strymec: Honest question: can we trust you will never simply post a video you found throught-provocing, but will allways post videos which properly represent counter-views and objections even though you believe they do not have a leg to stand on?
Short video: "I Was A Deluded 9/11 Truther"
by bohm 141 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
ProdigalSon
The last line from bohm's Building 7 video:
"So why is 7 World Trade Center the only tall steel building in history to collapse due to fire alone?
Because its the only one in history to burn uncontrolled, for seven hours. It's really that simple."
LIE.
It's really that simple.
The Windsor Tower in Madrid burned like a Roman candle for 20 hours:
-
bohm
Haha pson, you should reeeeeally read your own links.
First off he did not lie, since the windsor buiding has a concrete core.
Which your links says.
So was that without consequence? From your own link:
The fire protection on the existing steelworks below the 17 th floor had been completed at the time of fire except for the 9 th and 15 th floors. When the fire spread below the 17 th floor, those protected perimeter columns survived, except for the unprotected columns at the 9 th and 15 th floors which all buckled in the multiple floor fire (see Figure 2). However, they did not cause any structural collapse. Obviously, the applied loads supported by these buckled columns had been redistributed to the remaining reinforced concrete shear walls.
what praytell do you think would have happened had the building not contained a concrete core to carry the load?
the honest thing, considering you called him a liar, would be to withdraw your statement.
-
Leolaia
Good OP. I agree entirely.
The Windsor Tower in Madrid burned like a Roman candle for 20 hours
No, that was NOT a steel-framed building like WTC7. It had a concrete core and concrete columns. The steel frame above the 17th Floor did suffer complete collapse. Nothing insulates steel better from fire than concrete, which has its own reinforcing strength as well.
-
strymeckirules
strymec: Honest question: can we trust you will never simply post a video you found throught-provocing, but will allways post videos which properly represent counter-views and objections even though you believe they do not have a leg to stand on?
did YOU find this video thought provoking or theory proving?
-
bohm
did YOU find this video thought provoking or theory proving?
i found it contained some new information, like the full footage of the WT7 collapse, which was quite interesting. Also i liked the presentation, and the joke about the guy in the airplane was pretty spot on. But its not like i saw that video and made up my mind, nor would i suggest you do the same.
I would recommend you build your ideas on what happened on 9/11 on the actual evidence, rather than going after the messenger and other very irrelevant points.
-
NewChapter
Great post Bohm!
NC
-
leavingwt
bohm: I'm a subsriber to this author's videos. These are much different than his normal stuff. I enjoyed these two videos.
-
-
NewChapter
Thanks Leolaia.
I'm pretty impressed with the original video. I no longer discuss cospiracy with conspiracy theorists, because the cognitive dissoance is so deep and impenetrable. I am so impressed that he changed his conclusion. It gives one hope.
NC
