NIST examination of WTC steel was seriously fudged

I didn't misunderstand you,I gave you the link to a video where FDNY officials noted it was leaning.

If that's not good enough for you,then nothing is.

 

You obviously did misunderstand me because I requested photos showing the WTC7 actually leaning, not photos/video of some FDNY official noting it was leaning.

 

Once AGAIN,I didn't misunderstand you, I just gave you all the proof you need on the condition of 7,I realize it isn't what you asked for,but it will have to do,.

 

I anticipate implications of FDNY complicity.

 

Haha, that is funny.

It's the bright people who are dissecting the BS gov reports and exposing the lies.

 

Half of the Murrah building in OK was gone, including structural support members, and nobody was running around claiming it was going to topple over any second.

 

Pulled that one out of your hat,did you?

the ONLY reason they left it standing as long as they did was to finish recovery and rescue efforts, as well as a restraining order from timmy's lawyer

 

Every psychological study done on your little "movement" over the last ten years has said otherwise. Sorry to inform you. But accepting it is the first step to overcoming it.

 

If our movement is so little, you are you spending so much of your time trying to combat it?

 

Well, he's obsessed with truthers and is obligated to run interference when he sees something a little too specific. He is then obligated to insult. Or, hey, maybe he's just "in between flights" too!

 

I'm not saying that this collapse due to fire could not have happened... Yes there's a first time for everything. Now you mentioned the moon landing. I can believe this happened. It has been proven, scientifically.. You can even bounce lazers off the moon now as an experiment. I'm saying they just have to do the same thing here, which they haven't, because NIST's conclusions are NOT scientific.

 

Suchas.......

 

It's fun to point and laugh at stupid people.

LOL @ "obligated". You're pathetic, dude. Not a single response that doesn't involve pretending we're all involved in this big conspiracy against you. Not a single one.

Which of their conclusions are not scientific?

 

The ones about what initiated the collapse, e.g. "fire induced progressive collapse" for WTC7.

BTW, do you have any examples of phsycological studies of truther intelligence?

 

Of course they are. I have great kids, a devoted wife, a decent house, a professional career, call them a few times a month, and send them pictures of their grandkids on facebook.

So, in other words, you're not going to get any more specific than that?

Not intelligence. Psychology. The mental defect of confirmation bias shared among them.

Do you have access to academic journals? Like through a college or something?

 

That's their conclusion! I've already mentioned multiple ways why they didn't base it on all evidence and the scientific method and therefore is a baseless conclusion.

Also feel free to address the specific critique I mentioned previously.. You and another guy as well seem to gloss over that and come back another day and be like I'm not being specific.

Additionally, have you tried reading the lady's paper linked to in the op?

You were talking about how "bright" they are i.e. intelligence.

Nevertheless regardless what claim you really wish to make, can you cite any studies or not?

Why don't you name a study and we'll see about how available it is.