• 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

Angel of Ioren

Friendly Skeptic
<!-- /firstHeading -->
Angel wrote: Lynn Margulis was Carl Sagan's first wife apparently. She's also a bit of a nutter



<!-- bodyContent --> Richard Dawkins had this to say about Lynn Margulis and her work:
I greatly admire Lynn Margulis's sheer courage and stamina in sticking by the endosymbiosis theory, and carrying it through from being an unorthodoxy to an orthodoxy. I'm referring to the theory that the eukaryotic cell is a symbiotic union of primitive prokaryotic cells. This is one of the great achievements of twentieth-century evolutionary biology, and I greatly admire her for it.[SUP][5]




ROFLMAO! Sorry Angel but ya know I gotta tweak you once in awhile. :) Since your not really leaving as a mod I wanted to make sure you still felt welcome. :) Of course I consider Dawkins to be a bit of a nutter myself so I guess you can be a respected scientist and still be a nutter.

On a more serious note, terms such as nutter, truther, creationist, racist, and other loaded terms tend to marginilize folks and take away from legitimate discussion.
On a more seriouser note :) we don't always agree but I do appreciate your dilligence Angel in trying to keep the discussion flowing. As for Lance I have seen him "thanking" folks but he hasn't posted lately.
Come back to the Five and Dime Lancey Dean, Lancey Dean. ;)[/SUP]

<tbody>
</tbody>
Dawkins is not above giving credit where it is due. That's what science is about - she proved that theory. It doesn't mean he agrees with everything she says.

Quote mining is never good.
 

trainedobserver

Paranormally Disenchanted
The second video that pixalsmith recently posted above is one of the more outstanding 15 minute summaries of the very real problems with NIST's science I've seen. Incredible, simply incredible, that evidence was ignored, discarded, and disposed of before it was even evaluated.

The need to understand WHAT HAPPENED is incredibly important BEFORE the WHY or WHO questions are even FORMULATED. The conspiracy theory questions and debate shouldn't even be raised in conjunction with the question of WHAT HAPPENED to those buildings.
 

Angel of Ioren

Friendly Skeptic
The second video that pixalsmith recently posted above is one of the more outstanding 15 minute summaries of the very real problems with NIST's science I've seen. Incredible, simply incredible, that evidence was ignored, discarded, and disposed of before it was even evaluated.

The need to understand WHAT HAPPENED is incredibly important BEFORE the WHY or WHO questions are even FORMULATED. The conspiracy theory questions and debate shouldn't even be raised in conjunction with the question of WHAT HAPPENED to those buildings.
That makes a lot of sense Rick. I just have a problem with people saying that it wasn't terrorists that flew those planes into the towers and that US government decided to do it to start a war. They didn't do that.
However, they did USE the entire tragedy to start a meaningless war with Iraq. That seems to be clear.
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
That makes a lot of sense Rick. I just have a problem with people saying that it wasn't terrorists that flew those planes into the towers and that US government decided to do it to start a war. They didn't do that.
However, they did USE the entire tragedy to start a meaningless war with Iraq. That seems to be clear.
It doesnt matter if it was eastern folks, western folks or Angelos grandmother... they were terrorists. The USA has a history of false flag attacks, ie: Gulf of Tonkin, Northwoods, etc etc etc etc... why should this event be any different? I am not saying Bush orchestrated it because he is too damn stupid BUT he DID pick the 9/11 commission members and he DID pick the head of NIST that did the piss poor investigations that resulted in them finally admitting to an unexplained free fall and global collapse of the building into a nice neat pile.
 

tyder001

Paranormal Adept
One reason I'm irritated at my president now. I supported him and he still has us in two wars and a military action in Libya to boot. I'm starting to get disenchanted with Washington. :p
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
One reason I'm irritated at my president now. I supported him and he still has us in two wars and a military action in Libya to boot. I'm starting to get disenchanted with Washington. :p
and what does this have to do with Building 7?
 

drew hempel

Skilled Investigator
The second video that pixalsmith recently posted above is one of the more outstanding 15 minute summaries of the very real problems with NIST's science I've seen. Incredible, simply incredible, that evidence was ignored, discarded, and disposed of before it was even evaluated.

The need to understand WHAT HAPPENED is incredibly important BEFORE the WHY or WHO questions are even FORMULATED. The conspiracy theory questions and debate shouldn't even be raised in conjunction with the question of WHAT HAPPENED to those buildings.
I agree that this new second video is excellent and amazing that Lance, etc. have not commented on it!!! haha. Too funny.

---------- Post added at 05:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:04 PM ----------

That makes a lot of sense Rick. I just have a problem with people saying that it wasn't terrorists that flew those planes into the towers and that US government decided to do it to start a war. They didn't do that.
However, they did USE the entire tragedy to start a meaningless war with Iraq. That seems to be clear.
If you want to get into how involved the CIA was with 9/11 -- just check out Daniel Hopsicker Investigates -- Daniel Hopsicker has completely exposed that the training of the 9/11 terrorists was done at a CIA front in Florida.
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
Well, the fact that those buildings came down is part of why your country is in those wars.
all those troops came home already, right? mission accomplished, right? those are not wars, they are kinetic military action and we are sending MORE troops over as we speak to help bring the rest of the troops home, right? that bunch of BS is a whole topic... lets get back to Building 7 and how it came down, that is the purpose of this thread.

Angelo did you know there was a fortified command center/bunker built for the Mayor within building 7? and that it was built to withstand terror attacks? why would he leave his fortified command center and run and hide else where? because he was told they were going to blow up the building, you can hear first responders saying that right after you hear a big boom...
 

Angel of Ioren

Friendly Skeptic
all those troops came home already, right? mission accomplished, right? those are not wars, they are kinetic military action and we are sending MORE troops over as we speak to help bring the rest of the troops home, right? that bunch of BS is a whole topic... lets get back to Building 7 and how it came down, that is the purpose of this thread.

Angelo did you know there was a fortified command center/bunker built for the Mayor within building 7? and that it was built to withstand terror attacks? why would he leave his fortified command center and run and hide else where? because he was told they were going to blow up the building, you can hear first responders saying that right after you hear a big boom...
Yes, i know about it, you discussed it with Lance in this thread and you showed no proof of it, and when you were questioned you said (on page 5, #50 of this thread):
do not have access to the blueprints on wtc7 like i do on wtc 1 and 2, therefore i cannot confirm or deny. In the bigger picture it means squat.


---------- Post added at 01:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:25 PM ----------

I really urge people to go back in this thread and see how Lance made really good points about it. I agree with him. You can also see how Pixel repeats himself in his newer posts, since he seem to have all his talking points on the topic ready to cut and paste.

 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
Yes, i know about it, you discussed it with Lance in this thread and you showed no proof of it, and when you were questioned you said (on page 5, #50 of this thread):


---------- Post added at 01:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:25 PM ----------

I really urge people to go back in this thread and see how Lance made really good points about it. I agree with him. You can also see how Pixel repeats himself in his newer posts, since he seem to have all his talking points on the topic ready to cut and paste.

well i have been researching this much longer than you or lance so i would have lots of data to go back on. what is your point anyway? just how much research have you done to be spouting off like this?
 

drew hempel

Skilled Investigator
Yes, i know about it, you discussed it with Lance in this thread and you showed no proof of it, and when you were questioned you said (on page 5, #50 of this thread):


---------- Post added at 01:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:25 PM ----------

I really urge people to go back in this thread and see how Lance made really good points about it. I agree with him. You can also see how Pixel repeats himself in his newer posts, since he seem to have all his talking points on the topic ready to cut and paste.

Can you or Lance comment on the videos that pixelsmith posted? Slum dunk case! Since building 7 was a controlled demolition that means the two towers were as well. Which also means 9/11 was an inside job. But if the "skeptics" can't even comment on the evidence then all we can do is laugh hysterically at how people hide behind the corporate-state propaganda, no matter how silly it is.
 

Angel of Ioren

Friendly Skeptic
well i have been researching this much longer than you or lance so i would have lots of data to go back on. what is your point anyway? just how much research have you done to be spouting off like this?
None at all actually since I leave that up to the experts and i take their word for it. You don't like being called out on repeating the same thing over and over, do you?

---------- Post added at 02:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:59 PM ----------

Can you or Lance comment on the videos that pixelsmith posted? Slum dunk case! Since building 7 was a controlled demolition that means the two towers were as well. Which also means 9/11 was an inside job. But if the "skeptics" can't even comment on the evidence then all we can do is laugh hysterically at how people hide behind the corporate-state propaganda, no matter how silly it is.
Look dude, I'm going with the official report. When another official report comes out, then I'll go with that one. The only thing I know for sure is a lot of people died that day and the world changed because of it - I think that's one point we can all agree on.
 

trainedobserver

Paranormally Disenchanted
Here is a list of tenants in Building 7 at the time of the collapse from Wikipedia.

At the time of the September 11, 2001 attacks, Salomon Smith Barney was by far the largest tenant in 7 World Trade Center, occupying 1,202,900 sq ft (111,750 m²) (64 percent of the building) which included floors 28–45.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][25][/SUP] Other major tenants included ITT Hartford Insurance Group(122,590 sq ft/11,400 m²), American Express Bank International (106,117 sq ft/9,900 m²), Standard Chartered Bank (111,398 sq ft/10,350 m²), and theSecurities and Exchange Commission (106,117 sq ft/9,850 m²).[SUP][25][/SUP] Smaller tenants included the Internal Revenue Service Regional Council (90,430 sq ft/8,400 m²) and the United States Secret Service (85,343 sq ft/7,900 m²).[SUP][25][/SUP] The smallest tenants included the New York City Office of Emergency Management,[SUP][26][/SUP] National Association of Insurance Commissioners, Federal Home Loan Bank, First State Management Group Inc., Provident Financial Management, and the Immigration and Naturalization Service.[SUP][25][/SUP]The Department of Defense (DOD) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) shared the 25th floor with the IRS.[SUP][1][/SUP] Floors 46–47 were mechanical floors, as were the bottom six floors and part of the seventh floor.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][27][/SUP]

---------- Post added at 01:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:04 PM ----------

Look dude, I'm going with the official report.
Angelo,

Do you own one? Have you read it?
 

Angel of Ioren

Friendly Skeptic
Here is a list of tenants in Building 7 at the time of the collapse from Wikipedia.

At the time of the September 11, 2001 attacks, Salomon Smith Barney was by far the largest tenant in 7 World Trade Center, occupying 1,202,900 sq ft (111,750 m²) (64 percent of the building) which included floors 28–45.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][25][/SUP] Other major tenants included ITT Hartford Insurance Group(122,590 sq ft/11,400 m²), American Express Bank International (106,117 sq ft/9,900 m²), Standard Chartered Bank (111,398 sq ft/10,350 m²), and theSecurities and Exchange Commission (106,117 sq ft/9,850 m²).[SUP][25][/SUP] Smaller tenants included the Internal Revenue Service Regional Council (90,430 sq ft/8,400 m²) and the United States Secret Service (85,343 sq ft/7,900 m²).[SUP][25][/SUP] The smallest tenants included the New York City Office of Emergency Management,[SUP][26][/SUP] National Association of Insurance Commissioners, Federal Home Loan Bank, First State Management Group Inc., Provident Financial Management, and the Immigration and Naturalization Service.[SUP][25][/SUP]The Department of Defense (DOD) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) shared the 25th floor with the IRS.[SUP][1][/SUP] Floors 46–47 were mechanical floors, as were the bottom six floors and part of the seventh floor.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][27][/SUP]

---------- Post added at 01:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:04 PM ----------



Angelo,

Do you own one? Have you read it?
No. I've just read the summaries in Popular Mechanics. Again, I'm no expert, but neither is anyone else on this forum. We're just choosing different people to listen to. Someone is wrong for sure. I think the ones in the video are wrong, but I can't test this stuff out for myself.
No one on this forum can, right? No matter how adamant pixelsmith is about this stuff, he's not an expert on this topic either and his putting his trust in his sources, as much as I am. you can admit to that, right Pixelsmith?
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
Seems like Angelo is bordering on trolling here. He admits he knows nothing yet continues to comment like he does, he used the word "truther" in a derogatory context, etc... I suggest he consider backing away from commenting on this thread gracefully at this point.

---------- Post added at 06:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:15 PM ----------

No. I've just read the summaries in Popular Mechanics.
grin... you realize that article has been thoroughly and shamefully debunked? as a skeptic you should have known that... and when I want to know about a disaster of this proportion the first publication I would go to is of course Popular Mechanics... omg... please... before you look even sillier, consider leaving this thread.
 

Angel of Ioren

Friendly Skeptic
Seems like Angelo is bordering on trolling here. He admits he knows nothing yet continues to comment like he does, he used the word "truther" in a derogatory context, etc... I suggest he consider backing away from commenting on this thread gracefully at this point.

---------- Post added at 06:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:15 PM ----------



grin... you realize that article has been thoroughly and shamefully debunked? as a skeptic you should have known that... and when I want to know about a disaster of this proportion the first publication I would go to is of course Popular Mechanics... omg... please... before you look even sillier, consider leaving this thread.
How am I trolling? I am telling you EXACTLY where I stand on the topic and i am also saying I am not an expert. From what I know about you, that you're a cheesemaker, a luther, a guitarist, a tae kwon do master, a photography buff, a mac user, etc, you're not an expert on the topic as well, right? You are putting your trust in the people that you are getting your information from. Just admit to that and we can move on.
 


Top