• SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, five years young! For a low subscription fee, you will be able to download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive After The Paracast podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! FLASH! For a limited time, you can save up to 40% on your subscription. You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Building 7

P

pixelsmith

Guest
Wtc7

oh boy... seriously?! you must have run across a popular mechanics article or something.

Why not start with motive this time around?

Who had the most to gain?

What would be gained by WTC7 being destroyed?

What was in WTC7 that needed to be destroyed?

If you follow the money, where does it lead?
 

Double Nought Spy

May I please go back to the zoo now?
Wtc7

Priceless! You start a new thread where you still duck the question of What do you think happened to Building 7? and even have the balls to post a priggish line about "abandoned points." You are a piece of work, for sure!



There was some request to discuss this topic in another unrelated thread and I am game (for at least a little while).

It won't do any good but I suggest trying to be succinct and to back up claims with relevant references. If you decide to just spam 50 links, asking folks to go and read the equivalent of a novel to ferret out the one supporting item, you will lose my respect (yes, I mean it, don't act all petulant) but you will additionally lose most readers.

Please don't change the topic to another when the chips are down and an open question is on the table. I plan to mark such lapses like this :mad::mad::mad:ABANDONED POINT:mad::mad::mad:.

I earlier said that I was unwilling to discuss 9/11 with Pixelsmith but I want to withdraw that stipulation until the name calling starts in this thread.

Let's start anyway with as little rhetoric as possible and see what happens...

Thanks,

Lance
 

Angel of Ioren

Friendly Skeptic
Wtc7

DNS, Lance posted pictures and stated some valid points. Argue against what he presents, not him.

I don't think he ducked the question at all. To me it's clear that Lance thinks the damage that happened to the building caused it to collapse. look at the pictures. One can't deny that there was damage.
 

The Pair of Cats

a.k.a Philip Deane
Wtc7

Lance. The damage you have shown is hardly going to affect it in any considerable way. Are you saying that what looks like minor damage ultimately caused WTC 7 to collapse?
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
Wtc7

Second you could tell us how the building was originally constructed and then what was done to it a few years later to make it a fortified command center bunker to be used in case of a terrorist attack. It was a heavily fortified structure WITHIN the WTC7 structure itself. It was no ordinary building.

Please carry on.
 

Double Nought Spy

May I please go back to the zoo now?
Wtc7

DNS, Lance posted pictures and stated some valid points. Argue against what he presents, not him.

I don't think he ducked the question at all. To me it's clear that Lance thinks the damage that happened to the building caused it to collapse. look at the pictures. One can't deny that there was damage.
If he has no problem with the official story, then why can't he just say so? I know a lot of respectable people who would say that. Why all the drama?
 

The Pair of Cats

a.k.a Philip Deane
Wtc7

One would think that buildings of that calibre would have been built to withstand such damage hwether you call it minor or major. And if this damage caused it to fall , why didn't it topple sideways instead of straight down?
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
Wtc7

Hi Phil,

So have we moved on from no damage to "minor" damage (a 10 story gash!)?

Lance
Please tell us how the damage in on corner causes a global instantaneous collapse straight down (and at free fall speed for part the way) neatly into its own footprint. with the damage in one corner it should have toppled to one side.

---------- Post added at 03:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:40 PM ----------

i guess it was the same magical office fires that brought WTC1 and 2 down into their own footprints as well....
 

Double Nought Spy

May I please go back to the zoo now?
Wtc7

Hi Phil,

So have we moved on from no damage to "minor" damage (a 10 story gash!)?


Lance

DNS--I will stipulate that I do accept the NIST report and what drama? I thought you wanted to discuss this?
You said I wanted to discuss this. I only asked what your opinion was on the official reason for the collapse of #7. Why on Earth you couldn't just say you accept the official report is beyond me. But thanks for coughing it up eventually.
 

Angel of Ioren

Friendly Skeptic
Wtc7

Ok--Pixel. Because I show a photo that shows damage in one corner, that DOES NOT mean that this is the only damage (as extensive as that is). If you only look up slightly you will see the other photo I posted that shows more damage along the face. I will get to the collapse later.

Phil--what reference do you have that shows how much of building (of each caliber, if you like) must be gouged out before it is structurally weakened? I am not an engineer or artifact and hopefully you will see that we can't just accept your wishes as to how building ought be built as a guide?

Lance
I think you mean architect and not artifact.
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
Wtc7

Ok--Pixel. Because I show a photo that shows damage in one corner, that DOES NOT mean that this is the only damage (as extensive as that is). If you only look up slightly you will see the other photo I posted that shows more damage along the face. I will get to the collapse later.

Phil--what reference do you have that shows how much of building (of each caliber, if you like) must be gouged out before it is structurally weakened? I am not an engineer or artifact and hopefully you will see that we can't just accept your wishes as to how building ought be built as a guide?

Lance
You completely ignored my post about it being rebuilt as a fortified command bunker in case of terror attacks. This is important to establish as it was not like any other building in the complex. It was built to withstand direct explosive type attacks.

---------- Post added at 03:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:55 PM ----------

ANd WTC1 and 2 were designed to withstand multiple airliner impacts.
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
Wtc7

LOL on the artifact!

I have been playing the Illuminati game so much that the word was stuck in my head, I guess!
I guess an architect would be better at assessing the situation.

---------- Post added at 04:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:18 PM ----------

LOL on the artifact!

I have been playing the Illuminati game so much that the word was stuck in my head, I guess!

---------- Post added at 12:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:04 PM ----------

Pixel, so do now you admit that we aren't talking about just damage on the corner and that there WAS damage to the building?

RE: Command Bunker


Mayor Giuliani did spend $13 Million to construct an armored command center on the 23rd floor of the building. Is that what you are referring to and if so what are you suggesting that has to do with the building's collapse? Did the command center somehow radiate out protection to the rest of the building?

Lance
There was minimal damage to the well built structure is what I am saying.
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
Wtc7

Wait? Are you abandoning the bunker as somehow protecting the building? Why did you even bring it up?
The bunker added to the integrity of the building.

Are actually going somewhere with this topic? Where were we? oh yes there was a little damage in the corner of the building and some magical office fires were about to start randomly throughout the building.
 

Angel of Ioren

Friendly Skeptic
Wtc7

The bunker added to the integrity of the building.

Are actually going somewhere with this topic? Where were we? oh yes there was a little damage in the corner of the building and some magical office fires were about to start randomly throughout the building.
I wouldn't call a 10 story gash a little damage in the corner. Maybe you don't think it wasn't the only thing to cause the building to collapse, but at least be honest and acknowledge that there was a more than a little damage.
If we're not honest with each other's evidence, this becomes a pointless exercise. Both side of the argument need to do this.
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
Wtc7

I am wondering why you would not start out with motive and who stood to profit...
 


Top