Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty F
You didn't answer my question.
|
I wrote:
Quote:
|
I've posted wjy I think the towers didn't collapse "naturally", I never said that there wasn't a bunch of terrorists that flew planes into the towers.
|
That's not an answer? What I've posted in this thread has been what I consider to be evidence that office-fires and plane impacts weren't the only forces operating on the structures that day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty F
Once again: the fact that in 10 years none of you idiots came up with ANY kind of evidence for your retarded claims, what does that tell you?
|
I can't answer for other idiots, and I only relay what I first thought from seeing it happen, then what independent findings have confirmed for me, especially since, as it grew, the official theory became less reconcilable with what appeared to have happened.
I tend to stay away from purely speculative idiots' claims, but I'll cite the findings and physical evidence engineer and scientist idiots report, both independent idiots and NIST idiots (who actually got most of their forensics from the idiots at FEMA).
Since the government idiots haven't come up with any hard evidence for their theory and the idiots at the FBI actually said they don't have any hard evidence linking the idiot Ben Laden to 9/11, I'll stick with the fact set that most credibly explains why the buildings collapsed, and most if not all of the weirdness that happened that day.
There *is* documented evidence of incendiaries and temperatures that could melt steel and produce iron by-products, among other indicators in the dust and rubble.
But those who refuse to accept any alternative to the government theory won't acknowledge that evidence, which makes them another kind of idiot entirely.