It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Where Did the Towers Go?

page: 8
48
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

Hey, Bruce. Where did the engines enter the Pentagon? Were there puncture holes? Or did the explode and shatter against the reinforced windows?




posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 08:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dorrell

Just listen to the witnesses of that day. What do they all say at ground zero? Explosions, Explosions etc. Fire Fighters said it, Police, Responders, Witnesses, News crews......All said explosions. Before and during the collapses!


Going by the sounds, it's what you'd assume. Floors falling and supports breaking make loud banging noises.



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 09:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: cestrup
a reply to: hellobruce

Hey, Bruce. Where did the engines enter the Pentagon? Were there puncture holes? Or did the explode and shatter against the reinforced windows?


There are plenty of photos of engine debris inside and outside the Pentagon. Along with very identifiable bits of plane.



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: cestrup
a reply to: hellobruce

Hey, Bruce. Where did the engines enter the Pentagon? Were there puncture holes?


Yes


Or did the explode and shatter against the reinforced windows?


Truthers may claim that, but we have all seen the silly claims that they make here!



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 09:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam

That did not answer my question and Jack White pretty much proved all of those "photos" that turned up years later from the Pentagon as fakes. Enjoy!

Oh, can you post a picture for everyone showing where the giant engines breeched the pentagon? Thanks!

Please feel free to scroll through the obvious photoshopped pics. There's a lot of them and some are down right silly.

jackwhites911studies.org...



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: cestrup
Jack White pretty much proved all of those "photos" that turned up years later from the Pentagon as fakes.


Wrong again, those claims just show White does not understand perspective, or that vehicles can move....

apollohoax.proboards.com...



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: cestrup

Please feel free to scroll through the obvious photoshopped pics. There's a lot of them and some are down right silly.


So anything showing engine bits is photoshopped? See also: self-reinforcing delusion.

What happens to planes when they hit hard structures? Do the wings stay in place? Do you expect to see something like a Looney Tunes wreck where there is a perfect cutout shape of the plane?



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:00 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

You link me to a blog full of broken links, name-calling, on a debunker site? I can agree about the fact that automobiles do move but he brings some interesting points as well.



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam

Still no pics of where the engines hit!?

Why are none of those artifacts shown on 9/11 during the news coverage? Why did they just show up years later? Why did no live coverage show that fuselage?

The answer is fabricated evidence.



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: cestrup
a reply to: Bedlam

The answer is fabricated evidence.


No doubt it was a hologram that covered up for the disintegration beam from Judy's death satellite. And all the plane wreckage was shopped in later. Yes, yes, I see it now.



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: cestrup
Why are none of those artifacts shown on 9/11 during the news coverage?


Please link us to the news coverage that does not show the wreckage....



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam

Show me one newscast from 9/11/01 that has that fuselage in it. Just one and I'll believe you. With all of the media there don't you think it would be visible somewhere or some reporter would have pointed it out?

You got a pic of those engine holes yet? Or just photos or parts that just magically entered through a window? How did engine parts get inside when there are no visible engine holes? Don't just say "it did" - prove to me where the engines entered. We've all seen the main puncture hole - where are the two holes on the side where the hardest part of a 757 would have hit?



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: cestrup
Why are none of those artifacts shown on 9/11 during the news coverage?


Please link us to the news coverage that does not show the wreckage....


It was all modified after the fact to show fake wreckage. At least, that's what you'd have to have to support the claim.



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

Really? Your tactics are too deliberate. Show me one video of a part of a jet from 9/11/01. They were all over the lawn - now show me.



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: cestrupWe've all seen the main puncture hole - where are the two holes on the side where the hardest part of a 757 would have hit?


Still on the Looney Tunes outline theory? Do you think the plane might have, you know, deformed a bit? Sort of folded up? Shredded? Do you expect to see large sections of intact fuselage, as if it held together in a perfect plane shape when it went through a nuke-resistant structure?

Ever seen the wreckage of a large plane, where they plow into the ground at speed? Do they look like a plane then?



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam
Do you expect to see something like a Looney Tunes wreck where there is a perfect cutout shape of the plane?


Well, as that is their source for their "knowledge" of physic, so they apparently do expect a perfect shape of the plane!



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: cestrup
Show me one video of a part of a jet from 9/11/01. - now show me.


You are the one making the claim - it is up to you to back that claim up.

that is how things work in the real world, what happens in your cartoon world is not relevant.



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam

The jet hit square on the side of the building (according to authority). Not folded up. Now where are the puncture holes of the engines? I guess you two resorting to insults is the most telling part about this discussion.

But according to non-looney toon logic - the jet's nose hit first and the entire jet folded into a cylinder in a fraction of a second. Leaving a 16 ft hole and nothing more.



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: cestrup
a reply to: Bedlam

But according to non-looney toon logic - the jet's nose hit first and the entire jet folded into a cylinder in a fraction of a second. Leaving a 16 ft hole and nothing more.


DId you expect it to take a lot of time? It's a very thin-walled aluminum cylinder moving at a goodly clip. It's not like it's a giant block of solid metal. Airplanes are as light as you can safely make them.



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 10:31 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

That's nice. More insults. I offered a challenge - I didn't ask to see the fuselage or wreckage because I know it does not exist in the coverage from that day. There's no burden on me. The proof is everywhere in every video of the pentagon lawn that day. There's no wreckage to be seen and I challenged you to prove me wrong.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join