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.

 

Another Look at Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

page: 6
11
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

I'm no expert, but what you say would be true IF this were 1945. But of course it is not 1945, it is half a century later.

How much more sophisticated, do you suppose, is today's nuclear technology than it was in 1945?




posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 01:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: wmd_2008

I'm no expert, but what you say would be true IF this were 1945. But of course it is not 1945, it is half a century later.

How much more sophisticated, do you suppose, is today's nuclear technology than it was in 1945?



Look at your first three words, ALL nuclear weapons will give a bast wave, heat, radiation & an emp due to how the explosion is generated it's that simple!



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

At which nuclear R&D facility do you work?



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 10:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: wmd_2008

At which nuclear R&D facility do you work?



You don't need to work at something to learn how it works you should try it!



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 11:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander




How much more sophisticated, do you suppose, is today's nuclear technology than it was in 1945?

The whole idea of nukes is to create a huge blast wave.
Otherwise what's the point?



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 08:16 AM
link   
a reply to: samkent

That's 1945 thinking. There have been 50+ years of R&D done in nuclear technology. Do you suppose they've improved things at all?



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Trump and Jesie Ventura will spill the beans when Trump becomes president, all of the others believe the official story that most of us do not, .



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

YOU can't change how a nuclear explosion works!



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander




There have been 50+ years of R&D done in nuclear technology. Do you suppose they've improved things at all?

If you were to improve a nuclear bomb just what would you want to change ?



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 10:41 AM
link   
Why the hell are we talking about nukes!?!?!

This is BS. No wonder those that think that 9/11 was not properly investigated and covered up are labled crackpots.

Just saying, if I wanted to cover up a real crime, I might consider flooding any discussion on the matter with complete nonsense, that way if the topic ever made it mainstream it wouldnt take much to point at a discussion like this and make everyone laugh. Just saying.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 02:29 AM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

It's conspiracy theorists that flood it with nonsense




posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: MALBOSIA

It's conspiracy theorists that flood it with nonsense



So it seems. However you have just shown with your post that you refuse to differentiate one theorist from another, therefor any BS theory is the product of the entire cospiracy theorist population?



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Correct if it's a BS theory



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Correct if it's a BS theory


So if someone claims that nukes were used and there was no plane, only a hologram, that would be sufficient for you to discredit "conspiracy theorists" as a whole?



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA




So if someone claims that nukes were used and there was no plane, only a hologram, that would be sufficient for you to discredit "conspiracy theorists" as a whole?

The short answer is yes.
But the longer answer is that some people/groups come up with some 'way out there' explanation for one event in the 911 story.
But they don't have any explanation for the what, who, how for the bigger picture of their 'out there'.
We can use the nukes as an example.
There is no such thing as a silent nuke. We all know that.
But somehow through the magic of their imagination a nuke in the basement leaves no trace.
So to us who do not believe in a direct 911 conspiracy lump nukes into the nut job theories.
The same goes for hologram airplanes.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 01:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: MALBOSIA




So if someone claims that nukes were used and there was no plane, only a hologram, that would be sufficient for you to discredit "conspiracy theorists" as a whole?

The short answer is yes.
But the longer answer is that some people/groups come up with some 'way out there' explanation for one event in the 911 story.
But they don't have any explanation for the what, who, how for the bigger picture of their 'out there'.
We can use the nukes as an example.
There is no such thing as a silent nuke. We all know that.
But somehow through the magic of their imagination a nuke in the basement leaves no trace.
So to us who do not believe in a direct 911 conspiracy lump nukes into the nut job theories.
The same goes for hologram airplanes.


You said yes yo discrediting conspiracy theorists as a whole and then used a specific complete BS theory to explain why.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 06:48 PM
link   
I write a thread critically analysing the credibility of A&E for 9/11 truth and it turns into a frankly stupid debate about fantasy nukes.

Typical of a thread in this forum really.

If you want to have a silly conversation about every nukes on 9/11 then start a thread on it but please do not troll my thread with this garbage.

Seriously this derailment happens in every thread its getting annoying rather than derailing the thread how about you actually write you own thread about what ever nonsense you want and let this thread either get back on topic or just fizzle out.



posted on Mar, 20 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin


I noticed that as well.

I sure hope these crackpot Architects and Engineers are not designing buildings today.
They are all so bat**** crazy that none of the buildings would ever stand up against a summer storm.

(let alone a nuke blast)...sorry, I had to.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
2,340 Vs The World.


Hang on. You wrote before that "They have over 20,000 signatures on their petition from members of the general public and over 2300 form other professionals form the fields of architecture and engineering."

Wouldn't that be 23,000 vs the World?? just to start???

And when you mean "World" what do you mean exactly? Take a look of the link below

upload.wikimedia.org...


opinion polls conducted, THOSE WHO DID NOT BELIEVE IN THE OFFICIAL STORY
89% of Jordan
84% Egypt
77% Indonesia
68% China
67% Mexico
58% Palestinian People
58% Ukraine
49% South Korea
47% Taiwan
44% Italy
43% Russia
43% Great Britain
37% France
36% Germany
29% Nigeria
23% Kenya

This obviously varies country to country, the whole of the middle-east does not believe in the US Official narrative. So when you write things like 2,340 against the world you are writing fallacy.

This does not also include American military officers for 9/11 truth, pilots, firefighters, scholars, medical professionals etc etc.


Here is a very extensive website of MILITARY OFFICERS FOR 9/11 Truth: www.mo911truth.org...

I advise reading their statements. Because there are different parts of the story that they find to be not just fallacy but impossible


nice try though.

edit on 21 3 2016 by Debunkology because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 03:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Debunkology

Just shows you that around the world joe public doesn't understand construction or materials !!!

The only ENGINEERS of relevance in this are STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS not chemical or electrical or mechanical engineers or architects.

I visit and talk to structural engineers on a regular basis due to my job and NOT one that has commented on this thinks it was a demolition..



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join