have another hit off your bong. I cant even respond to whatever it is you are trying to say because it is nonsense
I think the main thing truthers are missing is the big picture here. There is no evidence of explosive being bought into the towers. There is no evidence or narrative of how such a logistical impossibility of this magnitude could have been achieved. What they have is; 1. 1 witness to 'power-downs' in one floor of the building, which was not witnessed or recorded by anyone else. - no evidence. 2. A mentally ill woman talking about 'trucks' arriving in the early hours of the morning and unload (as if it is something unusual in a huge office building). - no evidence. 3. Claim that 'Ace Elevators' placed explosives during an elevator modernisation. - again, no evidence. Truthers literally have no evidence of how 'explosives' were planted in the building. No witnesses, no reports, no documents, no footage, nothing.
You don't get to do that. You are demanding proof of a negative when the only proof possible is the lack of evidence. In the case of a phenomenon or process which results in horrendously loud noises and small objects scattering in random directins in defiance of gravity, that abscense of evidence is evidence of abscense.
For Koko; [video=youtube;qWJTUAezxAI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWJTUAezxAI[/video] Burden of proof. Proving a negative. Two important concepts you should get your head around.
so by admission of all the troughers on this board the government cannot prove explosives were not used. wrong, that IS the argument and you have no proof otherwise .
That CD works by initiating collapse is a given, That it was not employed here is evident in the lack of any sign of explosive charges being used. You cannot silently detonate an explosive charge. That simple, really.
sure you can detonate an explosive quietly. What kind of trash is that? Firing a gun touches off an explosive and you can use a pop can to silence it LOL No its not evident unless you have evidence and you already claimed you had no evidence so either you are lying this time or you lied last time which is it? I thought you had all this experience whats up with that?
Silencers on guns have nothing to do with demolition charges. You wouldl need concrete slabs thicker that the floors surrounding each charge and that just aint happening in an occupied office building. Do learn how these things work.
Comparing the acoustic signature of a gun and a HE is an apples to oranges comparison. First of all modern firearms propellants ie nitrocellulose formulations, are by definition not a high explosive. When ignited, solid nitrocellulose is converted into gaseous products via a deflagration instead of a detonatio- it does not produce a significant shock front or overpressure.. Furthermore, a significant component of a high velocity Bullets acoustic signature results from the sonic boom produced by high velocity transonic projectiles. The sonic boom and sound from the gaseaus products of nitrocellulose can be mitigated by the addition of baffling and a reduction in a projectiles velocity. The detonation of a demolition or military grade HE drives a super sonic exothermic front through the surrounding media resulting in an overpressure that produces its destructive force. From a technical standpoint it is exheedingly difficult to mitigate or localize the noise resulting from such a detonation as compared to a deflagration.
You're asking him to prove he's NOT a 'shill'....How exactly is that not asking him to prove a negative,brainiac? And you're STILL not using 'troughers' correctly.
Oh my God.....just when I thought I'd heard every ridiculous thing a truther could say...Thanks koko!
Well, let's see. Online anonymity exists. Shills exists. Certain personalities defend officialdom across the spectrum. Shills are known to promote and defend officialdom. Are you familiar with history at all? What is your suspicion barometer set at?
Man...this place is locked up tighter than a drum, even tighter than I thought. You still up for the debate there buddy?
He conveniently omits the part about man's best friend, whom was trained to detect the odor of bombs, being removed before 9/11.
Be reasonable. Reasonable Adjective https://www.google.com/search?q=Rea...able&aqs=chrome.0.57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 Synonyms rational - sensible - moderate - fair - sane That's all I'm asking of you. Look at the world around you for the way it really is.
Maybe they needed the dogs to sniff for that missing flight that buried itself underground in Pennsylvania.
Not true. There had been an extra contingent of dogs the week prior due to a bomb threat, but the added detail, not the normal contigent, was withdrawn prior to the attack. There was, in fact, a bomb dog killed in the attack.
"Dog killed sniffing for bomb"..yeah I think I saw that headline on CNN... (WHO DIDN'T?) I think it was one of those dogs that found the magic bandana that floated down from WTC1 and landed intact in some pile of molten metal.
The dog's name was Sirius http://www.globalanimal.org/2012/09...-only-police-dog-killed-in-911-attacks/51066/
