Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > 9/11
Register FAQ Chat Social Groups Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 22-07-2012, 11:53 PM   #1
wispy
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,968
Default Polat Tower the new Talisman? Not quite.

It seems that the Polat tower fire was only the external insulation going up in flames.

The inside escaped with only light damage.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/...76_964x663.jpg

Last edited by wispy; 22-07-2012 at 11:54 PM.
wispy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-07-2012, 10:48 AM   #2
denton
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 666
Default

So is it not directly comparable to WTC7?
__________________
And one by one, the dissenting voices are silenced. Submission or suppression. Censorship is alive and well.
denton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2012, 11:39 PM   #3
wispy
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,968
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by denton View Post
So is it not directly comparable to WTC7?
According to the news rbulletins I read no it's not.

The Polat fire was superficial it seems and affected only the external cladding or skin.
wispy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2012, 12:06 AM   #4
dave52
Senior Member
 
dave52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,673
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by denton View Post
So is it not directly comparable to WTC7?
As in, it wasn't a random fire that caused a symmetrical collapse...
__________________
Dave.

www.DaveWare.co.uk
Are You Listening...?
dave52 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2012, 06:59 AM   #5
wispy
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,968
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dave52 View Post
As in, it wasn't a random fire that caused a symmetrical collapse...
As in it wasn't a fire that could cause a collapse.
wispy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2012, 07:11 AM   #6
dave52
Senior Member
 
dave52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,673
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wispy View Post
As in it wasn't a fire that could cause a collapse.
Are there any examples of fires that did cause collapses...?
__________________
Dave.

www.DaveWare.co.uk
Are You Listening...?
dave52 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2012, 09:55 AM   #7
bryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,737
Default

Some people seem to think that practicing good science involves proving that a phenomenon has no precedent, is impossible to replicate, and is unrelated to all other phenomena.
__________________
'The use of "professional actors" to depict victims is especially telling, given that many Americans believe the government has used professional actors in events like Sandy Hook and the Boston marathon.' - David Icke
bryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2012, 12:59 PM   #8
wispy
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,968
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bryan View Post
Some people seem to think that practicing good science involves proving that a phenomenon has no precedent, is impossible to replicate, and is unrelated to all other phenomena.
So what is not 'good science' about assessing the difference in charactestics between the fires and structures involved at the Polat and those in 911?
wispy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:43 PM.