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.

 

Just Wondering...

page: 15
29
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409





temperatures of only 1000 degrees F., which is a much lower temperature than recorded in the WTC buildings.



You're funny.




posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Your own post backs up what I said..... "Hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings" That was why NORAD responded the way it did to the Committee. And Mr. Kean is being a bit misleading with his statement. No General was going to sit there and admit they bungled the response that day and no one was really going to push the issue. That can of worms would have involved a few hundred Senators, Congressmen and the last three Presidents making horrible decisions that looked good at the time they were originally made.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



*Fact*, all four airplanes were never properly identified.


Let's take a look here.



American 11 Registration Information

American 77 Registration
Information


United 175 Registration Information

United 93 Registration Information


In other words, you are incorrect.



*Fact*, Many hi-ranking military officers and politicians are convinced 911 was an inside job and have made it known publicly.


That is false and I know that as a fact with my connection to the military.



Did experts on the scene think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition?

Whom should we ask to find out if WTC 7’s collapse resembled an explosive demolition? How about asking the explosive demolition experts who were on the scene on 9/11? Brent Blanchard of Protec:

"Several demolition teams had reached Ground Zero by 3:00 pm on 9/11, and these individuals witnessed the collapse of WTC 7 from within a few hundred feet of the event.

We have spoken with several who possess extensive experience in explosive demolition, and all reported seeing or hearing nothing to indicate an explosive detonation precipitating the collapse.

As one eyewitness told us, "We were all standing around helpless...we knew full well it was going to collapse. Everyone there knew. You gotta remember there was a lot of confusion and we didn't know if another plane was coming...but I never heard explosions like demo charges.

We knew with the damage to the building and how hot the fire was, that building was gonna go, so we just waited, and a little later it went."

www.implosion...... of 9-8-06 .pdf

sites.google...wtc7resembledac...

* Controlled Demolition Inc

* D.H. Griffin Companies

* Mazzocchi Wrecking

* Gateway Demolition

* Yannuzzi Demolition & Disposal


Towers Weakened by Planes; Brought Down by Fire

WASHINGTON, D.C., MAY 1, 2002
Analysis by a team of 25 of the nation's leading structural and fire protection engineers suggests that the World Trade Center Towers could have remained standing indefinitely if fire had not overwhelmed the weakened structures, according to a report presented today at a hearing of the House Science Committee. That finding is significant, said W. Gene Corley, Ph.D., team lead for the ASCE/FEMA Building Performance Study Team, because extreme events of this type, resulting in such substantial damage, are generally not considered in building design, and the fact that these structures were able to successfully withstand such damage is noteworthy.

Only a handful of architects and engineers question the NIST Report, but they have never come up with an alternative. Although at first blush it may seem impressive that these people don't believe the NIST Report, remember that there are123,000 members of ASCE(American Society of Civil Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report. There are also 80,000 members of AIA(American Institute of Architects) who do not question the NIST Report.

911-engineers.blogspot.com...


Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief ’s Assessment

Bearing walls and Open floor design

When the jet liners crashed into the towers based upon knowledge of the tower construction and high-rise firefighting experience the following happened: First the plane broke through the tubular steel-bearing wall. This started the building failure. Next the exploding, disintegrating, 185-ton jet plane slid across an open office floor area and severed many of the steel interior columns in the center core area. Plane parts also crashed through the plasterboard-enclosed stairways, cutting off the exits from the upper floors.

The jet collapsed the ceilings and scraped most of the spray-on fire retarding asbestos from the steel trusses. The steel truss floor supports probably started to fail quickly from the flames and the center steel supporting columns severed by plane parts heated by the flames began to buckle, sag, warp and fail. Then the top part of the tower crashed down on the lower portion of the structure. This pancake collapse triggered the entire cascading collapse of the 110-story structure.

vincentdunn.com...


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

Scientists investigating the Sept. 11, 2001 collapse of the twin towers said, "the World Trade Center towers showed telltale signs they were about to collapse several minutes before each crumbled to the ground." There would not be telltale signs if it was explosives (Controlled Demolition) that caused the buildings to collapse.

"In the case of the north tower, police chopper pilots reported seeing the warning signs - an inward bowing of the building facade - at least eight minutes before it collapsed at 10:29 a.m." New York Daily News reporter Paul Shin wrote in his June 19th, 2004 article 9/11 cops saw collapse coming.

"Federal engineering investigators studying the destruction of the World Trade Center's twin towers on Sept. 11 said New York Police Department aviation units reported an inward bowing of the buildings' columns in the minutes before they collapsed, a signal they were about to fall." - NYC Police Saw Sign of Tower Collapse, Study Says


In other words, Truthers do not have any real support for their claims.



*Fact*, before pentagon collapse, early photos show only a small entry hole.

*Fact*, Pentagon officials lied to the 911 commissionaires


Let's take another look at American 77 and the Pentagon.

American 77 and the Pentagon Investigaton



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 05:24 PM
link   
science.howstuffworks.com...

This is as simple an explanation as your gonna get. Take note of the steel thickness at higher floor levels and the part about fire proofing materials.

How do you live in a country with a government that's out to get you? If you really bought all the conspiracy I would have thought you'd be outta here by now.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs



You're funny.


Perhaps, but I am also correct. Tell us at what temperature does steel begin to weaken. In case you did not know that fire can weaken steel, let's take a look here.

Fire-distorted steel

Fire-distorted steel 2

Fire-distorted steel 3

Extreme heat can cause rails to buckle, like these in Melbourne, Australia



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant

If I thought the country was out to get me that would be paranoid.
And the fire proofing is a matter I thought I was allowing you to avoid.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 05:39 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

We're not talking here about steel actually and this isn't
the first time I've had to say it.

IRON

Nor are we talk'n about rails or " supports ' as you refer to W?E

See you don't even know what you're talk'n about.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs



cience.howstuffworks.com...

This is as simple an explanation as your gonna get. Take note of the steel thickness at higher floor levels and the part about fire proofing materials.

How do you live in a country with a government that's out to get you? If you really bought all the conspiracy I would have thought you'd be outta here by now.


I hope he pays attention where your link says:



The steel bent.
Even though the girders that comprised the twin towers wouldn't turn to molten steel in the jet fuel fire, they would certainly have weakened in the heat. In fact, one estimate says that they would have lost half of their strength at 1,100 degrees Fahrenheit (593.3 Celsius) [source: Popular Mechanics]. It's important to also note that other items would have caught on fire in the buildings in addition to the jet fuel, and could have contributed to higher burning temperatures.


Because one poster thought I was being funny when I said:



Skyeagle409

Other than my experience as a pilot, I am also an airframe structural technician and one of my many jobs as such is the softening (annealing] of aerospace metals, including steel, at temperatures of only 1000 degrees F., which is a much lower temperature than recorded in the WTC buildings.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

I have not changed my mind and never will. It is NOT a conspiracy of any kind. The official story is the TRUTH. I know many do not believe this, but I do.

Every bs conspiracy theory on this has been debunked over and over. They are all ridiculous.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs



We're not talking here about steel actually and this isn't
the first time I've had to say it.

IRON

Nor are we talk'n about rails or " supports ' as you refer to W?E

See you don't even know what you're talk'n about.


I know what I am talking about and I know that stored iron can generate temperatures high enough to start fires. Speaking of iron, let's take a look at Sherman's bow ties that were bent by hand after fire exposure..

Sherman's Bow Tie

Sherman's Bow Tie 2



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs



nd the fire proofing is a matter I thought I was allowing you to avoid.


Why would anyone want to apply fire protection to structural steel?



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant




I would have thought you'd be outta here by now.


More relevant than off topic.
You mean a place where the Gov. actually bans evil corporations
like monsanto. Instead of catering to them with MORE LYING at the
expense of it's peoples lives, health and safety? Pull your
head out and look around..... No.. without the rose colored glasses!



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 06:10 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




Why would anyone want to apply fire protection to structural steel?



Wait for it..... I know this one..... rust.

It may be fire retardant but it's actually applied more so to prevent rust.

And you don't know what you're talk'n about.
edit on Rpm72515v14201500000045 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 06:25 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant

And I understand that as metal heats, it becomes malleable. And there is such a thing as metal fatigue? I am not an expert, but would love it if someone built a computer mdel with all the sciency details taken into account.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: skyeagle409




Why would anyone want to apply fire protection to structural steel?



Wait for it..... I know this one..... rust.

It may be fire retardant but it's actually applied more so to prevent rust.

And you don't know what you're talk'n about.

The rust protection was a sprayed on "scale" completely separate from the fire resistance. YOUR speaking of things you know not



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 06:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: AshFan
a reply to: In4ormant

And I understand that as metal heats, it becomes malleable. And there is such a thing as metal fatigue? I am not an expert, but would love it if someone built a computer mdel with all the sciency details taken into account.


They did, its in both engineering reports



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant




YOUR speaking of things you know not



Are you gonna continue with making claims that amount to
about as much as the lies you choose to believe?

And your grammar is fading.
edit on Rpm72515v33201500000009 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 06:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: skyeagle409




Why would anyone want to apply fire protection to structural steel?



Wait for it..... I know this one..... rust.

It may be fire retardant but it's actually applied more so to prevent rust.

And you don't know what you're talk'n about.


Not to mention the fire protection history on that building was so bad that there were lawsuits over it.
www.nytimes.com...

There's a great line in there where the experts say it was probably moot anyway because of all the massive structural damage.

Refute away



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: In4ormant




YOUR speaking of things you know not



Are you gonna continue with making claims that amount to
about as much as the lies you choose to believe?

And your grammar is fading.


I'm a good spellerer and maker of words inside sentences and things" period.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant

YOUR use of that site. Is like me saying someone's
try'n to kill you, after several shots just missing your
ass. But you have to go and ask them to make sure.


There isn't to much you're gonna tell me about what i've
been work'n around everyday for more than twenty years
amigo. You're really not.
edit on Rpm72515v49201500000016 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join