Keep your fake mems straight. That idiotic argument was offered in support of the no-brain theory of Shanksville. The bandana was buried in the aircraft. Why the sheeple who buy that faked-site theory think this is unusual, I have no idea.
How many do you think there were supposed to be? Why would these imaginary conspirators remove all but one bomb dog on the day of 9/11? They were supposed to have been setting this all up for months, even through the reported heightened security. The day of 9/11, everything should have been set up ready to go. Why would removing all but one dog aid in the conspiracy? Who in the port authorities are you claiming aided in this conspiracy by removing all but one dog?
You avoided the question. There was heightened security at the WTC for weeks before 9/11 with extra dogs and security. All of this while supposedly the buildings were being rigged with bombs. Are you claiming complicity by the NY Port Authority now?
How many sources are you going to whine like a little girl about? 9/11 myths isn't one source Jango. It's obvious you don't even follow the information presented, which is typical of truthers. The individual that runs 9/11 myths uses, at some times, excessive sources to prove his points. Sources that YOU have stated you accept. CNN, Fox, NYTimes, all of those are in his articles that disprove this crap. You whine about JREF, you whine about 9/11 myths, you whine about the NIST report, you whine about the 9/11 commission report, you whine about PENTTBOM. So basically just all the sources that debunk the stupidity that YOU believe in are not accepted? Perfect, thanks. Just making sure we have that double standard in place. Take for instance his information on this current stupidity. He uses 2 separate sources, neither of them are him (which truthers love to do, link back to themselves...that's credibility for ya). The bomb dogs are to protect the ground Jango, not to go through the entire building. 1 dog is more than enough to sniff out the sub basements and ground levels. Considering that they can pick the scent up from a great distance. Your own blatant incredulity notwithstanding.
Why can't truthers ever stay on topic? Even in their own threads they veer off all over the place. Koko made a whole bunch of claims. Can anyone, including koko address my responses to those claims? Post 11 remains poorly rebutted Post 46 remains completely ignored. The best Koko could muster for post 115 which outlines exactly how to calculate the limits of the structure was "10 pages of formulas are cute and absolutely worthless" Do you people feel better about losing when you call people shills?
you said to which I said to which you did a uturn they are both chemical explosions and I proved that a chemical explosion can in fact be silenced. Look pretty foolish tootin your horn that you are an expert and then come out here do a uturn. I am sure the rest of the world gets it, but just in case the common link is "explosion", not the use.
Childish games, 'councilor'. You just get funnier every day. Next you'll use the 'I had my fingers crossed when I typed that' defense.
why cant troughers ever address any topic without distorting it to the point it cant even be recognized. I await YOUR model that uses NISTs numbers as seen below, 10 pages of formulas are cute and absolutely worthless, but I bet it makes people feel really smart! LOL the model was posted for a full rebuttal to cover all previous trougher droppings. The numbers used were from nist reports, you can see them in the upper left corner. Feel free to replicate it if you like. It shows how incredibly strong that design is and how the whole premise troughers stand on has no basis in reality.
your logic is absurd and completely out to lunch! Trusses that cannot pull in the walls when they are at full strength then weakening due to massive heat they magically have the strength to pull in the walls while at the same time failing due to the weakening. troughers are loonarticks plain and simple.
that would be treason because it would jeopardize public safety. you wouldnt want me to get hurt now would you?
I would recuse myself because I could not conscientiously defend you long before you had the opportunity to fire anyone.
You have no idea how good that makes me feel. The more truthers show their malcontent for me, it raises my self respect. Thank you Koko
Thanks for coming over to the truther side but we dont want you. You would give truthers a bad name after the way you discredited yourself with your explosion rebuttal. thanks anyway.
nah not malcontent, none what so ever. I sometimes get great satisfaction helping troughers find their way through the dark when they get lost in their own intellectually dishonest black hole
His logic ALWAYS is out to lunch.I love it how the OCTAS start getting desperate and then start referring to computer modules for their PROOF.comedy gold. - - - Updated - - - stands up and gives standing ovation. your making WAY too much sense and have way too much logic and common sense for them to grasp though so it will fry their brainwas with overload with way too much logic and common sense you have given them though. This also spells it out for them dummies style in this video as well but the video ALSO has too much logic and common sense in it for them to grasp as well.hee hee. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZAHp_zSGd8
Does it really matter?....it puts new light on the oft repeated 'fact' by truthers that ALL the dogs were pulled out of the WTC
My logic is absurd in the same way the mathematics is useless. What is this garbage? The strength of any structure is dependent on its shape. If you change the shape, you change the strength. In the matter of the trusses: In their original configuration the trusses carried loads in two different vectors. The first was the gravitational load. This load was transferred parallel to the axis of the inner and outer columns through the gusset plates that connected them to the columns. For someone in preschool, this means the weight was applied straight down the column. The second vector was the wind load that was communicated through the trusses perpendicular to the axis of the inner and outer columns. And for someone in preschool, this means the wind pushed straight through the truss. When the trusses sagged and eventually buckled due to heating they no longer transferred load in the same vectors. They were still connected through the gusset plates, but they could not communicate their loads to the columns the way they did before. Gravitational load from the trusses was no longer parallel to the inner and outer columns and wind load could no longer be communicated between the inner and outer columns. For someone in preschool, this means that the weigh of the truss was now applied at an angle to the column. This change in direction of force is what pulled the columns inward. If you deny this, then how do you explain the photographic evidence that shows the columns at the point of impact pulling inward over time? By the way, the trusses didn't need "strength" to pull the columns. On the contrary, it was the heat induced loss of tensile strength that allowed the trusses to sag. They only needed mass.
And now Koko will disappear again for a few weeks because he suddenly realized he has something else to do.
