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.

 

Judges shocked by first time seeing video of WTC 7 collapse in Denmark court, March 2015

page: 10
117
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 09:33 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

This:

'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe'
The Open Chemical Physics Journal, April 2009
Harrit, Niels H.; Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen

Links:
www.webcitation.org...
edit on 20-3-2015 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Macabe
There is no earthly explanation for the presence of the thermite particles found in the dust and debris of the WTC .


As there were no thermite particles found, what are you babbling about?




What exactly makes you so sure of that ? is it because the it is not in the NIST report ?.....and why is it you insist on belittling people who do not believe the fairy tale you are so desperately clinging to ?



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 09:42 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

You could fly a plane through the holes in that NIST report.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 09:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: hellobruce

This:
'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe'
The Open Chemical Physics Journal, April 2009


That is simply a pay to publish journal, with no peer review at all.

Bentham Open journals claim to employ peer review;[5] however, the fact that a fake paper generated with SCIgen had been accepted for publication, has cast doubt on this.[6][7][8] Furthermore, the publisher is known for spamming scientists with invitations to become a member of the editorial boards of its journals.[9] In 2009, the Bentham Open Science journal, The Open Chemical Physics Journal, published a study contending dust from the World Trade Center attacks contained "active nanothermite".[10] Following publication, the journal's editor-in-chief Marie-Paule Pileni resigned stating, "They have printed the article without my authorization… I have written to Bentham, that I withdraw myself from all activities with them".[11]

also
www.metabunk.org...

Also shown not to be thermite here
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also remember one of the people claiming thermite was found by the court to be a "idiot"!
edit on 20-3-2015 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 10:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Macabe
There is no earthly explanation for the presence of the thermite particles found in the dust and debris of the WTC collapse. This simple fact is actively being ignored in the OS'ers. WTC7 caught fire, we are told, by burning debris that blew in through the windows of the facade, yet this fire brought the building down in short order. Nonsense. OS'ers are living in a world of denial (or involved in keeping the cover alive).


I was doing research on an accelerated fire/explosion in which thermite may have been involved. Thermite is made of rust and aluminum oxides (and a couple of other materials, add sulphur and barium nitrate, you have thermate, add ammonium perchlorate and just run fast, especially if you use compressed bricks). Anyway, what was the building made of? Steel/iron and aluminum, of course with concrete and plastic, maybe some wood and glue in desks, polypropylene, ABS, copper, gold, platinum, bakelight, etc. Steel/Iron rusts (oxidizes), aluminum oxidizes. Once pulverized there are lots of materials (rust and al oxides) to produce an "indication" of thermite. Being close to the ocean, unprotected iron and aluminum will degrade at an accelerated rate in the salt air.

But this is the way it works, use an explosive that can be masked by the presence of existing materials. It can be argued "legally" as a false positive and gives to antagonist(s) plausible deniability. Or use something that is so radical as to seem impossible or at least highly improbable, the oxides still point in a different, maybe real, direction. In any of these actions one wants to maintain a high level of obfuscation and directed/controlled disinformation, such that the action can be only "hypothesized" from the physical evidence, there's never enough real proof. That's why there is always controlled opposition after the fact, to steer the real opposition. Counterintel 101 ;-)

Cheers - Dave
edit on 3/20.2015 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 10:50 PM
link   
"3 Buildings. 2 Planes. Do the math."

Saw that comment years ago and it always stuck with me. Whatever happened to the two big towers, no way building 7 came down from simple office fires.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 02:54 AM
link   
Honestly, I don't understand you truthers....

Why is it so hard to believe a bunch of radical terrorists can hijack multiple planes from multiple sites within US security?

Why is it so hard to believe they can successfully ransack the airline cabin and commandeer the plane? I mean it's not like they lock the cabin..........right?

Why is it so hard to believe they were capable of flying through US airspace and hit their intended targets? That # happens all the time right?

Why is it so hard to believe steel trusses can become compromised from the heat of jet fuel? Never mind it doesn't burn hot enough.....there were papers there.

Why is it so hard to believe WTC 7 could colapse from falling debris? I mean, I've personally seen what an Acme anvil does to Wiley Coyote.....completely flattens him.

You truthers.....I tell'ya.


(post by CallYourBluff removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 05:18 AM
link   
Two buildings designed to withstand the impact of planes fell at free fall speed and inadvertently brought down a third, 52 floor, steel structure due to vibration and debris. They were never able to find the huge, orange black boxes but they did however find bone fragments, multiple Qurans and two passports belonging to one of the suspects.No clear footage of the "plane" that hit the pentagon because the videos are still being withheld by the FBI ect ect...
Seems perfectly plausible and not shady at all.
I could sit for hours and point out the huge list of problems with the official story but it's a complete waste of time.
As I said before, the dim public are too easy to manipulate and too cowardly to accept that their government could carry out such an act. Just like here in Britain with the cover ups of the elite pedophile rings.Ignorance is bliss.
edit on 21-3-2015 by CallYourBluff because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 05:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: CallYourBluff
Two buildings designed to withstand the impact of planes fell at free fall speed


Neither WTC 1 or 2 fell at free fall speed, it is obvious you have never even watched the video of their collapse as if you had watched it you would see the debris falling off those buildings falling at free fall speed, the collapsing building was slower.


the videos are still being withheld by the FBI ect ect...


No they are not, they were all released, so another thing you have never investigated.


I could sit for hours and point out the huge list of problems with the official story


No you could not, as it is very obvious you do not know much about it at all!



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 06:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate

What he said.......LMAO



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 06:50 AM
link   
a reply to: ParasuvO

"How do YOU explain the building leaning, and WHY would they put a transit on it ?? ""

Because of the massive 20 story hole in the building. Because there was a visible bulge in the building. Because it gave every indication to the FDNY that it was going to fall.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 06:51 AM
link   
a reply to: ParasuvO

"random" suggests one here....one over there....one in the corner...by the end of the afternoon several floors were fully engulfed...so no, that is not random to me.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

And the mighty 8th Air Force could fly a thousand plane raid through the holes in the stories that come from the "truther" realm. Your point.......



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 08:46 AM
link   
a reply to: stosh64


I realize posting this is pointless because no amount of information will change any ones mind.
Everyone will see what they want regardless.

Some want to see the truth, some want to bury it so others won't see.

Don't trip. You do good.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: truthster013
SHHHHHHHH !!!
Now you've just told them how to get away with it.
You should be ashamed of yourself.

LOL



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: ParasuvO

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: ParasuvO

originally posted by: SanitySearcher
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

If anyone knows the work involved and equipment needed to set up a real demolition to fall so perfectly...in a building full of staff in various businesses only emptied at 9am the day of the WTC attack.......!!!!!

Well, no more needs said, because I don't want to expose the idiots.


Of course all that work was perfectly carried out by unknown caused fires and unknown extremely minute bits of damage to the building!!!!

Which idiots do you think would be exposed ?


Was the 20 floor long gash/hole in the side of the building one of the "extremely minute" bits of damage? Or did that come from something else?

And yes, that's a legit question (im the one who's getting into the WTC 7 stuff for the first time, be kind) and not a troll. That hole didn't seem minute to me, but was it caused by something other than falling debris? And is there definitive evidence of it, or just conjecture?


Ya, that would be a minute bit of damage, got any pics of this GASH in the building and all of the support structures that it damaged ??

That's right you do NOT, because no damage of the sort took PLACE, also, tell me how the fires got started that were nowhere near any of the damage zones, that burnt like they were being fanned by the devil himself ??


Ask a question. Make it clear that one is asking a genuine question due to lack of insight. Go so far as to put a disclaimer in there that it's not a troll question.

Get responded to like one is a certified moron, and spoken to like a backward child.

Thanks, I think I'll direct my questions to other, more helpful and less agitated members from now on


Welcome to the 9/11 forum.

This is considered enlightened debate here. I admire you doing your own research.

Just consider ALL the evidence, and come to your own conclusions.

I have no doubt 9/11 was used as propaganda by TPTB to further their global agenda.

However, my own conclusions are that in NY, 2 planes brought down 3 buildings due to damage and fire.

But I am an OS'er, and a brainwashed, manipulated sheeple. At least that is what I am told here.....



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 01:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: rebelv

A voice of reason. Thankyou. Be prepared to be told that is impossible


lol, I know.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: stosh64




But I am an OS'er, and a brainwashed, manipulated sheeple. At least that is what I am told here.....

Nothing wrong with that.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell us how the US government keeps the lid on all the worlds experts in the required fields.
They have structural engineers in Iran. Why are they quiet?
Does Putin like the US so much he hushes all his engineers?



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: hellobruce

I told him to be prepared...lol


lol, I'm not getting sucked into an argument about
where is the evidence that the moon exist or
Did George Washington ever tell a lie!

Rebel 5



new topics

top topics



 
117
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join