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.

 

9/11 TRUTH GOES NUCLEAR: Massive Download In Progress . . . It’s Time to Wake Up!

page: 8
77
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 01:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: [post=18495339]wmd_2008
35 YEARS in construction on everything from houses/office/chemical plants /hydro power/multi storey projects and first job in the DESIGN/DRAWING office of a structural steelwork comapny.


So how would you explain planes made of aluminium alloy cut thru those columns like knife thru butter?
Am aware of momentum and related effects




posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 01:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: AmenStop

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: AmenStop

Here we go the ordinary man in the street who has only typical demolition videos to base what he saw happen on.

Do YOU personally have any experience designing structures or day to day dealings with the terminology used, do you have any idea of the loadings on a structure of that size, when major components fail.

Have you every seen or used equipment to test various building materials/components to destruction to see how they behave.

Or is everything base on what other mistakenly think should happen



You are joking right? Hahhahahaha. Ok lets see you give me another example of a steal building falling in its own footprint and it wasnt a controlled demolition.....

Waiting......

Oh it only happens in fairy tale land where all laws of physics are suspended.

Your argument is poor at best, utterly stupid and knowingly false at worst.


LETS see proof they fell in their on foot print /proof of a change in the laws of physics.

35 YEARS in construction on everything from houses/office/chemical plants /hydro power/multi storey projects and first job in the DESIGN/DRAWING office of a structural steelwork comapny.

Have had a technical role for many years quite often testing structural components sometimes to destruction!!!

Oh and by the way its a STEEL BUILDING not Steal


If you're going to call someone out for their spelling, at least make sure your own spelling is correct.



posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Musing

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: AmenStop

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: AmenStop

Here we go the ordinary man in the street who has only typical demolition videos to base what he saw happen on.

Do YOU personally have any experience designing structures or day to day dealings with the terminology used, do you have any idea of the loadings on a structure of that size, when major components fail.

Have you every seen or used equipment to test various building materials/components to destruction to see how they behave.

Or is everything base on what other mistakenly think should happen



You are joking right? Hahhahahaha. Ok lets see you give me another example of a steal building falling in its own footprint and it wasnt a controlled demolition.....

Waiting......

Oh it only happens in fairy tale land where all laws of physics are suspended.

Your argument is poor at best, utterly stupid and knowingly false at worst.


LETS see proof they fell in their on foot print /proof of a change in the laws of physics.

35 YEARS in construction on everything from houses/office/chemical plants /hydro power/multi storey projects and first job in the DESIGN/DRAWING office of a structural steelwork comapny.

Have had a technical role for many years quite often testing structural components sometimes to destruction!!!

Oh and by the way its a STEEL BUILDING not Steal


If you're going to call someone out for their spelling, at least make sure your own spelling is correct.


Well since I am from the UK some info for YOU!!!


A storey (New Zealand English, Australian English, British English, Canadian English, Indian English) or story (American English) is any level part of a building that could be used by people (for living, work, storage, recreation, etc.). The plurals are storeys and stories, respectively.



edit on 5-10-2014 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 12:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: [post=18495339]wmd_2008
35 YEARS in construction on everything from houses/office/chemical plants /hydro power/multi storey projects and first job in the DESIGN/DRAWING office of a structural steelwork comapny.


So how would you explain planes made of aluminium alloy cut thru those columns like knife thru butter?
Am aware of momentum and related effects


YOU answered it yourself, momentum and related effects



posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: sled735

Obama, said the investigation of 9/11 is over, done.

We all know what really happened.

The one thing to me that is a give away, is not letting those who designed and built, the towers, investigate their design flaw in their building of the Towers. In this, the cover up is disclosed, these architects and engineers, if given the chance they would find the real truth.
SS Nazi, Hitler, Parliament building burning. New Pearl Harbor, open check book for Nazi's, loss of freedom right's for the people. Reason in part, to be able to go into Afghanistan and finish pipe line. Money, Greed. Do in the 7 Islamic nations.

And what? Syria, in part is the Iran pipe line they don't want finished. Blame Russia for the Ukraine, it's oil, petrol dollar.

This is all going to come out, thing is only 500,000,000 people are going to be alive to hear about it, Hile Hitler, and the rest of them not to be mentioned.



posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 05:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tedgoat

How about this Demolition Expert Danny Jowenko?



He says that the TT's definitely were NOT CD.



posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 06:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: lexyghot

originally posted by: Tedgoat

How about this Demolition Expert Danny Jowenko?



He says that the TT's definitely were NOT CD.


He said building 7, was CD done by experts, the door is now open. Some thing smells. And that dude is dead.
Link www.youtube.com...
edit on 5-10-2014 by OOOOOO because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 12:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: OOOOOO

originally posted by: lexyghot

originally posted by: Tedgoat

How about this Demolition Expert Danny Jowenko?



He says that the TT's definitely were NOT CD.


He said building 7, was CD done by experts, the door is now open. Some thing smells. And that dude is dead.
Link www.youtube.com...


Done by experts yes. And he was confused by the time it took to do it too. A controlled demolition is not done within a matter of hours. It's done over days of preparation.

He didn't say the TT's were not CD. He just didn't say they were preferring to concentrate on building 7 which obviously was CD!



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 10:52 AM
link   
So this MASSIVE DATA DUMP on 9/11 that is suppose to reveal all the secrets of inside job is............ where now? Still uploading? Stuck in cyberspace?

Ugh, I am so tired of of "COMING SOON! Massive new evidence to be revealed!!!" threads, and nothing ever happening. Its worse than those 2012 doom threads or Nibiru or some cataclysm scare where all hype and nothing happens.

Sorry, but there is no "data dump" that will answer the questions or reveal secret demolition plans and evidence or whatever nonsense the "Truth" Movement has been promising to reveal all these years.


This nuclear data dump is nothing more than a pathetic fizzle...............
edit on 10/6/2014 by GenRadek because: eta stuff



posted on Oct, 8 2014 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: GenRadek

For the more perceptive amongst us, the data has been dumping for years. That is, private individuals (as opposed to the media and government) have been spending time and money investigating the facts, and all those facts contradict the official story at every turn.

But that is, ONLY the more perceptive amongst us, the more curious amongst us.

For the less perceptive amongst us, they are happy to believe the official story, no questions asked.


edit on 8-10-2014 by Salander because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2014 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

They have? I havent seen a thing yet! Not one thing that screams "NUCLEAR!!!" Not even a mouse fart. I have yet to see one investigation from the "Truth" Movement that actually did anything other than regurgitate the same crap claims that were copy and pasted from the "Truth" websites. I have not seen one shred of evidence that could say anything about "inside job". What has been "published" are papers more worthy of use in an outhouse than any serious investigation.



posted on Oct, 8 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: GenRadek
a reply to: Salander

They have? I havent seen a thing yet! Not one thing that screams "NUCLEAR!!!" Not even a mouse fart. I have yet to see one investigation from the "Truth" Movement that actually did anything other than regurgitate the same crap claims that were copy and pasted from the "Truth" websites. I have not seen one shred of evidence that could say anything about "inside job". What has been "published" are papers more worthy of use in an outhouse than any serious investigation.


Have you read the NIST report? If so, do you believe it is accurate?
edit on 8-10-2014 by MALBOSIA because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2014 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Any one else notice that an individuals propensity to believe 9/11 conspiracies is directly proportionate to their lack of construction/engineering experience and their grasp of basic Newtonian physics.

Unfortunately, reading the NIST reports won't make a bit of difference to someone who doesn't have the education to understand the terminology and methodology used.

I have yet to see anyone from the 9/11 conspiracy camp have any luck refuting Professor Zdeněk Bažant's collapse mechanism. Plenty of claims to the effect, but the math doesn't lie...



posted on Oct, 8 2014 @ 06:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Drunkenparrot
Any one else notice that an individuals propensity to believe 9/11 conspiracies is directly proportionate to their lack of construction/engineering experience and their grasp of basic Newtonian physics.

Unfortunately, reading the NIST reports won't make a bit of difference to someone who doesn't have the education to understand the terminology and methodology used.

I have yet to see anyone from the 9/11 conspiracy camp have any luck refuting Professor Zdeněk Bažant's collapse mechanism. Plenty of claims to the effect, but the math doesn't lie...




That sounds like the the same BS excuse given to credit default swaps. Can't understand the math? Then don't question it's legitimacy...

If NIST's model worked, I am sure they would love to show it off with a visualization. But they can't, so they don't. Nobody could simulate NIST conclusions because it would appear ridiculous if visualized.

There are many amature attempts made, why don't you post the one that best suits NIST conclusions.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 07:00 AM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA



That sounds like the the same BS excuse given to credit default swaps. Can't understand the math? Then don't question it's legitimacy...

That parallels the people in Nigeria and Ebola.
They have been told the truth about the spread of Ebola but they just don't accept it. They believe what they want and continue with their unsanitary burial practices.

The uneducated refuse to believe that fire can take down a steel structure. Despite all the other evidence from non building fires and non 911 sources.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 07:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: MALBOSIA



That sounds like the the same BS excuse given to credit default swaps. Can't understand the math? Then don't question it's legitimacy...

That parallels the people in Nigeria and Ebola.
They have been told the truth about the spread of Ebola but they just don't accept it. They believe what they want and continue with their unsanitary burial practices.

The uneducated refuse to believe that fire can take down a steel structure. Despite all the other evidence from non building fires and non 911 sources.



Cough! The Uneducated always believe what the official story Bullcrappers say regardless of the impossibility of the event. And that's just WTC-1 and 2. And that is also regardless of the witness testimonies of explosions in the basement areas of both towers and Fire Fighters saying that there must have been detonators in the buildings as they came down! You don't believe first hand witnesses?

The uneducated also believe that WTC-7 came down because a couple of office fires....lol Can't believe anyone can fall for that lame excuse to hide a Demolition!



Pot calling Kettle black mate!



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 07:32 AM
link   
there is very little truth behind what happened on that day.
I am sure some people knew about it, but the american government was unable to stop it.
The only reason Americans thought the system was flawless is just because nobody ever tested it out before.
The sense of safety america felt, the invincibility, had more to do with hollywood brainwashing/hype than with reality.
You were never safe.
The attack was just proof of that. that's why american government is now overcompensating in almost every aspect regarding security.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Drunkenparrot





I have yet to see anyone from the 9/11 conspiracy camp have any luck refuting Professor Zdeněk Bažant's collapse mechanism. Plenty of claims to the effect, but the math doesn't lie...


Would that be the famous "Piledriver" theory? You know, the one where the top 15% of the building crushes the remaining 85% of undamaged structure below it into dust...and then crushes itself when it reaches the ground..that "theory"? I'd love to see a physical experiment demonstrating that whopper..not just a few equations and a couple of 2 dimensional diagrams.....



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 08:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tedgoat
Cough! The Uneducated always believe what the official story Bullcrappers say regardless of the impossibility of the event.


Wrong, in my experience at least the people I've met in real life that go with the conspiracies hard core style are actually the uneducated ones that try to be clever - but fail. Often (and I may be generalising here but it's strangely the truth) they're followed around by the smell of weed, think they're experts in politics, physics, astronomy, unarmed combat, religion and anything else going and yet spend most of their time

a) Working in their relatively dead end jobs
b) Playing on the PS2/3/4 while smoking aforementioned weed
c) Spending any free time left on the Internet getting their education from other people like them

I've had people almost red in the face saying to me "The collapse went against physics, yada yada" - yet when put through any type of questioning they fail to be able to back up their claims because 'they can't remember and they just read it somewhere, and and don't understand it all anyway' - I.e. they decided to eat some BS off the Internet because it makes them feel better sticking two fingers up to the Government.
But it isn't the Government that suffers, it's their poor little damaged brains that end up so full of crap they start to think they're enlightened and anyone that actually still has the ability to think is a 'sheep'.

Basically - the reason why as far as the physics of the collapse go I don't believe any of the conspiracy nonsense is because I've only ever seen it peddled by insignificant people trying to make something of themselves using lies, lies and more lies. And if you actually have any background in a relevant subject then you can see this. The majority of people who go for the junk theories from what I've seen are emotional and/or lacking in relevant experience.. I suspect the remainder will have a money trail leading back to them from the majority of the 'faithful' if you look, wherever it's through ads, products or donations.

I think part of the problem is that it is actually pretty hard to study seriously for anything. Even just doing a degree which is relatively broad - when I started mine I remember thinking I'd never see the end of the tunnel. It's hard work, some of it is boring and you have to do that to get to the exciting bits. So I can see why some people look at several years of hard work (before you even really specialise properly) and think 'screw this' and go onto some snake oil salesman site where they can make you a physics and engineering expert in just a few pages and a 50 minute YouTube video.
But that should be telling you something is wrong - no matter how you look at it you cannot even begin to acquire the necessary skill set to make a truly independent opinion just by perusing a few self-contained whackjob sites that make it simple - the clue - it's not actually that simple if you're going to go into detail.

But seeing as some people still believe the 'free fall speed' lie about the towers falling after 13 years still have trouble seeing that debris is falling faster than the towers are collapsing it's really not a surprise that they struggle with anything else. If you're going to be brainwashed by something you can debunk with your eyes, then it's best to just not bother trying to think - because it's not working.
edit on 9-10-2014 by AgentSmith because: bb code



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 08:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flatcoat
Would that be the famous "Piledriver" theory? You know, the one where the top 15% of the building crushes the remaining 85% of undamaged structure below it into dust...and then crushes itself when it reaches the ground..that "theory"? I'd love to see a physical experiment demonstrating that whopper..not just a few equations and a couple of 2 dimensional diagrams.....


A perfect example of where some people oversimplify what happened. Here's a little clue - they weren't solid objects.
You can't do 'basic math' treating them as such. There were many complex forces at work and you have to take into consideration the properties of the individual components of the building and the way it was constructed.




top topics



 
77
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join