The gauntlet has been thrown down that I can't explain this:

OK, step 1: Get the facts straight. It is a common truther lie that the WTC 7 fell in freefall. This is, in fact, completely false. From the first signs of collapse (East Penthouse) until complete collapse was over 13 seconds.

Who says so? How about the pre-eminent truther, Steven Jones admitting they were wrong and that it took twice as long to collapse as they initially claimed? Source Video evidence they are talking about:
Step 2: Determine why WTC 7 collapsed. You've already stated WTC 7 wasn't hit by an aircraft, but this is a clear attempt at diversion. You try to claim WTC 7 wasn't hit by an aircraft and thus it wasn't hit at all. Truth of the matter is it was hit with debris from one and possibly two 110 story buildings, each weighing an astounding half million TONS.

The PROOF of the damage comes from those who were close enough to the building to get a good look at the damage; the firefighters themselves.

Two sources for firefighter testimony: Source Source

**Note** A transit is a device to see if a building is leaning any one direction


So there you have it. The building fell in over 13 seconds which is far slower than freefall speed. Even the "truther" estimate of 6.5 seconds is slower than freefall speed. And even though it hadn't been hit by a plane, WTC 7 had indeed been hit and hit hard. Hard enough to cause enough damage that the fires that burned for hours were able to weaken the structure enough to cause a collapse.

Any questions?

I direct you to this, Patty...


The Bombs In The WTC - View Of A Military Expert:
Why The Towers Of The World Trade Center Collapsed


Enjoy...

__________________
My NEW UPDATED Pep Talk For Lefties and Lurkers

I cannot teach anybody anything, I can only make them think.
~~ Socrates

The Real John McCain 2

I read this much....

...And couldn't get any farther for laughing too hard.

If you're using this site for your proof, Stripey, you've lost.

__________________
Man up.

In response I direct you to this: A critical analysis of the collapse of WTC Towers 1, 2 and 7 from an explosives and conventional demolition industry viewpoint

As for the opening picture trying to compare the collapse of the WTC towers to a nuclear bomb going off, I would like to point out that all the debris of the WTC was coming DOWN, while all the stuff from the nuclear explosion is going UP.

I read far enough into the article to realize it is made up of an amalgamation of lies from the likes of Alex Jones and Greg Szysmanski. Especially when it got to the part where the article claimed fighters were sent to Alaska so they would be as far away from NYC as possible.... as though every single fighter in America were sent to Alaska. Get real!

If you honestly think there is a part of that article that stands up to inspection, please feel free to post it and we will disect it to see what is real and what is hogwash.

I'd just like him to post proof of the claim that everything above the 40th floor of the towers was off limits to employees the previous weekend. Or that 30 people spent six months assembling and placing demo charges in the towers.

I also like the claim that "real terrorists would have hit the towers lower", as if it's easy to hit the tower in the first place while traveling at 500 mph, much less fly lower and avoid the surrounding buildings. Particularly because Al Qaeda never expected the buildings to actually collapse, so they weren't trying very hard in that direction.

__________________
Man up.

Clearly, the link is over the top speculation, though I do agree it's a little dogey that all three of them would collapse in a pancake fashion, looking exactly like gingerficated housing comissions.

__________________

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
-- Ronald Reagan.