The Instigator
JustCallMeTarzan
Pro (for)
Winning
17 Points
The Contender
yhubin
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points

Conspiracy IV: World Trade Center 7

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
JustCallMeTarzan
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/15/2009 Category: Technology
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,701 times Debate No: 8649
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (3)

 

JustCallMeTarzan

Pro

The proposition on offer is that the building known as WTC7 collapsed on 9/11/2001 as a result of damage sustained from the collapse of WTC 1 and 2 and the subsequent fires inside the building.

*****************************************

There are 2 primary contentions that argue against the story above.

1) WTC7 collapsed very quickly - in about 7 seconds.

If you actually watch a video of the collapse, it takes more like 12 or 13. The collapse begins in the upper penthouse, which falls several stories into the building before the rest of the building begins to collapse. This internal damage accounts for not only the apparent fast fall of the rest of the building, but also for why it fell into its own footprint.

2) There was very little damage to WTC7.

The answer to this is simple. There was little damage that could be seen in the majority of news reels due to the angles of the shots. Here's a good one of WTC7 burning out of control (http://www.debunking911.com...). A quote from the NIST team - "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom — approximately 10 stories — about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." Photos like this (http://911research.wtc7.net...) show exactly how the damage happened...

AFFIRMED.
yhubin

Con

listen I understand how, all this evidence, might lead to a conspiracy of 9/11, but you have to understand that maybe, George Bush wasn't the bets president but a man like that would never blow up the pentagon and the twin towers with planes, it just doesn't seem logical,

and let me ask you this people, why would they do that? you tell me when you have an answer to that..

poor Americans which died during the 9/11 attack

although the evidence proofs there must have been something to trigger the collapse of the twin towers, having a plain slam into a building will cause very unpredictable things, so in that case, how can we be so sure that the buildings must have fallen due to something other then the planes.

a very unpredictable statement
Debate Round No. 1
JustCallMeTarzan

Pro

Sigh.

My opponent does not understand which side of the resolution he is supposed to be arguing.

He has offered a barely comprehensible argument for MY position and has thus conceded.
yhubin

Con

could this delegation then please explain and state, what topic you are representing and how i have aided in you in your argument
Debate Round No. 2
JustCallMeTarzan

Pro

JCMT: "The proposition on offer is that the building known as WTC7 collapsed on 9/11/2001 as a result of damage sustained from the collapse of WTC 1 and 2 and the subsequent fires inside the building."

YHUBIN: "I understand how, all this evidence, might lead to a conspiracy of 9/11, but... [George Bush] would never blow up the pentagon and the twin towers with planes, it just doesn't seem logical."

I am defending the proposition that WTC7 was destroyed when terrorists flew planes into WTC1 & 2, which then collapsed, damaging WTC7.

You are supposed to defend the proposition that WTC7 was NOT destroyed in this manner.

********************************************************************************

JCMT: La proposici�n en la oferta es que el edificio conocido como WTC7 desplom� en el 9/11/2001 a consecuencia de da�o sostenido del desplome de WTC 1 y 2 y los fuegos subsiguientes dentro del edificio.

YHUBIN: Comprendo c�mo, toda esta evidencia, quiz�s lleve a una conspiraci�n de 9/11, pero... [George Bush] Nunca volar�a el pent�gono y las torres gemelas con aviones, justo no parecen l�gico.

Defiendo la proposici�n que WTC7 fue destruido cu�ndo terroristas volaron aviones en WTC1 & 2, que entonces desplom�, da�ando WTC7.

Usted es supuesto defender la proposici�n que WTC7 no fue destruido en esta manera.
yhubin

Con

my fellow delegate, the twin towers, were said to contain steel powerful enough, to resist those type of temperatures, could this fellow delegate also explain the accounts of witnesses which were survivors of the twin towers, saying that before the plane hit the towers, they heard explosions before hand.

Does this delegate not realize that in order to make it look as if it was a terrorist attack, the American Government would have to blow up a government building to make it look as if the terrorists were aiming to scare or to destroy the American State
Debate Round No. 3
JustCallMeTarzan

Pro

JustCallMeTarzan forfeited this round.
yhubin

Con

Knowing my opponent, he takes this debate very seriously there fore, i will continue the debate in the next round making t fair.
Both delegations can put forth their concluding arguments and await the voters opinions

God BLess
Debate Round No. 4
JustCallMeTarzan

Pro

My opponent has apparently not understood the problem with posted in English OR Spanish. I realize they may speak Catalan or something in Andalucia, but this debating site is in English.

I am affirming:

The proposition on offer is that the building known as WTC7 collapsed on 9/11/2001 as a result of damage sustained from the collapse of WTC 1 and 2 and the subsequent fires inside the building.

My opponent has not contested this. He offers arguments for my case, not his.

Once again:

Defiendo la proposici�n que WTC7 fue destruido cu�ndo terroristas volaron aviones en WTC1 & 2, que entonces desplom�, da�ando WTC7.

Usted es supuesto defender la proposici�n que WTC7 NO fue destruido en esta manera.
yhubin

Con

I apologize deeply for my mistake. I speak English fluently as i have been going to the English school all my life.

My mix up with the con and pro was big and cost you your debate and or that i apologize
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Lexicaholic 7 years ago
Lexicaholic
RFD:
(1) Tie. I doubt that there was an active conspiracy top blow the building up. There probably was an active conspiracy to make it look like the government was actually doing its job prior, though.
(2) Tie. The debate kind of meandered, and I was no more convinced that the point was proven than it was. I know that this means I should vote Con, but really, why?
(3) Con had better conduct. Pro forfeited a round. Con was very apologetic for his mistake, and actually tried to make an argument in round 3 about bombs exploding before the planes hit. This argument was ignored, perhaps because Pro missed it. Pro then attacked Con's English language skills.
(4) Pro, clearly.
(5) Tie.
(6) Pro, for using sources.
Posted by thisoneguy 7 years ago
thisoneguy
They murdered a key witness,?
Posted by tBoonePickens 7 years ago
tBoonePickens
No seais gilipollas!
Posted by Xer 7 years ago
Xer
yhubin no habla ingles.
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 7 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
La posición de "CON" en este pagina es para APOYAR la conspiración.
Posted by yhubin 7 years ago
yhubin
listen i understand how, all this evidence, might lead to a conspiracy of 9/11, but you have to understand that maybe, Goerge Bush wasnt the bets president but a man like that would never blow up the pentagon and the twin towers with planes, it just doesnt seem logical,

and let me ask you this people, why would they do that? you tell me when you have an answer to that..

poor americans which died during the 9/11 attack
Posted by thisoneguy 7 years ago
thisoneguy
I live in the UK, BBC ran live footage between their studio and CNN on site Anchor, the report was about the collapse of building 7,, which at the time was still standing in the background, the reporter went on to say that there was a large pile of rubble a few blocks away as a result of its collapse,, the collapse did happen ! 20 min later,, lol, (it can be see on you tube)
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Lexicaholic 7 years ago
Lexicaholic
JustCallMeTarzanyhubinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Vote Placed by Xer 7 years ago
Xer
JustCallMeTarzanyhubinTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by JustCallMeTarzan 7 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
JustCallMeTarzanyhubinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70