It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
For your consideration: photographic evidence is not exactly what we were talking about here, it never was.
Show me the hardness evaluation of this steel,...
You don't get it, do you?
Fire is able to weaken steel you say? Nah.
Really? Nobody knew it could, this is mind-blowing... oh my gosh... you are going to invent the wheel next, are you not?
Pictures, opinions and some discrediting for witnesses who contradict your story?
You don't get it. As PO has alluded to, your pictures and stuff are not evidence of anything, not proof of anything except perhaps your utter lack of understanding of what happened that day.
WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory
Indications of the Imminent Collapse of the World Trade Center Buildings Disprove Explosives Theory
It is apparent that you have no clue as to what you are talking about because in this case, the hardness evaluation is moot by the very fact the photos proved that the structural members were annealed!! by fire.
Of course the pictures are proof. What we don't have evidence for is evidence of explosives and thermite and the reason is, those claims are the products of fabrications.
But the really funny thing is, that you just compared the "conspiracy-side" with an official investigation.
eah, more disinfo!
Gordon Duff Confesses to Posting 40% False Information
"If I Didn't Write False Information I Wouldn't be Alive..."
You won't look into the concentrations and composition of the dust being found either, seems like I'm unable to prove anything if you won't listen nor educate yourself.
I have, so why do you think I have said that no explosions are heard as WTC 1, WTc 2, and WTC 7 collapsed and that no demo explosive hardware evidence was ever found in the rubble of the WTC buildings?
that no demo explosive hardware evidence was ever found in the rubble of the WTC buildings
It was determined the structural steel met specifications.
40% I am completely satisfied with the government’s account
38% I have some doubts as to whether the government’s account fully explains everything
10% I do not believe the government’s account at all
12% I don’t know/ Not sure
“Even the government’s own computer model disproves its theory. It looks nothing like the actual collapse,” said Tony Szamboti, a mechanical engineer from the Philadelphia area. “Not only that, they refuse to release the data that would allow us to verify their model. In the world of science, this is as bad as it gets. I’m glad most people can look at the collapse and see the obvious.”
Confessions of an Ex-Truther
The ranting and raving of someone who wasted a year of his life being sucked into the lies of the 9/11 Truth Movement.
Because they did not look for it. Do you get paid to post this stuff? You seem to have all the answers but really know nothing.
I guess 6% iron in the dust, 14% metal-wool and various other rather fishy spheres are enough to have both of my eyebrows raised.
My Wing Commander was in the Pentagon when American 77 struck, so it was no problem debunking truther claims that the Pentagon was struck by a missile. In addition, I have identified B-757 wreckage inside and outside the Pentagon, which had nothing to do with a missile. BTW, a cruise missile could not have caused that kind of damage at the Pentagon, especially to the damaged light poles.
especially to the damaged light poles.