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.

 

World Trade Center 7 Explosion and Controlled Collaspe Caught on Tape.

page: 29
135
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg

This is a still of the same core. To me, this looks a lot like a concrete core.

But even more imporant is the way it simply turns into dust. I would have expected it to remain standing, but no.

Alien ray.





posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
tell me what it is you see


I see the same thing I see in this photo:





Core columns covered with spray on fire proofing. It's the fireproofing that turned to dust. Fire proofing easily turns to dust, no space rays needed.

PS: I love the way you claim that there was not enough FORCE to pulverise the buildings, and to make up for this lack of FORCE you add a alien space ray which adds....HEAT....not FORCE



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
tell me what it is you see




PS: I love the way you claim that there was not enough FORCE to pulverise the buildings, and to make up for this lack of FORCE you add a alien space ray which adds....HEAT....not FORCE


each floor was what? 14 feet is all that separated each floor from one to the other?

go pick up a brick and drop it 14 feet onto a concrete slab below. Don't be an idiot where you could hurt someone or their property...
your low-strength concrete brick will not atomize and become airborne as a result of only falling 14 feet, throw it your hardest, it will crumble surely, but to dustify that brick in a 14 foot free-fall?

you need the same physics that was used to dustify high-strength concrete on 9-11.
edit on (7/5/1515 by loveguy because: Your reason for the edit (must be filled out):



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: waypastvne

No, the alien ray does not add HEAT. It reduces the bonds between molecules.

And just a question: how thick is that fireresisting stuff you're talking about sprayed on? Because if that's what we see, it must be quite a layer - and if that indeed is what we see, it's even more unimaginable how these 'hot fires' (those oxygen starved ones, the ones that Edna waved from, remembe) could damage the structure at all..



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: loveguy
each floor was what? 14 feet is all that separated each floor from one to the other? go pick up a brick [...] it will crumble surely, but to dustify that brick in a 14 foot free-fall?


The (lightweight) concrete of the floors between core and perimeter were 4 inches thick (roughly 10 cm). Each (non-core) floor weighted ~430 tonnes. The OS suggest that a slab of 430.000 Kg pounded on the slab below, hence pulling on the core (presumedly pulling it to pieces) by means of the bolts with which it was connected to the core. Then, almost immediately thereafter (this is suggested by the near free fall speed of the collapse), the bolts were breaking. The next 430.000 Kg slab joined the first one, and now 860.000 kg hit the floor below - you get the picture. So, we're talking about huge quantities of energy here, and maybe that is sufficient to pulverise the concrete and send it outwards AND pull the massive, interconnected core apart AND pull the outside perimeter apart.

What the OS suggests is that the building was simply not build to resist downward forces equivalent to a floor falling down on the next. However, the model I just gave is flawed: firstly the first floor probably did not collapse all at once (that would be very strange), then the 430 tonnes hit a very large floorspace, so the force per m2 is much more managable, then the floors weren't connected to the core directly, but they rested on rubber pads that were connected to the core.



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: loveguy

Don't be an idiot.


Take a chunk of spray on fire proofing and drop it, see what happens.

The only concrete in the buildings were in the floors. The concrete was covered on one side by sheet metal and on the other side by carpet or vinyl. Most of the concrete dust would be contained.

However the underside of the floor was covered with 3/4" of spray on fire proofing.



As the floors collapsed the fireproofing under the floor be knocked off on impact, crumble to dust, and carried outside by the escaping air. The majority of the dust you see is fire proofing.

Before the collapse, almost all of the steel was covered with fire proofing.
After the collapse almost none of the steel was covered with fire proofing.

A smart person should be able to figure out for themselves where all the dust came from.



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
the ones that Edna waved from, remembe.



This is Edna. She didn't stand there very long.




posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
it's even more unimaginable how these 'hot fires' could damage the structure at all..


The fire proofing was knocked off during aircraft impact.

Is there any evidence of this ?

Yes lots of evidence.

For instance in the aircraft impact videos you see a large cloud of dust (below red arrows) from the impact site drifting down towards the ground. We know this is not smoke because smoke doesn't just fall to the ground and lay there.




In this video filmed before either tower collapsed, at 2:44 you will see a thick layer of dust on the ground. This is mostly fire proofing.






posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 05:02 PM
link   
So why exactly did building 7 have to come down? I know there were offices pertaining to emergency management for the city, or whatever it is, and the idea is that it was sort of a base of operations.

But if you're looking to be discrete, isn't there some way to not have had to take the building down? Would think you'd have a better outcome for whatever their goals were by keeping it up, find a different solution.


edit on 5-7-2015 by ghaleon12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4

originally posted by: scottyirnbru "How many people were involved in the planning and execution?" The number needs to be huge.


2 words. manhattan project. huge secrets can and have been kept


They were not kept, the Russians knew exactly what they were doing there - ever heard of Morris Cohen, Klaus Fuchs, Harry Gold, David Greenglass, Theodore Hall, George Koval, Irving Lerner, Allan Nunn May, Ethel and Julius Rosenberg?



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4

originally posted by: scottyirnbru "How many people were involved in the planning and execution?" The number needs to be huge.


2 words. manhattan project. huge secrets can and have been kept


They were not kept, the Russians knew exactly what they were doing there - ever heard of Morris Cohen, Klaus Fuchs, Harry Gold, David Greenglass, Theodore Hall, George Koval, Irving Lerner, Allan Nunn May, Ethel and Julius Rosenberg?


And plenty of other governments knew exactly what was going on 9/11.

This post isn't about 1 or 2.. but... how could 10 to 20 floors cause enough force to demolish 90+. It can't. It's simple physics. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Even if you want to believe the "pancake theory" it doesn't work. It has been proven by people much smarter than me that if the buildings collapsed via "pancake", the entire thing would have taken well over 90 seconds. Not 11. Now of course someone will say "oh but there was so much debris pulling down the structure". Okay.. and how much of it was exploded OUTWARD during the collapse? A bunch. So now you have structure, using energy to eject extremely heavy steel beams. And you have the energy that is supposedly strong enough to collapse all the remaining floors, destroy every truss, every core column, pop EVERY rivet at almost the exact same time in order to facilitate a 10-11 second collapse. No. I'm sorry. I know I'm no physicist, but even I can understand that it doesn't work like that.



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: ghaleon12
So why exactly did building 7 have to come down? I know there were offices pertaining to emergency management for the city, or whatever it is, and the idea is that it was sort of a base of operations.

But if you're looking to be discrete, isn't there some way to not have had to take the building down? Would think you'd have a better outcome for whatever their goals were by keeping it up, find a different solution.



What better cover than a terrorist attack? Wipe out the whole building with everything in it, then as fast as you can, clean it up, ship off all the steel and call it a day. That's what happened with #7.



originally posted by: waypastvne

In this video filmed before either tower collapsed, at 2:44 you will see a thick layer of dust on the ground. This is mostly fire proofing.



There wasn't enough fireproofing to cause that much dust. WTC has notorious problems with the fireproofing. Most of it was supposed to be removed because it contained asbestos. A lot of it was removed during construction from wind driven rain.



edit on 5-7-2015 by DerekJR321 because: added information



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: DerekJR321




There wasn't enough fireproofing to cause that much dust. WTC has notorious problems with the fireproofing. Most of it was supposed to be removed because it contained asbestos. A lot of it was removed during construction from wind driven rain.


Asbestos was only lower (blow 37 th floor) of North Rower (WTC 1) - over the years much of it had been removed
when floor renovated, rest was encapsulated with impermeable coating to prevent flaking

As said had problems with fireproofing sticking to steel - would flake off if steel dirty/rusty or if painted

Movement of building in wind could cause fireproofing to flake off, even the vibration of air through the HVAC
system could cause fireproofing to flake off



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 07:38 PM
link   
a reply to: DerekJR321




This post isn't about 1 or 2.. but... how could 10 to 20 floors cause enough force to demolish 90+.


WRONG......

Its called dynamic vs static load - as the support columns failed the top section fell under force of gravity

It picked up lot of kinetic energy - enough to crush the floors under it just like a pile driver

Its like resting a bowling ball on foot (static load) Now pick it up 3 or 4 feet and drop it on your foot (dynamic load)

Note the difference ........



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 08:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: DerekJR321




This post isn't about 1 or 2.. but... how could 10 to 20 floors cause enough force to demolish 90+.


WRONG......

Its called dynamic vs static load - as the support columns failed the top section fell under force of gravity

It picked up lot of kinetic energy - enough to crush the floors under it just like a pile driver

Its like resting a bowling ball on foot (static load) Now pick it up 3 or 4 feet and drop it on your foot (dynamic load)

Note the difference ........



WRONG.. the energy would have dissipated. 10 floors can not crush 90. Conservation of energy. Also.. the ejected beams fell at the same speed as the towers. This can't happen by crushing the floors below. Unless they were crushed instantaneously. Which is impossible without.... EXPLOSIVES. Towers 1, 2 and 7 could not have collapsed at near free fall speed by opposing force. It simply goes against physics.



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 08:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: DerekJR321
WRONG.. the energy would have dissipated. 10 floors can not crush 90.


10 floors crush the floor underneath, then 11 floors crush the one underneath, then 12 floors crush the one underneath, then 13 crush the one underneath etc. etc.


Also.. the ejected beams fell at the same speed as the towers.


Wrong again, just watching a video it is clear the debris falling off the buildings is falling faster than the building collapse.


Towers 1, 2 and 7 could not have collapsed at near free fall speed


Still wrong, tower 1 and 2 did not fall near free fall speed - just watching a video that is clear to see!

As we see, "truther" physics is apparently different to real world physics!



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 11:38 PM
link   
Conspiracy believers keep forgetting that all the floors were identical in construction and load bearing abilities.
If floor 68 could not support the debris neither could 67.

This is one of the specific reasons no new sky scrapers will ever be built using tube in tube design.



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 12:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: ghaleon12
So why exactly did building 7 have to come down? I know there were offices pertaining to emergency management for the city, or whatever it is, and the idea is that it was sort of a base of operations.

But if you're looking to be discrete, isn't there some way to not have had to take the building down? Would think you'd have a better outcome for whatever their goals were by keeping it up, find a different solution.



Due to the collapse of the towers there were no firefighters to contain the fires let alone no water so they knew if they didn't pull building 7 it would of became a towering inferno. That's why the owner decided to pull it



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 12:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
Conspiracy believers keep forgetting that all the floors were identical in construction and load bearing abilities.
If floor 68 could not support the debris neither could 67.

This is one of the specific reasons no new sky scrapers will ever be built using tube in tube design.


Column 18 is the one that failed in WTC 7 and it suffered no damage from fire or collapse of the tower.



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 12:19 AM
link   
dble post

edit on 6-7-2015 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
135
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join