Jerry Eichenberger wrote on 06/22/13 at 12:42:21:I'm starting to agree with Serowbot.
The TT is now composed of fewer than 10 regular contributors.
I started this whole thing back in 2008 during the presidential campaign to stimulate intelligent, thoughtful discussion.
Unfortunately, it has disintegrated into a few people calling each other names, and fewer yet who are, in my mind, conspiracy nuts who see a devious conspiracy behind everything.
That's why I seldom contribute anymore.
I sick of hearing about the Federal Reserve, idiots who think bin Laden's crazies did not fly the airplanes into buildings on 9/11, and rants of people who hate the gov't - if you hate the gov't so much, show me one better.
Jerry,, that is so childish,,Youre a LAWYER man,, you know better than that kind of mess..
Heres your challenge,
Explain how I am required to know of a better place in order to NOT Like whats happening HERE.
Okay? Now, youre in a corner. You wanted debate? You got it.,
Unless I can show you something better I have to like what IS?
You realize how twisted that is, right?
YOure Tired of seeing things over & over, yet, youve done nothing to show me Im wrong. YOu cant PROVE 9/11 went down the way YOu say it did,, In fact, there are more experts on MY side.
And, I have a good bit of experience workinmg with metal.
Now, are you gonna stand by that pancake theory?
YOud better notr, because if you do, I am gonna make you sorry for it, Youll have to explain how, after floors Fell Away from the vertical supports, the vertical supports werent left standing,
You cant explain how they fell,,
or can you? How did ALL that cement go to powder? It was powder before it hit the ground,, thats what that huge cloud was,, there was powdered cement for blocks & it didnt turn to powder when it hit the ground,
& NO,, I dont know how that was done,, theres no reason for it,, not from just a building burning & falling.
ASYmmetrical damage,, symmetrical failures.
You cant tell me the fires heated ALL the metal at the same time,, in order to get a symmetrical collapse, instead of one part falling faster than another, causing it to fall to on side, ALL the vertical supports had to fail simultaneously on each floor.
Close study & a stop watch proves that some of the collapse was at so very near free fall speed that the ONLY way that could happen was for the structure to 100% Fail.. & thats just not possible without something knocking it down.
Professionals in demolition say it was a demolition,
The towers were old, asbestos laden.,
Occupancy was down.
Too costly to take down legally.
The official story does not add up.
Have you studied the way the towers were built? The elevator shafts were surrounded by some huge columns.
Theres no way to make those buildings,with such a height to width ratio, come down Thru the Path of Greatest REsistance. The top would slide to one side & fall over, not straight thru tons & tons of steel,
Its as if you guys think all the metal in that buoldinbg was all the same temperature & it was Very Hot,, & it wasnt.
IF it had been, the vertical supports wouldnt have broken,, they would have been like spaghetti, pressed down by the weight of the building & some would have been cooler than others & resisted & caused it to fall to one side,
You guys simply arent thinking,, youre allowing someone to tell you sweet little lies,,