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: 60
135
<< 57  58  59    61  62  63 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion



For your consideration: photographic evidence is not exactly what we were talking about here, it never was.


Only in your fantasy world because the photos have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that fire will weaken steel to the point where it is no longer feasible as a structural member.


Show me the hardness evaluation of this steel,...


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.



You don't get it, do you?


The fact that you asked for an hardness evaluation on structure steel that clearly show signs that it was annealed by fire, simply proves that it is you, who didn't get it. In other words, you posted in error.



Fire is able to weaken steel you say? Nah.


Let's take a look and you will notice in the video that not only does the fire weaken and distort the steel beam, it makes a mockery of your claim that fire cannot weaken steel.





Really? Nobody knew it could, this is mind-blowing... oh my gosh... you are going to invent the wheel next, are you not?


Let's take a look at what a typical fire can do to steel.

Photo of Twisted Rail Heated by Wood Fire, Bent by Hand

Now, watch this video and notice that a steel rail is bent by hand after lying on a wood fire.



As you can plainly see, a steel rail was bent by hand after heating over a wood fire.



Pictures, opinions and some discrediting for witnesses who contradict your story?


The people discrediting my claim are those who have claimed that nukes and space beam weapons demolished the WTC buildings and that no aircraft struck the WTC buildings and the Pentagon because missiles were used.

What better way to discredit truthers than to let them do it themselves.
edit on 9-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander



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.


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.



WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory

Indications of the Imminent Collapse of the World Trade Center Buildings Disprove Explosives Theory

www.representativepress.org...

www.skyscrapersafety.org...

www.bloomberg.com...


What better way to discredit truthers than to let them do it themselves.
edit on 9-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




As you can plainly see, a steel rail was bent by hand after heating over a wood fire.

Ahhh General Sherman was in on it too!
They have been planning 911 for over 100 years!



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent

The false flag operation is now blown!

General Sherman used the 9/11 attack to cover-his role in the plot to destroy railroad tracks as an excuse to raise transportation fees.

Personally speaking, I think railroad track bow ties look cool on a tuxedo.
edit on 9-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent

There are enough indicators on ATS alone to prove foulplay. Circumstantial evidence is evidence as well and it's sheer abundance should be able to raise an eyebrow here and there.

But the really funny thing is, that you just compared the "conspiracy-side" with an official investigation.

Why should I be able to prove anything, just because Nist failed in doing so? It was never my job in the first place, was it? Where and when did I state to have a conclusive theory for the things that happened that day? But yes, I certainly would expect any official investigation to meet decent standarts. Let's talk about cover-ups then, they wouldn't meet scientific demands either I guess. Would they?



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




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.


If that would've been the case, why should Nist examine the microstructure of said steel in the fist place? Context is your friend, pictures of core-columns are obviously not very usefull in this constellation. Guess why. Were there any left as Nist started this investigational cover-up? No? They couldn't perform any hardness evaluation on core-columns since that steel was already gone? How fishy is that?

Your first 2 links showed said core-columns if I'm not mistaken, the third one is a 404. Anything else? You should listen to Salander at least if you won't listen to me.

edit on 9-9-2015 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-9-2015 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-9-2015 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




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.


Yeah, more disinfo!



You make a little PubOps very happy as I was able to refute your claim before reading it. How awesome is that? Hey big fella, how do you guys examine evidence if it's non-existent by now? 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.

No! Yes. Duh!
edit on 9-9-2015 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion



But the really funny thing is, that you just compared the "conspiracy-side" with an official investigation.


The funny thing is, after 14 years since 9/11, the official story remains, whereas, over that same period of time, the Truth Movement has been made a laughing stock in the eyes of the Internet from disinformation that has been planted in order to discredit the Truth Movement.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion



If that would've been the case, why should Nist examine the microstructure of said steel in the fist place?


It was determined the structural steel met specifications.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion



eah, more disinfo!


Facts, all facts, so let's take a look where some of the truther reference came from.



Gordon Duff Confesses to Posting 40% False Information

"If I Didn't Write False Information I Wouldn't be Alive..."

www.forbiddenknowledge.tv...






No real mystery as to how the Truth Movement has made a mockery of itself over the years.
edit on 9-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion



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?

Why did I post a 1993 photo of the steel structure of WTC 1 sitting within a huge bomb crater? Why did WTC 1 remain standing after that huge bomb was detonated? Did we bomb Iraq immediately after the WTC 1 bomber fled to Iraq? No.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 05:22 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

Steel at WTC was A36

A36 steel consists of 0.29 percent carbon, 0.9 percent manganese, 0.04 percent phosphorus, 0.05 percent sulfur, and 0.35 percent silicon, with iron comprising the remaining majority. Material Grades defines A36 steel as having an applicable thickness between 10 and 60 millimeters. KNOW MORE



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 05:39 PM
link   


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?


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.



And here is another one for ya..


edit on 9-9-2015 by wildb because: added video



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




that no demo explosive hardware evidence was ever found in the rubble of the WTC buildings


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. And don't forget the witnesses for various explosions you keep ignoring constantly. We would actually need a new investigation if that's not enough for you. I say why not?



It was determined the structural steel met specifications.


In the Nist-report? Sort of, yes. It was determined that the evaluated steel was not weakened due to fire. And they might have been able to find residues from explosives if they could've examined the core-columns, I'm pretty sure about that.

Btw, do you have any numbers on how many people believe the OS now and how many believed that story in 2001? Just curious. I would put my money on the assumption, that the numbers of sceptics are rising pretty fast. Do you have any idea why and how that could happen, if 'your' version actually holds some water?

Poll from 2013:


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

rethink911.org...



“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.”

rethink911.org...

Not that you should automatically go with the mainstream or public opinion (pun intended), take it as a hint.


edit on 9-9-2015 by PublicOpinion because: fishy old study linky



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Anyone on the fence about 911 should see this Doc... you too Sky guy..





posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

I saw the first video and it is evident that the guy wants to get rich real quick. I have yet to see much of the second video, but I did see a portion of it and it is evident that much of what I saw had been debunked years ago, such as pools of molten iron that never was.

How about visiting this site.



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.

extruther.blogspot.com...



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb



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 do have the answers, especially hearing bomb and shell explosions for a year in Vietnam, which is how I know that there are no demo explosions as WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 collapsed.

As a pilot since 1969, I caught the founder of 'Pilots for 9/11 Truth' posting disinformation and lies on his website and i challenged him in another forum, where he slammed me with more disinformation, and I called him on it, and afterward, he left the room.

As a aircraft structural technician since 1967, I can relate my knowledge to the structures of WTC 1, WTC 2 and WTC 7. I knew that it would have been impossible to plant explosives properly in order to bring down the WTC buildings, but because truthers are not knowledgeable enough to know the way its done in the real world of explosive implosions, they have concoct unfounded conspiracy theories based solely on total ignorance and not on facts nor evidence.

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.

To sum it up, it is no mystery as to why the Truth Movement is the focus of ridicule and scorn on the Internet.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion



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.


It shouldn't be a mystery considering that anyone can create spheres using a lighter and steel wool, or simply by placing a steel beam in a barrel and pack the barrel with wood and then, light the fire.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 07:56 PM
link   


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.


You are some piece of work, you do know the cab driver admitted he was used to stage the light poles at the pentagon, do you even know his name?

As for the molten metal being debunked are these people making this up for fun after what they just went through..

EDIT to add, your one of these people who know all but will not look at the evidence, real nice, you are supporting the people who did this, the ones who killed 3000 for their gain, how do you sleep at night? and what ya getting paid for this...





edit on 9-9-2015 by wildb because: edit to add



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 08:07 PM
link   


especially to the damaged light poles.


Yeah right, A plane hit a light pole in Dallas I think, you know what happened, the wing broke open and caught fire and it crashed, yet on 911 it hit five and just kept going?

If your so smart about 911 tell me about the gold, and marsh and mclennan. Tell me what they had to do with 911, just to name two..
edit on 9-9-2015 by wildb because: spelling



new topics

top topics



 
135
<< 57  58  59    61  62  63 >>

log in

join