Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Les H who wrote (289540)	11/6/2010 11:45:24 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 306849

>>Hess said he heard no explosions.<< actually, he said there were explosions and then changed his statements later. then again, you knew this and simply disregard what doesn't fit your predetermined scenario. filtering data in this manner is an easy way to reach a predetermined conclusion, but it doesn't yield accurate conclusions on a consistent basis. hess verified he felt the building quake, the lights went out, air rushed passed him and the stairwell collapsed, by both accounts BEFORE the towers fell. neither of their stories was consistent with hob nobbing in the office for an hour after they got up there BEFORE 9:03. nothing hess says challenges barry's eyewitness report. >>What they're probably hearing is the lower part of the building gradually give away after it was hit by the debris from the collapsed tower.<< based on what? your desire for two events that occurred at different times to have happened at the same time? with no evidence? and you claim i'm ASSUMING? that's what you assume. you have to first provide some shred of evidence both men were in the building for 60+ minutes that morning - in direct contradiction to the events laid out by jennings and hess was silent on the matter. >>Ceilings giving way, walls tumbling over into stairwells, stairways collapsing, windows shattering, debris crashing into the street, etc.<< do you even know what side of the building they were on and which side was damaged? hess said the window he looked out of wasn't facing the tower, indicating he was on the undamaged side of WTC7. you don't care what side he was on, you don't care if that side wasn't damaged by debris and you could care less about figuring out the timing. you just want a predetermined answer. it's a free country - and you have that right. you don't want an inquiry, you want to believe what you are told and move on. again, free country and all. >>If somebody wanted to take down the building with controlled demolitions, it would not have been left standing all day long.<< Les, that's absurd. arguing that if a crime didn't occur the way you envision it should have occurred, IT COULDN'T HAVE OCCURRED AT ALL is silly. >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center Jennings original interview. No mention of explosions. youtube.com; Les, you analysis is 100% inconsistent here - this is what happens when you determine the outcome before evaluating the evidence. your "logic": barry doesn't mention explosions when first interviewed, but does so later. therefore, the explosions didn't occur b/c barry added information later and it is unreasonable to add detail to a story at a later time. hess mentioned explosions when first interviewed, but denied them later. therefore, the explosions didn't occur because hess changed his story to the correct version. you can't LOGICALLY argue both cases as you have done. you have your answer and you cherry pick data and conflicting arguments to support it (barry changed his story, so the changed story is wrong, hess changed his story so the changed story is correct). no, you cherry pick what was said to mold the information to your desired outcome. you don't have one iota of evidence that barry and hess were in that building for an hour twiddling their thumbs while planes were hitting the towers and everyone else had evacuated. i have uncontested eyewitness testimony they weren't in WTC nearly long enough for the first tower to fall and that explains hess still claiming visibility before the pyroclastic cloud engulfed the area. hess doesn't claim the first tower was dustimated by that point in time. you ASSUME it. you have your answer, evidence be darned... explosions PRECEDING the collapse of tower caught on tape. youtube.com