemasonic-luciferian-globalist-globe-lie
?"The Black Nobility Jesuit Order: Founders of Fascism, Freemasonry, Illuminati, The Vatican & Zionism" ? https://www.humorousmathematics.com/post/the-black-nobility-jesuit-order-founders-of-fascism-freemasonry-illuminati-the-vatican-and-zionism
? Connect & Please Share My Over ? Censored RedPilling Articles: ? https://link-tube.com/OperationQ ? https://t.me/OperationCue
...and why don't flights from the southern tip of south america to southern africa take 2 weeks?
flattards will never answer that one either.
i think you're correct, and i think 9/11 controlled demo is another example of what you're talking about.
it pisses people off every time i say it, i get accused of being a "shill" anytime i say it, but i don't give a fuck... i'll keep saying it.
controlled demo is a theory planted to make us all look like retards.
bring on the hate i don't give a fuck.
Didn't a recent University of Alaska(?) study just confirm that it is scientifically certain that the freefall speeds must have been triggered via some sort of a controlled demolition and not fires? That the official reasoning in the 9/11 reports is literally impossible to replicate in any way shape or form?
Yep, Fairbanks:
https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/evidence-overview
Do you have any response to these findings?
yeah it's a simple response... bullshit.
when the system fails it looks like freefall because it is. when the damaged area can no longer support the weight of the building above, it fails spectacularly.
that doesn't mean someone, or a team of someone's was somehow able to spend months cutting holes in drywall to expose critical structural elements, making all the necessary weakening cuts on that critical structure, and rigging the buildings with explosives... while going completely unnoticed by the thousands of people who worked there every day.
when the buildings were damaged the remaining supports in that area were now required to hold extra weight/stresses. when those now stressed elements were then heated they reached a point where they could no longer hold the weight of the building above and the upper building fell through the damaged area.
i don't care how well you design a building, it's not able to "catch" the upper portions of a falling skyscraper.
they tend to be heavy, and inertia is a thing.
also
if you did rig a building with explosives, they would have gone off when the planes hit the building and the buildings would have fell right after the plane impacts.
and
rigging a building for demolition requires hundreds of miles of control wire and/or det cord chains to initiate the charges, which would have been blatantly obvious to the people who worked there.
lastly
if you spent all this time and energy rigging a building for explosion, why would you smash planes into those buildings risking severing the control wires rendering your demolition prep useless... thus risking the post event inspectors could find these devices and your entire plot would be discovered.
nothing about this "controlled demo" theory makes a bit of sense, it's a ridiculous theory designed to make people who question the things that happened that day look like complete morons. it's the reason people make fun of anyone who wants to talk about all the other shady shit that happened that day, or led up to that day, it's forever tainting the entire event so that i can't point out to people that we absolutely shot down that 4th plane without people accusing me of believing in utter nonsense controlled demo theories.
it was intentional, just as the OP here suggests, to discredit all investigations into the day and conspiracy theories in general.
If you haven’t watched “Zeitgeist” I highly recommend it. It gets into all of these questions you raise. Also, there was thermite and direct evidence that explosions took place based on survivor interviews. Have you seen the film I’m referring to? I think it would be very informative to you.
i've watched it, and i've watched corey and dylans lame attempt at selling DVD's... it's all nonsense.
the "evidence" of "thermite residue" is literally someone saying they found aluminum and iron oxide (rust) in the dust of the collapse.
two of the more common metals or metal oxides found in any building in the world.
yes, there are more exotic compositions (in particular using magnesium+aluminum alloy aka mag/al or "magnalium", some use copper oxide rather than iron oxide), however all of them are using the same essential methodology... create a metal fire hot enough to get the lower melt metal to burn, creating enough heat to melt the high melt temp metals to liquidize and flow onto the target.
there is zero evidence of thermatic melt, zero evidence of chain "explosions" caught on audio in the lead up to the collapse, and zero evidence of any of the necessary pre-demo work to make that a viable tactic...
incidentally i'd highly suggest you look into thermite, how it's made (8:3 ratio of iron oxide and aluminum), how it's commonly initiated (usually by using a stepped combustion to bring the temps up high enough to trigger the exothermic reaction in the aluminum... ie e-match -> BP slurry coated sparkler -> thermite), how thermite reacts when you are able to initiate the reaction (hint it doesn't "explode" so you wouldn't hear explosions anyway), etc...
you can add things to the composition mix (like sulfur or other free oxidizers) to lower the ignition temps, but the utilization of thermite in demolitions is essentially just starting an aluminum fire in some form of crucible, that aluminum uses the "oxide" from the iron oxide to burn, producing tremendous heat that is hot enough to leave behind slag/molten iron. this molten iron is then used to either weld things or cut things but it needs gravity to do it... you essentially drip or pour the hot metal onto your target.
if i place a flower pot on the hood of your car filled with thermite, then jab a sparkler into it and light it... the sparkler is hot enough to initiate the reaction and the whole contraption would begin to spit and sputter sparks and molten metal until the reaction worked it's way through the powdered thermite composition and found that little hole in the bottom of the flower pot...
the molten iron then pours out that little hole and burrows a hole through your hood, and most of the way through the top of your engine.
it would look like your engine got hit by a fucking meteorite...
but it doesn't explode.
anyone saying "there was thermite because witnesses say they heard explosions" doesn't understand how thermite works (thermite doesn't explode).
...
in order to rig a building for demo you have to pretty much gut the damn thing. you have to get down to the supporting structure. in order to do this you gotta bust holes in drywall and fireproofing and insulation... then make weakening cuts with a cutting torch or a grinding disk, then attach cutting charges to the remaining structure to complete your cuts.
it's long tedious messy loud noticeable job that takes months even for small buildings.
it takes massive crews the better part of a year to rig a building that size for demo.
thousands of people worked in all three of those buildings every day, that work would have been noticed.
beyond that, in order to control all these cutting charges, you would need to connect these charges to one another or a central blasting box that can initiate the charges using electricity to pass fire to the primary devices (usually e-matches) that initiate the secondary devices.
the only other way to tie all these charges together would be using some type of det-cord chains.
this brings up two major problems with the theory...
if it was ematches and a blasting control box... the planes could have severed the control wires rendering the cutting charges useless. way to big of a risk to take and as i mentioned earlier... this method requires miles of control wires. there would have been a telephone thick truck line of wires running down the stair case by the time you got to the bottom.
it it was det-cord, the impact of the planes and the ensuing fireball from the aerosolized jet fuel fireball would have trigged the det-cord chains and all the shaped charges on impact of the planes... so the buildings would have fallen right away.
lastly... thermite requires that containment to function, you can't just paint things with a thermite paint and expect it to do anything other than briefly heating up the steel... frankly unless you painted it on a few inches thick it probably wouldn't react at all because the powder needs to be loose to allow air to be mixed into the composition for it to function properly... you can't have it locked up in a thin painted on film and expect it to do anything more than just make something hot for a few seconds.
... look... i've been in blasting, demo, and pyrotechnics most of my adult life. i've personally built more thermite devices than i've had birthdays. moreover i know people who've been in the building demo business, who's families have been into blasting and demo, for generations...
none of the people who do this sort of thing for a living have ever found any of the "9/11 controlled demo" theories to be worth a squirt of piss.
we laugh about it.
it's a fucking joke.
i firmly believe the entire thing was planted into conspiracy circles so people would shift focus away from important questions and onto the nonsense they invented.
it appears to have worked.
Wow, thank you for the thorough response man. I will certainly have to look more into all of that but on the surface, unless you are a top tier bull-shitter, it sounds like you know your stuff.
I personally know jack about those reactions and technical factors in controlled demolition but it was an attractive theory along with the support of the Fairbanks study and the claims saying the parameters for the 9/11 commission report have never been able to be duplicated in any independent studies attempting to recreate the event.
Some things I would be curious about your take on in order to attempt to discredit the Zeitgeist movie further if you don't mind taking a crack? Because it sounds like you are knowledgeable and level headed and you're the first person I've encounter who might have facts/ sound theories to back it up.
The basement workers claims of getting blown to shit in the lower levels of the building like a bomb went off. People dying, getting thrown to the ceiling, wall, etc.
The images of the perfectly angled cuts in the supporting beams.
The "rivers" of molten steel within the rubble that looked like a foundry according to the firefighters.
4 The clearly scripted phony interviews with talking points built in given by "witnesses" with those handlers standing behind them.
Reports of tower 7 collapsing before it even happened
Tower 7 collapsing perfectly like a controlled demo via "debris that started a fire".
The free fall speeds that don't support the pancake style collapse (the top layers failing and at least encountering some interference to slow the collapse)
Sure man, not a problem, and i really appreciate your willingness to consider alternate opinions... most people just attack me for not buying the official conspiracy theory.
i'd have to see those reports, and when it happened to weigh in on A: if i believe them and B: what could have caused the phenomenon. if this happened during the collapse as people were running, it could have something to do with the pressure pushing down the central core... but if thats the case i'd believe them a lot less... anyone in the building during the collapse wouldn't have much chance to get out alive to give that statement.
i'd need to see those cuts. I've never seen them but if i did i'd most likely be able to tell what caused them. if it's thermatic melt or the result of a shaped/cutting charge there would be obvious signs on the back of the cut. either splash out/slag or a curling from the force of the charge's "knife" blowing out the back.
It could also be a stress break/tear but that would show it's own signs of warping/deflection at the edges of the fracture. metal doesn't break cleanly like a piece of peanut brittle... it should have tell tale signs on it for whatever caused it.
Link and I can say more.
If you remember it took them months to dig down to the bottom of that hole, as it was packed solid with concrete rubble, twisted beams, and mangled rebar. there could not possibly have been firefighters at the bottom of that bathtub to witness the pool of molten metal... and as i said above there's no chance in hell that solidified puddle wouldn't have been photographed and video'ed as they were craning it out of the hole. it would have been a huge deal and it would probably be part of one of those cheesy memorials somewhere in the country.
But again i'd need to see the video you're talking about, without seeing it thats the only way i can explain that phenomenon without agreeing they were being coached.
It was doomed and they all knew it.
That is actually the source of the "pull it" quote. the fire cheif was saying "pull all the crews out of the building" not "pull down a giant skyscraper in the middle of downtown Manhattan"... fire chiefs have some clout but nobody's public service sector job allows them to writes checks that big.
Eventually you reach a point where the beam can't withstand the pressure anymore and the i beam fails/bends.
Ever see a steel cable snap? it'll cut you in half if you get in the way... thats a few thousands pounds of force doing that...
Now imagine a few thousand tons.
Now imagine over a million.
Building foundations aren't designed to "catch" a million tons of building falling down onto them...
Thats a fuck ton of mass to stop once it starts moving.
Inertia is a real mother fucker when you're dealing with that much weight.
So it would look EXACTLY like a freefall, because it was. If you were falling from an airplane and hit a bird... would you notice a reduction in speed?
Thanks a lot for the response. I always think it's best to hear ALL arguments with a healthy dose of skepticism, even the ones you think to be factual. Had a high school teacher who preached "don't take my word for it, not your parents, not Fox News, not CNN... etc, read everything, do your own research, try to get as close to the SOURCE as possible, and make up you own mind.". Everyone needs their own assumptions and perspectives to be challenged and doing so in a constructive, open, and uncensored way is the only route to the truth.
So thanks for engaging. To be honest, all of that "evidence" I was pointing out here came from the movie Zeitgeist and the raw footage they included (the pictures of the beams cut, very shady "scripted" looking interviews, firefighters describing the "foundry" of molten steel, the basement workers describing the explosions far prior to the actual collapse).
Maybe you could rewatch that chapter of the movie if you wanted a refresher on what I'm referring to. In the meantime, I'll see if I could find any raw footage or images myself. The way the movie presented the "facts" left no doubt in my mind that this was not something that could be accomplished by a group of self-trained terrorists without a lot of inside (gov alphabet agencies) help. Too many "coincidences" and lack of transparency.
This is what the real people in charge do though, chum/muddy the waters and push and pull different narratives to the point that no one is ever able to distinguish fact from fiction. A very scary thought. That's why I think it's important to keep questioning everything and not be complacent in accepting anything as fact.
so is qanon. it took pizzagate from epstein to qanon shamon
Flat earth consists of 1% bad actors, 4% grifters and 95% idiots.
I have to agree with this.
Flat Earth is among one of the most ridiculous insanity I had ever encountered and people LITERALLY use it to laugh at the actual legit things.
Portals. Don't you remember being knocked out and waking up landing? They implimented memories of the time it took to cross it.
Just kidding. I suspect that it grew up naturally, but people took advantage and muddied the waters, thus protecting their power.