Continuing Stupidity from " Truthers"

     Readers may remember Fellow Debunker 1 and “ Truther” C from my previous article.

     Fellow Debunker one E-mailed me for help again as “Truther” C is continuing with the “truther” tap dance, so, once again, I decided to help Fellow Debunker 1 by doing up another article.

     First,”Truther” C did not even TRY to address the FACT that NUMEROUS EYEWITNESSES saw a PLANE hit the Pentagon (reference ). Other eyewitness accounts are found here. Now, who should we believe, the people who WERE ACTUALLY THERE or   the “truthers?”   Note that every single witness says it was A PLANE. 

     As I mentioned in an earlier article, missiles do NOT explode on impact- they penetrate the target, THEN explode, which means that the damage to the wall of the Pentagon would have been OUTWARD.  However, the damage to the Pentagon was cone-shaped, with the widest point being where the plane hit and then narrowing- exactly the OPPOSITE of what a missile would have done ( source ).

     “Truther” C also continues to dismiss the fact that there WAS INDEED wreckage, and claims that just because they found wreckage doesn’t mean it was a 757-  the obvious implication here is that he still thinks the wreckage was planted.  The fact is that, since the plane went INTO the Pentagon, a good portion of debris would logically have continued further into the Pentagon as per Newton’s 1st Law of Motion.  As for why a lot of debris was on the lawn, plane crashes are unpredictable.

     “Truther” C then continues to make a fool of himself with the following statements regarding both WTC 7 and the plane that crashed in Shanksville, Pa, ie, Flight 93.  I will address each one in the order that “ Truther” C brought them up.

     First, “Truther” C wants to know why WTC 7, which was not hit by a plane, collapsed.  This is typical “truther” deception.  While WTC 7 was not hit by a plane, it WAS HIT by the debris from the collapsing north tower.  In point of fact, it was hit by large amounts of debris falling from a great height.  ( reference ). Before any “truther” says that pictures show a relatively undamaged WTC 7, the pictures the “truthers” always use are of the NORTH side of WTC 7-  it was the SOUTH side of WTC 7 that was damaged ( reference ).

     Second, he claims that the building fell in its own footprints.  In point of fact, it did NOT fall straight down into its own footprint-  the size of all 3 buildings made that PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE. (reference)

     Third, “ Truther” C asks about the other jet, Flight 93, that crashed that day, and wants to know why nobody knows it’s destination.  First of all, they were able to narrow the possible targets of Flight 93 down to two: The White House and the Capitol ( source ). It seems to me  that both would be likely targets of an attack, which is why, as we see from the same site , both were evacuated. As for why they don’t know whether the White House or the Capitol was the intended target of Flight 93, the answer to that is quite simple- Flight 93 NEVER REACHED IT’S INTENDED DESTINATION.  Remember, everyone on board that flight, including the hijackers, was killed, so just how in the hell are they supposed to know which building they were aiming for when Flight 93 never got there?  Hold a séance?  

(picture from here).

     Fourth, he pulls the usual misquote of Silverstein’s alleged “pull-it” quote.  Here are the FACTS on that: Silverstein was talking to the FIRE department about pulling the fire fighters out.  If the “truther” claims were true, that would mean Silverstein admitted to insurance fraud on TV-  even the “truthers” wouldn’t be THAT dumb.  Second, here is the quote from Silverstein, from here:

“I remember getting a call from the Fire Department commander, telling me they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, you know, ‘We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is just pull it.’ And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse.

As the above site mentions, neither side disputes that Silverstein was talking to the fire commander and neither he nor the fire commander are in the demolition business.  I suggest “truthers” ask themselves this question:  If we already had a terrible loss of life, would it make more sense for Silverstein to suggest blowing up the building or for him to suggest they get the firefighters out of there?

            Fifth, “Truther” C claims that WTC 7 was the only building that collapsed due to fire-  this is an outright lie.  As readers may remember from one of my earlier articles, the Kader Toy Factory ( reference ),  the Sight and Sound Theater (source ) in Lancaster County, Pa , and an Egyptian textile factory ( source ) all did exactly that.

            Sixth, he claims that fire was the sole cause of the collapse, which is also a lie- it was a COMBINATION of the severe structural damage caused by debris from the North Tower impacting WTC 7 and the fires that caused the collapse.

            Seventh, “Truther” C asks about the fireproofing.  Did it ever occur to him that the impacting debris may have dislodged the fireproofing and fireproofing might only be good for a certain period of time anyway.  As we see here, the fireproofing was rated for TWO hours of continuous fire and WTC 7 was burning ALL DAY- I’m pretty sure that’s a little longer than two hours. Furthermore, the fireproofing in the WTC was faulty and, when trying to fix the problem, they did a rather half-assed job ( reference).

            Finally, “Truther” C makes the argument that WTC 7 shouldn’t have collapsed due to fire because it had a fire prevention system designed to stop internal fires.  There’s just one tiny little detail-  the fire prevention system, like most office buildings, is a SPRINKLER SYSTEM, which means they require WATER to function.  Here are the FACTS: The reason the WTC 7 fires weren’t fought is because there was a LIMITED WATER SUPPLY that day, as we see from these 2 quotes from here: ” There was an engine company… right underneath building 7 and it was still burning at the time. They had a hose in operation, but you could tell there was no pressure. It was barely making it across the street.
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyle.html,” and ” Located about five blocks from the World Trade Center (WTC) site, the 170-bed NYU Downtown Hospital was thrust into one of the most horrific events in history on Tuesday, Sept. 11…

Shortly after the second tower collapsed…due to the number of hydrants opened by the firefighters on the scene, we also lost water pressure to the building, leading to fears of losing water altogether. Staff were immediately notified to conserve water…

By 4 p.m. on Tuesday, gas and high-pressure steam had been restored through rerouting by Con Edison. Before the gas was turned on, the utility ran extensive tests to ensure that there were no leaks. About an hour later, the water pressure slowly started to increase, and the facility was once again able to sterilize instruments and provide domestic hot water. http://web.archive.org/web/20050215113515/http://www.unbr.cz/groundzeroen.htm ”  

 Obviously, if a building 5 blocks away was having issues with water pressure, Ground Zero would have been having worse problems.

      Clearly, “truthers” need to lay off the Christmas spirits, and I DON’T mean the ones in Dickens’ A Christmas Carol.

 

(picture from here )

  

(picture from here)

Advertisements

Posted November 16, 2010 by Victor Chabala in Real 9/11 Facts

Tagged with , , ,

%d bloggers like this: