Exposing "Truther" Lies 5

 

See Exposing “Truther” Lies,  Exposing “Truther” Lies 2, Exposing “Truther” Lies 3, and Exposing “Truther” Lies 4.

            I believe I last left off with “truther” lie/misquote # 11, so I’ll pick up with lie/misquote 12 from here.

            Lie number 12 is the claim that NIST changed their story and said the buildings did not pancake ( source).

            The fact is the NIST NEVER said pancaking caused the collapse- in point of fact, the pancaking occurred AFTER the collapse had begun (reference).

            This quote from here shows what NIST REALLY said: “Failure of the gusset plate welded to the top of the truss chord was again almost exclusively observed regardless of location. This may be a result of overloading the lower floors as the floors above were ‘pancaking’“.

            Furthermore, as this source indicates, the NIST focused on the time period from when the planes hit the towers to the beginning of the collapse.   Oh, and the NIST did NOT need to study the behavior of the collapse because every single paper that was peer-reviewed by widely respected scientific journals- which does NOT include the Journal of 911 Studies- about the WTC collapse shows that the extremely large weight of the upper sections of the twin towers would result in lower sections being crushed by the upper sections, which is EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED ( reference).

            Lie number 13 is Silverstein’s “ pull it” quote, where “truthers” insist that is a demolition term ( source).

            This is a lie- pull is a firefighting term, meaning to remove a team of firefighters from the building.  In addition, this source provides two facts which are UNDISPUTED by either side: 1) Silverstein was talking to the fire commander, and 2)  Neither Silverstein nor the fire commander are in the business of demolition.

            Lie number 14 is the claim that WTC 7 had only a few small fires ( source).

            In point of fact, there was a ton of smoke coming from the south side of WTC 7, and firefighters reported fires on multiple floors ( reference).

            Lie 15 is that WTC 7 had little or no damage ( source). 

            This is a blatant lie- and before any “truther” points me to a conspiracy site showing the undamaged side of WTC 7, conspiracy sites always show the north side of WTC 7 when it was the SOUTH side that was damaged (source).

            Oh, and as for the so-called minor damage, this quote by fire captain Chris Boyle, found here tells the truth: “A little north of Vesey I said, we’ll go down, let’s see what’s going on. A couple of the other officers and I were going to see what was going on. We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what’s going on. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good. “Hint to 911 “Truth” Movement:  A 20-story hole in a 47-story building is NOT minor damage.

            Oh, while we’re at it, here’s a challenge for “truthers.”  If you will refer to Brent Blanchard’s 8/8/06 Implosionworld.com article, you will notice that WTC 7 was hit by debris from the collapsing North Tower and was hit by tons of debris falling from a significant height and causing rather severe structural damage.  Anyway, here’s the challenge: Take a 47-story steel-framed building with a “tube-in-a-tube” design, fling massive amounts of extremely hot debris at it from a great height, causing severe structural damage, then set the building on fire and let it burn from mid-morning to late afternoon, early evening without bothering to fight the fire and see what happens.  I’ll guarantee you there’s NO WAY IN HELL that the building would remain standing.

Advertisements

Posted February 17, 2009 by Victor Chabala in Real 9/11 Facts

Tagged with , ,

%d bloggers like this: