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.

 

Ground Zero Footage

page: 20
56
<< 17  18  19    21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 10:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: GenRadek
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Funny cause from what I have seen, the "Truth" movement has ZERO clue when it comes to construction and prove it time and again, just like you. It is strange how you and so many in the "Truth" movement superimpose your lack of knowledge onto others in an effort to divert attention from your lacking skills. It doesnt work.



Thats all talk. Give an example.




posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Where to start? Thinking the WTC Towers were large skeletal steel structures and were suppose to stand. No idea of how the floor trusses and the exterior and interior core columns work together. No idea of how light steel trusses react in fire. Believing that the cores were all enclosed in concrete or were steel re-enforced concrete. Thinking that demolition charges can be silenced completely and yet have enough power to sever large columns without a soul noticing. Believing that explosives can be secretly rigged and maintained for long periods of time without one single soul ever noticing anything peculiar. Believing that unprotected steel needs many many hours to deform enough to fail in large fires and it is impossible for steel structures to collapse from fire alone. Believing that aircraft cannot penetrate steel buildings.

Need I continue?



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: GenRadek


Where to start? Thinking the WTC Towers were large skeletal steel structures and were suppose to stand.


What the frick does that even mean? Where was this stated?


No idea of how the floor trusses and the exterior and interior core columns work together.


Again... WHAT? In regard to global collapse?


No idea of how light steel trusses react in fire.


Light steel trusses would be referring to trusses made out of steel similar to what you would find in a partition wall and not designed to carry much more weight than the sheathing. I think your being grossly misleading.


Believing that the cores were all enclosed in concrete or were steel re-enforced concrete.


I don't know what to say. I honestly do not remember this topic with you or any member? What did I say about it? I hope you are not trying to take something a few people say and then claim it is what they all say? I wouldn't be surprised though, it is a tactic I have seen before with some OS'ers. not ALL of them. SOME of them.


Thinking that demolition charges can be silenced completely and yet have enough power to sever large columns without a soul noticing.


If your arguing against explosives, then you are saying that they were silenced. Who said they were silenced? There was
a 20 story building falling through an 80 story building. What silence could be observed? It is funny you mention this though because an OS'er did once argue against my claim that the noise of the Iron failing should have been heard from New Jersey, with the noise from the collapse and emergency vehicles would have drowned that out. High frequencies like a steel structure bending would have been heard before the lower frequency sound of concrete blowing up



Believing that explosives can be secretly rigged and maintained for long periods of time without one single soul ever noticing anything peculiar.


Seriously? you do not think this could be done? In a building complex like the WTC where repairs and maintenance are going 24/7 and there are many typical controls that an operation like that could be hidden behind. That is not even a factor. If there is reason to believe that explosives were used then there is little doubt they could have.


Believing that unprotected steel needs many many hours to deform enough to fail in large fires and it is impossible for steel structures to collapse from fire alone. Believing that aircraft cannot penetrate steel buildings.


The fire factor is gone once the collapse started. None of the steel below the impact zone was above normal temp. The entire structure below the impact was perfectly sound with a solid base. the 25% smaller structure had an open wound for a base and somehow managed plow through that perfectly sound structure. Fire is not a factor in that. The global collapse simulation is the factor there and so far no visual simulation of that event has been produced by NIST... I guess they didn't get paid enough for that.



edit on 6-10-2014 by MALBOSIA because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2014 @ 06:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

The fire factor is gone once the collapse started. None of the steel below the impact zone was above normal temp. The entire structure below the impact was perfectly sound with a solid base.


Hey you got something right.


the 25% smaller structure had an open wound for a base and somehow managed plow through that perfectly sound structure.


Yep. One floor at a time.

Your apparent understanding of the collapse physics is that since the lower part is bigger that the top, that it can resist the falling mass. Is that correct?

The resistance to the falling mass comes from the floors and their connections. Stuff falls on floors, right? And not on the columns.

Simply put, your understanding of things is too simplistic.

There is no way to teach you what you need to know on a chat board. Go take some night school classes.



posted on Oct, 12 2014 @ 12:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: lexyghot

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

The fire factor is gone once the collapse started. None of the steel below the impact zone was above normal temp. The entire structure below the impact was perfectly sound with a solid base.


Hey you got something right.


the 25% smaller structure had an open wound for a base and somehow managed plow through that perfectly sound structure.


Yep. One floor at a time.

Your apparent understanding of the collapse physics is that since the lower part is bigger that the top, that it can resist the falling mass. Is that correct?

The resistance to the falling mass comes from the floors and their connections. Stuff falls on floors, right? And not on the columns.

Simply put, your understanding of things is too simplistic.

There is no way to teach you what you need to know on a chat board. Go take some night school classes.


I don't care what theories you and NIST use to describe it. That is still what happened.

Have you been able to find a simulation that fits NIST theories? Can you post it?



posted on Oct, 15 2014 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: lexyghot

I was at work today and thinking of you lexyghot. We are doing a reno in a lab and noticed something...


No passive fire protection. Same tenant upstairs. By your logic this place is a death trap, right?



posted on Oct, 15 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

Thats all talk. Give an example.


Have you found us an example of a larger more in-depth investigation than 911 yet ?



posted on Oct, 15 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

Thats all talk. Give an example.


Have you found us an example of a larger more in-depth investigation than 911 yet ?



There was not an investigation into 9/11. Was the FBI involved, NYPD? Amy credible investigator involved? The lead commission investigator wrote a book about how his investigation was hindered by politics and lack of cooperation. Even contemplated obstruction of justice charges against the government. The first investigation was over a year after the attack. Basically any and all investigations were more in depth than 9/11 commission and NIST who guessed every value that they put into their models and if you read it you would see that is based on limited liability. NIST didn't stand by a single conclusion they made admitting they didn't have the time or money and what evidence they had came from the 121 photos in their archive. 100 of which were from a great distance with no detail.

Is that what you call an in-depth investigation?



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 05:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: lexyghot

I was at work today and thinking of you lexyghot. We are doing a reno in a lab and noticed something...


No passive fire protection. Same tenant upstairs. By your logic this place is a death trap, right?




PROVE IT, whats the job and spec for fire protection



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: lexyghot

I was at work today and thinking of you lexyghot. We are doing a reno in a lab and noticed something...


No passive fire protection. Same tenant upstairs. By your logic this place is a death trap, right?




PROVE IT, whats the job and spec for fire protection


You have NO construction experience, do you?

There is NO spec for fire insulation and the city of Burnaby B.C did not require it. It is the same tenant so concern for the spread of fire is contained within a single insurance policy.

Should I warn them that collapse is imminent because wmd2008 and lexyghot say so?
edit on 16-10-2014 by MALBOSIA because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

The first investigation was over a year after the attack.



No the investigation started before the event was even over. I know this for a fact. On Sept 11 2001 I had a Sherifs car sitting in my front yard, the sherif asking me questions, at about 11 AM. A Sherifs stayed there 24 hrs a day for 3 days.

On Sept 12 I was questioned by two men from the FBI. On Sept 13 I was questioned again by 2 men one FBI one FAA. And some time around Sept 20 I had another FBI agent stop by, show me photos and ask me if i recognise anybody.

According to the FBI 911 "was our largest investigation ever. At the peak of the case, more than half our agents worked to identify the hijackers and their sponsors and, with other agencies, to head off any possible future attacks. We followed more than half-a-million investigative leads, including several hundred thousand tips from the public. The attack and crash sites also represented the largest crime scenes in FBI history."

www.fbi.gov...

NIST has released thousands of photos from 911 they are easy to find.



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

The first investigation was over a year after the attack.



No the investigation started before the event was even over. I know this for a fact. On Sept 11 2001 I had a Sherifs car sitting in my front yard, the sherif asking me questions, at about 11 AM. A Sherifs stayed there 24 hrs a day for 3 days.

On Sept 12 I was questioned by two men from the FBI. On Sept 13 I was questioned again by 2 men one FBI one FAA. And some time around Sept 20 I had another FBI agent stop by, show me photos and ask me if i recognise anybody.

According to the FBI 911 "was our largest investigation ever. At the peak of the case, more than half our agents worked to identify the hijackers and their sponsors and, with other agencies, to head off any possible future attacks. We followed more than half-a-million investigative leads, including several hundred thousand tips from the public. The attack and crash sites also represented the largest crime scenes in FBI history."

www.fbi.gov...

NIST has released thousands of photos from 911 they are easy to find.


Can you link the photos. I went through every photo on their website and counted 121. Other photos were taken from video clips but it still does not add up to thousands.

Too bad the FBI didn't give a final report. Or did they? Why didn't the FBI stop the destruction of evidence while they were investigating? That does not seem like them. I do not doubt that the FBI tried to investigate since it is their jurisdiction I doubt they would wait for permission. Somewhere along the line they must have been told to beat it. And in the end the 9/11 commission blamed the FBI and CIA for the attack.

I guess if that is what it says on the FBI website it must be true, right? No politics involved right?

Why did NIST scale back their models to what could be computed in weeks rather than months. Why did they make guesses on the wall layouts for 2 WTC and guess how much jet fuel was consumed initially. Why did NIST not receive enough money to supply a visual simulation of the global collapse theory. Why does NIST state over and over in their report that the results were based on how little they had to work with and apparently by your claims the FBI was in the middle of an investigation while evidence was contaminated and removed from the scene.

The US seems to have very low standards when it comes to in depth investigation. Maybe it would have been different in a more civilized country.



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA


Can you link the photos. I went through every photo on their website and counted 121. Other photos were taken from video clips but it still does not add up to thousands.


Find them your self it's easy here's a hint: copy paste this into your search .

The International Center for 9/11 Studies has secured the release of hundreds of hours of video footage and tens of thousands of photographs used by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for its investigation of the collapse of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7.

Oh and NIST has 121 different photographers not just photos on their site. Each photographer averages about 30 photos.




Too bad the FBI didn't give a final report. Or did they? Why didn't the FBI stop the destruction of evidence while they were investigating? That does not seem like them. I do not doubt that the FBI tried to investigate since it is their jurisdiction I doubt they would wait for permission. Somewhere along the line they must have been told to beat it. And in the end the 9/11 commission blamed the FBI and CIA for the attack.

I guess if that is what it says on the FBI website it must be true, right? No politics involved right?



FBI case summary:

www.911myths.com...

The most important evidence to the FBI would be the CVR and FDR. The rubble was in the way and needed to be moved.

The FBI spent just under 4 million man hours on 911, no other investigation even comes close.

Can you show me where the 911 blamed the FBI and CIA for the attack. This is very dishonest on your part eh.




Why did NIST scale back their models to what could be computed in weeks rather than months. Why did they make guesses on the wall layouts for 2 WTC and guess how much jet fuel was consumed initially. Why did NIST not receive enough money to supply a visual simulation of the global collapse theory. Why does NIST state over and over in their report that the results were based on how little they had to work with and apparently by your claims the FBI was in the middle of an investigation while evidence was contaminated and removed from the scene.

The US seems to have very low standards when it comes to in depth investigation. Maybe it would have been different in a more civilized country.



Before I answer those questions can you give me an example of a larger more in-depth Canadian investigation? Something on the same scale as 911.
edit on 16-10-2014 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 03:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: MALBOSIA


Can you link the photos. I went through every photo on their website and counted 121. Other photos were taken from video clips but it still does not add up to thousands.


Find them your self it's easy here's a hint: copy paste this into your search .

The International Center for 9/11 Studies has secured the release of hundreds of hours of video footage and tens of thousands of photographs used by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for its investigation of the collapse of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7.

Oh and NIST has 121 different photographers not just photos on their site. Each photographer averages about 30 photos.




Too bad the FBI didn't give a final report. Or did they? Why didn't the FBI stop the destruction of evidence while they were investigating? That does not seem like them. I do not doubt that the FBI tried to investigate since it is their jurisdiction I doubt they would wait for permission. Somewhere along the line they must have been told to beat it. And in the end the 9/11 commission blamed the FBI and CIA for the attack.

I guess if that is what it says on the FBI website it must be true, right? No politics involved right?



FBI case summary:

www.911myths.com...

The most important evidence to the FBI would be the CVR and FDR. The rubble was in the way and needed to be moved.

The FBI spent just under 4 million man hours on 911, no other investigation even comes close.

Can you show me where the 911 blamed the FBI and CIA for the attack. This is very dishonest on your part eh.




Why did NIST scale back their models to what could be computed in weeks rather than months. Why did they make guesses on the wall layouts for 2 WTC and guess how much jet fuel was consumed initially. Why did NIST not receive enough money to supply a visual simulation of the global collapse theory. Why does NIST state over and over in their report that the results were based on how little they had to work with and apparently by your claims the FBI was in the middle of an investigation while evidence was contaminated and removed from the scene.

The US seems to have very low standards when it comes to in depth investigation. Maybe it would have been different in a more civilized country.



Before I answer those questions can you give me an example of a larger more in-depth Canadian investigation? Something on the same scale as 911.


Are you mad that I'm Canadian?

Not dishonest eh



After releasing the report, commission chairThomas Kean declared that both PresidentsBill Clinton and George W. Bush were "not well served" by the FBI and CIA.[


You want an example of an investigation being more in depth than one from a country with 10 x the population?



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: waypastvne

I am so sick of people posting links to a direct pdf download. How is that NOT against the T&C here. It was a truther that did it to me last time so Im not beimg bias but please do not do the. You could have called your a link direct pdf to warn me you....



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA


Not dishonest eh



After releasing the report, commission chairThomas Kean declared that both PresidentsBill Clinton and George W. Bush were "not well served" by the FBI and CIA.[



So according to you the 911 commission report never mentioned anything Islamic extremist and blamed the whole thing on the CIA and FBI ? How is that not dishonest eh ?





You want an example of an investigation being more in depth than one from a country with 10 x the population?



Yes, please, show us what a civilised investigation looks like.


I am so sick of people posting links to a direct pdf download. How is that NOT against the T&C here. It was a truther that did it to me last time so Im not beimg bias but please do not do the. You could have called your a link direct pdf to warn me you....


Oh Bo Ho. You asked for a link i gave it to you.



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: MALBOSIA


Not dishonest eh



After releasing the report, commission chairThomas Kean declared that both PresidentsBill Clinton and George W. Bush were "not well served" by the FBI and CIA.[



So according to you the 911 commission report never mentioned anything Islamic extremist and blamed the whole thing on the CIA and FBI ? How is that not dishonest eh ?





You want an example of an investigation being more in depth than one from a country with 10 x the population?



Yes, please, show us what a civilised investigation looks like.


I am so sick of people posting links to a direct pdf download. How is that NOT against the T&C here. It was a truther that did it to me last time so Im not beimg bias but please do not do the. You could have called your a link direct pdf to warn me you....


Oh Bo Ho. You asked for a link i gave it to you.


All you have done so far is twist words. There is no discussion here. I am working on my own thread for 9/11, when it is done you are more than welcome to bring your 9/11 myths to trump it if you like.

And no I cannot find a bigger cover-up... I mean investigation. Take that and go.



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

I am working on my own thread for 9/11,


That's great news, I'm trusting it will be the largest most in-depth and civilised thread ever written about 911. You are going to put all your facts and evidence together and show us what really happened..... right ?

Whenever us osers put all of the Truther facts and evidence together we get something like this:



Everyone will eventually know that al-Qaeda never existed, acted under the control of the US Government and acted on its own initiative but with the passive complicity of the US Government to hijack planes, not hijack planes and try but fail to hijack planes, that the US Government, a small rogue element within the US Government, and Mossad operating without the knowledge of the US Government crashed the planes into the towers under remote control, crashed different planes into the towers undeer remote control, didn't crash any planes into the towers but projected holograms of the planes crashing into the towers, and didn't crash or project anything but convinced everyone that planes hit the towers by showing it to them on TV, after which the towers were blown up by explosives that made lots of explosions that everybody heard, weakened by thermite silently which explains why nobody heard any explosions, blown up by nuclear weapons in the cellar which started collapses from the top, and turned entirely to dust by energy beams from space which is why there was no debris, and that the debris pile was then kept hot for months by thermite that hadn't reacted when it all reacted to bring the towers down, and all the steel that wasn't there was immediately taken to China which is why the steel recovered shows signs of explosives, melting and dustification, and a plane, a missile, a different plane and a hologram all crashed into the Pentagon except that it was only one of them, or pulled up at the last second and flew over the Pentagon, leaving a neat 12 foot hole that caused 90 feet of the bit of the wall that had recently been reinforced to collapse, and another plane was shot down at Shanksville then landed in Cleveland leaving no wreckage at Shanksville that was spread out over too large an area to be from a crash even though it didn't exist. That's what really happened, and some day everyone will figure out how obvious it all is.

Dave


The world is counting on you. Show us what really happened.



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 06:09 PM
link   
a reply to: waypastvne




"The 911 Myth:
19 Hijackers, directed by Osama B. Laden, took over 4 Commercial Jets with box cutters and, while evading the Air Defense System (NORAD), hit 75% of their targets. In turn, W. Trade Towers 1, 2 & 7 collapsed due to structural failure through fire in a "pancake" fashion, while the plane that hit the Pentagon vaporized upon impact, as did the plane that crashed into Shanksville. The 911 Commission found that there were no warnings for this act of Terrorism, while multiple government failures prevented adequate defense."


Like most truthers I will not be drawing any conclusions.



posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 06:32 AM
link   
a reply to: waypastvne

Brilliant post :-D Just about sums it up



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 17  18  19    21 >>

log in

join