Defending the Truth

So what? If you knew anything about diesel fuel you would know at normal pressure it is non-explosive, and is very hard to ignite. So even if a couple tanks found themselfs on fire, it would not create enough energy to destroy the building. The report meantions diesel fuel, and still admits "more research needs to be done to find out why building 7 fell"So obviously they know damn well there was very little chance the fuel could have done that.
Now Im not going to call you a lier, as most here would do to me for making such a mistake, but building 7 fell at 5:22 pm 9/11, just over 6 hours after the towers fell. I dont see why you would bring the Good Lord into this, especialy considering you are now spreading false information that the building was on fire for "20+ hours". And yes there have been pleanty of steel structures that endured worse fires for over SIX hours, that never fell. I will call out AP for thanking you for spreading false information though. Good job AP

I have read just about every peice of information I could find, on both sides of the argument,(why wouldnt I, I didnt start out wanting this to be true. I was for invading afgan, and Iraq over this) and the FEMA's side just doesnt add up in many area's, or doesnt address concerns by many people at all. You you're self think the building was on fire for 20+ hours, that isnt a half truth, that is a total lie. (remember Im not calling you a lier for getting false info, but I am calling the source who told you they are.)

So, no you didn't read the links I provided.

This is why I refuse to debate it any longer. You refuse to see facts and read links.

http://www.structuremag.org/Archives...sanz-Nov07.pdf

You refuse to debate me cause I called your BS out, and now you cant even admit you were wrong. Dont worry, that seems to be the the norm for this thread.

Besides, You havent made much of a argument anyway.

What's funny is this was already explained to Grace and just as she did to you...She ignored it and prefers to stick to her false information instead...

THEN she has to make yet another comment about yet again...Who rec-ed who along with a whine/insult thrown in.

Sorry Grace, but the only people here spreading false information is yourself. And you really, really, REALLY need to let go of your issues regarding the rec button.

Wrong about 20+ hours, fine. I was.

It was 6 hours.

If you are going to nitpick that, they you really aren't interested in learning the truth, just interested in soiling the memory of the 3000 people that died that day.

And it's really pathetic that you listen to a bunch of tin-foil hat wearers instead of structural engineers.

But I guess engineers that have access to all the data don't know what they are talking about, right?

You know, the funniest part is I saw a special on the guys who started this whole thing, the guys who made the first conspiracy video. Did you know they've changed their story about 5-6 times?

LOL

You did no such thing Grace. You wish you had, but you haven't...

It's been explained to you about the generators...Knot's links go into great detail about how the fall occured, as well as explains about the fires, etc. etc., etc.

The only person here that seems to have a problem with admitting they were wrong is yourself. And that seems to be the norm of your responses within this thread.

The damn 9/11 report straight says they dont know why the building fell, what of that?

If Im going to nit pick???? Are you freaking kidding me??? You are damn right im going to nit pick, there are 3000 dead people and we owe it to them to nit pick this thing to death.

Actually, I can see where you got the 20+hours from...Considering that the ground crews had difficulty looking for survivors and bodies for almost a week afterwards, because there were indeed fires that were burning below ground for days after the initial collasp...

But like you pointed out...Grace is going to nit-pick it to pieces, in order to claim her wishful conspiracy story is true.

Im not the one who claimed the building was on fire for 20+ hours, that was BS, and I called it out. I also explained how diesel fuel isnt explosive, and is hard to ignite. there is no way more than a few tanks at most caught fire. Im stating (along with a couple million other people) that the reports are BS. Oh wait, im talking to a person who thinks steel beems are welded at 45 degree angles

A couple million? Now who' BS'ing? LOL

How would you even know 'only a few tanks caught fire'? Were you there? Have you listened to the FDNY reports?

Diesel fuel catches fire just like any fuel will, and will burn long. No one said it had to be explosive. The tanks could have ruptured, etc.

And even if the fuel didn't burn, there was still plenty of fuel in that building to burn plenty long enough.

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - World Trade Center 7, Building 7

Read.