I hate this day so much (actually hate most any holiday for that matter), id WELCOME being alone. ill even buy it some chocolate

a gazelle skinned, wooden one. i believe its still inside her

no but id still hump em

we got a whole djembe to fit!

howdy

isnt this kindda just another friend then?

Christina. She is a much better singer as well.

My 40' yacht is almost the length of my penis. Any women wanna ride either?

Who ever finds the WMDs first gets my vote

born and raised southern boy here

its likely too much to ask to not use the "supporting troops" red herring to further this thread along huh?

No thanks. Everyone already knows we are made of the best war machines on Earth.

its a little off topic but my bother bought me the new David Beckham Instinct for Christmas. Im not a big fan of it myself but it seems to be getting rave reviews from the ladies when I wear it out on the town. ...now if I only looked like Becks I might actualy keep one of them

I have learned 1 thing about TPAY threads in my brief experience in making them. Make them about sex and as simple as possible in order to attain a 50 page depth.

Your thought process would be incorrect.

Buildings that are full of "papers, carpets, cleaning materials, desks, and on and on" arent unique to other steel framed building that burned but did NOT collapse.



NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F. Wow. Go find me all the steel framed building in this century that fell because of "pockets" that hit 1800 degrees. If you do find me any, you'll be half way there. Next you have to explain the free fall speeds.



I dont give a flying firetruck what you're inclined to believe. That isnt important nor relevant to how the buildings actually fell. I couldnt care less whether youd believe me or not; that too is irrelevant.



My side? Do not characterize me please. IVE NEVER MADE A SINGLE CLAIM AS TO HOW THE BUILDINGS FELL. The propaganda war exists between both sides. Ive already stated before, Im not interested in that or conjecture. I want facts--of the verifiable variety. I find the manner in which the building collapsed implausible and uncharacteristic of virtually EVERY other building collapse in history, regardless of cause. The burden of proof isnt on me to prove how they fell. Im asking the question on how they fell because I find the official explanation illogical. If this puts me on a "side", well go team go!

I have. Its one of the easiet to refute. They use anecdotal evidence to suggest the cause of something thats only happened 3 times in world history. Get this, these 3 incidences happend in the same country, in the same city, on the same day! Wow what a coinkidink! Also go back and reread my post as you either A)didnt read all of it B)didnt comprehend C) chose to ignore it. Please dont cite the Popular Mechanic article again. As anyone can read themselves, its full of conjecture based assertions about how the building fell.



you do realize that the amount of fuel is irrelevant to its burning temperature right? THe plane wasnt fully loaded with fuel regardless.

Lets get this straight shall we? Is you teacher claiming that steel -with a melting point of roughly 2500 degrees- melted via an exothermic reaction between it and insulation? Or do you mean the insulation came off during impact and permitted the heat to melt the unprotected steel? Please cite ANY reference to this claim. Your teachers conjecture doesnt count. Theres huge problems with either scenario--Lets start with Jet-A burns at about 600 degree in open conditions. Even in the optimal conditions, max temperature harldy approaches 3/4 of what it takes to liquify steel. Even *IF* this were plausible, this can not account for the 80 something stories that were nearly vaporized as well. I know, i know, then the floors pancaked down...at near free fall speed and pulverized the other floors right? Maybe your civil engineering teacher should have spent more time in general physics. This is uncharacteristic of any building collapse, regardless of cause, in history (well with exception to controlled demo of course). Arguments from authority only work when they are factually correct with verifiable data. Please provide this teachers contact information and educational facility so I can contact him directly to clarify your statement.

You are likely correct. No one has adequately addressed them yet to satisfy my doubt.





By whose standard of creditability?? Yours? The media? The government? This is the definition of "creditable:

"bringing or deserving credit, honor, reputation, or esteem; Worthy of belief"

Im only interested in facts; not the credit, honor, reputation, or esteem of the sources. Venusians may have beamed death rays on it and would undoubtedly be accepted as truth by somebody--Yet, proof is still required of any postulated theory. I ask you prove to me that said causes of 7s collapse. FEMA, NIST, nor Popular Mechanics prove anything. Conjecture is NOT proof no matter how "creditable" the claims may seem. I've pointed out that every said cause of building 7's collapse is unprecedented, implausible, or down right impossible. I do NOT care what a report states or what anyone says happened. I want proof. The burden of proof isnt on me to provide how the building fell. If the building crumbled in a manner typical to the methods purported to cause its demise, id have no problem accepting that. Pardon my defiance but the alleged cause of collapse doesnt seem plausible to me.





Im not a monk nor do I need "enlightenment" as to imply a need for redemption for my alleged misguided logic.





Please do not infer, that because I find flaws in the logic of the collapse of building 7, that I subscribe to 911 conspiracy theories.





I agree, hence my inquisition.





Please dont post this again as I read the whole thing the first time. The title indicates the collapse was due to "falling debris and air pressure wave" but offers no proof for that conclusion in the body of the article. In case I missed it, please point out the err in my comprehension.

I have free will to buy a coke or a pepsi. I choose the coke. I suppose i wouldnt have true free will if i wanted tea but they didnt offer it