Russia

You got a chance, but you ignored it again. Can't debate the debunkers because they avoid the subject.

Tiny violin for Russia.

What's the conspiracy though?

Is it that there's some conspiracy behind people being banned from the Russia thread cause its simply impossible that they might actually have legitimately earned a ban?

About the level of conspiracy theory we get around here.

So yea. This thread has no point. It's just a dumping ground for people being all pissy because they've been excluded from actual discussion.

And so far it looks like the main example of this is a holocaust denier who believes that 9/11 was an inside job.

Word of advice for any other people who have been turfed out of the Russia thread. You might not want to post here if you want to continue to pretend you have a legitimate point.

And again, you are a holocaust denier who thinks the twin towers were destroyed via a secret demolition.

If anyone thinks your opinion here is worth anything, they are as delusional as you are.

Again really funny how you talk about "reality".

In any case, the Earth is not round, so we must deal with that. Given that the Earth is not flat, I do not want to waste time discussing it.

You may comprehend that freefall is an object falling under the influence of gravity alone, but you have not incorporated the significance of this event in terms of the collapse of seven. In one instance, a person was working in the field of engineering ( who came on here and explained why freefall could not occur in a building like seven. He has not posted since unforunately.. This is not merely my opinion. 

By finally acknowledging the freefall, NIST is acknowledging that the building is falling through its structure with no resistance.

In a moment, I will explain why there are flaws with the current NIST hypothesis,  

 Exactly how could fires on a few floors destroy 80 plus interior and perimeter columns in less than a second across the entire building's corners? The revised NIST paper contains no information regarding how this was achieved. Because freefall occurred, all mainstream engineering reports, including the NIST report, must also detail how it happened in a fraction of a second. However, they do not.

 The support low down in the building was there just before it collapsed, but then something happened and within a second it all disappeared and the top half fell. In the case of a natural collapse due to fire alone, the falling building collapses and demolishes the supporting structure below. In this scenario, freefall would not be possible. 

The 9/11 truth version of the collapse makes the most sense. 

 Explain why further, doubt you get this?

The NIST virtual model of the collapse depicts the descending building crushing the lower half. That's not what happened (explained above)

The debunkers do not seem to understand this and NIST is promoting lies about a buildup to a freefall. Since there was no build-up to freefall, they be forced to accept the truther argument that the building was destroyed by explosives. This was avoided.

Instead, NIST said the final collapse occurred in three stages (revised paper) 

 Stage 1 NIST analysis is fiction. There is also an error here because there is second building sits right above the steel core and next to the penthouse, so the timing of the collapse can be determined accurately.In any case, Stage 1 doesn't even match the final collapse features. The claim is that the acceleration in Stage 1 is less than gravity, but if you look at their virtual model and the collapse on video, the building has fallen for two seconds already.

 At this point of the collapse, stage 1 the building would already be in freefall. And that is how we know NIST stage one breakdown is all nonsense. 

Stage 1 is fiction. NIST is a lying organization, so they could not even match the stages 1 to 3 accurately here..

Lol cheerful. No one is actually reading your rants.

Stop wasting your time.

I will illustrate my point with a video from NIST. Obviously not stupid, but are too headstrong to recognize the validity of the truthers' arguments about the collapse.

Watch the video of the collapse here falling 18 stories. The video was stopped at 2 seconds into the fall of seven. I captured a screenshot of the video. Second screenshot (where it matches the NIST virtual model). 

Can you see where I highlighted it in red?  First screenshot.

This is due to the bending of beams, girders, and floor space. According to NIST, the buckling phase occurs in the first stage with a time of 0 to 1.75 seconds.

There is no rocket science behind the fact that the building began falling two seconds before this point in both the video and screenshot. It is impossible for the building to still buckle two seconds after the fall of seven. 

It wouldn't be possible to have freefall here if energy was used to crush and bend members. Guys should know that Freefall is not limited to one area, but occurs from all directions. That blue fill in NIST's model shouldn't be there. 

By finally acknowledging the freefall, NIST is acknowledging that the building is falling through its structure with no resistance.

Considering that the NIST model exhibits resistance after two seconds of collapse, how is a freefall caused by fire possible?

Before this collapse, freefall had already been achieved for two or more seconds.

I would love to see a science teacher on this forum, as I would like to see what he has to say. Model belongs to NIST and has nothing to do with conspiracy theorists.  

The video of the real collapse at 2 seconds and the model at 2 seconds clearly indicate that something is amiss.

There is no way that the building can collapse as shown in the video until all 8 floors of low support have been removed. See the NIST model. As shown on the right side( blue area) at 2 seconds after the collapse of seven, the floors and columns are still buckling 100 percent.

You keep asserting that it's an "inside job" yet you aren't providing any details of that inside job

It's almost as if you are entirely supporting this through your denial and incredulity of the event..

Lol more of your crayon drawings that make no sense.

It only reinforces how childish your theory is.

The laws of Newton's motion are well known. Give it another go and see if you can figure it out. Provide a truthful response. 

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NIST_

WTC_7_collapse_model_with_debris_impact_damage.ogv

FiniteNIST element model First screenshot.

rests here. Are you in agreement?

The entire shaded blue area represents the steel frame of the building, inside columns, connections, concrete, windows, and everything on each floor? Are you in agreement?

Forward on the model. Second screenshot.

We now have a collapse on the left (the east face of the north face). The blue shaded area collapsed, all the beams, girders, concrete, every bolt and connection falling to the ground. Is that correct? At the end of the collapse, all that blue section was gone. Do you agree?

Now let's talk about why freefall matters. The blue shade must be completely gone from the east side to the west side on eight floors for freefall to occur. There must be no resistance anywhere on those floors. A scientific fact, not just some speculation or assumption. 

Third screenshot.

Again, let us examine the NIST model in which they claim that freefall is consistent with their analysis. This will be highlighted in the paint once again. The collapse began at the lower end of the building. In order to collapse from A to B, eight floors would need to be destroyed. As long as half of the other side of the building provides structural resistance, there can be no freefall. Freefall means zero resistance, nothing can make this clearer.  In NIST's model, all these beams bend after two seconds of the final collapse (Black DOT AREA) By using energy for other purposes, such as destroying beams and columns, you negate freefall. That is a matter of science. 

The NIST model presents a second issue, and there are numerous others.

Where is the freefall happening? What are they thinking occurred? How long until freefall begins? Between two and four seconds after the final collapse?

There is no logic in their thinking since the building has collapsed halfway down already at 4 seconds

In order for freefall to occur, 84 steel columns must be destroyed across the entire structure.  In fact, the model NIST claims to be scientific fact is anything but that.

Once a science teacher or even someone working in the field of engineering or science sees what NIST is attempting to pass off as the actual event, they should state the same. 9/11 came and went, and nobody really looked at their work closely. Their model does not include free fall. You may close the thread, but I am happy with the knowledge that I am not living in denial.

Nope.

You are just trying to bait people into "proving" something to you that you'll never accept. Doesn't matter if 100 structural engineers came in here to explain it to you, you can just subjectively reject everything they say whilst endlessly repeating and recycling vapid truther talking points. It's the same for your Holocaust denial views and other conspiracy views. Anyone can do this, pretty much forever.

To recap for the 100th time, you are claiming the history books are wrong, okay, you are claiming "something else" happened on 9/11, okay, what is that something else? If you can't explain it and then demonstrate it, there is nothing to discuss.

If would be amazing, fantastic, incredible if 9/11 was an inside job, I'd be gripped by it. Unfortunately no credible theory exists, there are no leaks, no whistle-blowers, no deathbed confessions. What do I have to go on? A group of pseudo-scientific loons that makes money from it and individuals like you who seem to have severe difficulties understanding basic logic and secondary school physics.

You are a hardcore Putin supporter and apologist. As well as being a Holocaust denier and a serial conspiracy theorist. It's a surprise to no one that you will have issues on public discussion forums.