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: 6
29
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 08:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: AshFan
Does a 735,000 pound hunk of metal traveling at 500 MPH that explodes and then burns at 1500 degrees bend an I beam? I mean, I know that steel melts at 5150, but will it bend, or become flexible in these conditions? We need to conduct an experiment to find out.


I would guess it tore up a whole lot of what was supporting that building.




posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant




I can't imagine what it must be like to live in fear under the umbrella of an oppressive government bent on killing/enslaving me. What is that like?


I have no idea




I would guess it tore up a whole lot of what was supporting that building.


Congradulations on your conformity.
Proceed to the line under the V for your chip.
edit on Rpm72415v22201500000041 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 08:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: In4ormant




I can't imagine what it must be like to live in fear under the umbrella of an oppressive government bent on killing/enslaving me. What is that like?


I have no idea


That's the picture painted



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Double post

Stupid wine
edit on 24-7-2015 by In4ormant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 08:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: In4ormant




Is it on the same page as the engineering specs for the titanic?


They did not have the materials for the Titanic that were used in the towers' construction. I know you're just being sarcastic but actually, that is quite relevant. The Titanic would likely not have gone down if it had been constructed with better materials than the cheaply manufactured wrought-iron and steel that they used. The materials were extremely thin and brittle, unlike steel buildings erected in the 70's, when the towers were built.


The steel plates were about an inch thick pretty much the norm, but they were subject to cold brittle fracture something not properly understood then, because of impurities in the steel, but still the standard of the day. The Wrought iron rivets though, or some of them were below par, and there were design flaws as well. Brittleness seems to be the key rather than thinness.



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 08:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: In4ormant




Is it on the same page as the engineering specs for the titanic?


They did not have the materials for the Titanic that were used in the towers' construction. I know you're just being sarcastic but actually, that is quite relevant. The Titanic would likely not have gone down if it had been constructed with better materials than the cheaply manufactured wrought-iron and steel that they used. The materials were extremely thin and brittle, unlike steel buildings erected in the 70's, when the towers were built.


The steel plates were about an inch thick pretty much the norm, but they were subject to cold brittle fracture something not properly understood then, because of impurities in the steel, but still the standard of the day. The Wrought iron rivets though, or some of them were below par, and there were design flaws as well. Brittleness seems to be the key rather than thinness.


Engineers said unsinkable. Later found to be not true. Engineers said plane proof. Later found to be not true. I tried to make a simple correlation but as always there's an answer for everything.



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant




That's the picture painted


Indeed a kodak moment in context.
Or was that supposed to be an attack?



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 08:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: In4ormant




That's the picture painted


Indeed a kodak moment in context.
Or was that supposed to be an attack?


If you look at any of my post histories you would know I don't personally attack anyone. I'm perfectly fine with the 2 of us having opposing views. I may go after your view but not you.



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: AshFan
Does a 735,000 pound hunk of metal traveling at 500 MPH that explodes and then burns at 1500 degrees bend an I beam? I mean, I know that steel melts at 5150, but will it bend, or become flexible in these conditions? We need to conduct an experiment to find out.
That hunk of metal was aircraft aluminum vs hi-strength steel - the towers used A36, which is common structural steel with a yield strength exceeding 36ksi. They also used A242 which exceeds 100ksi. The higher strength steel, the A242 was used on the upper floors as it required less mass (thinner sections with less weight), resulting in lighter loads, enabling more floors to be built. The planes cut through the steel like butter. Does that seem reasonable to you? Ever see a bug hit a windshield? How about a bird hit a window?



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 09:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: AshFan
Does a 735,000 pound hunk of metal traveling at 500 MPH that explodes and then burns at 1500 degrees bend an I beam? I mean, I know that steel melts at 5150, but will it bend, or become flexible in these conditions? We need to conduct an experiment to find out.
That hunk of metal was aircraft aluminum vs hi-strength steel - the towers used A36, which is common structural steel with a yield strength exceeding 36ksi. They also used A242 which exceeds 100ksi. The higher strength steel, the A242 was used on the upper floors as it required less mass (thinner sections with less weight), resulting in lighter loads, enabling more floors to be built. The planes cut through the steel like butter. Does that seem reasonable to you? Ever see a bug hit a windshield? How about a bird hit a window?


The beams are under load. Not hard to fathom how the speed and weight of a commercial airliner might alter their shape or weaken them. They aren't indestructible.
edit on 24-7-2015 by In4ormant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant

Not sure why people seem to think an aluminum, or mostly aluminum, aircraft travelling at several hundred miles per hour is going to splatter like a bug against a windshield.

Add to that, the aircraft in question weighs many tonnes. ...and voila, you've got major structural damage, soon to be compounded by fire.



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

Just wondering we advance!

Been there, done that a lot. It's me - the silly Public Opinion on 9/11! Yes, I fell for bad conspiracy-theories and yes indeed... I did believe some Nist lies at the core of the matter after the first stage of the ladder. At least untill I experienced some changes in the papers first hand and saw one of my alltime favorits, a fire-fighting exercise in WTC 7 with wide open fire-doors and sprinklers in maintainance mode, vanishing from the report like steel cores in a free fall. Even Giant Killer would have been proud of having kept that nasty fact successfully contained in a darnd training-zone as well.

Anyway... forget all opinions regarding this topic, lets mention something else. Did anybody notice the culture of differentiated thinking going down the drain as well? People just tend to demand increasingly more frequent simple solutions for very complex matters. The big mind# came along with tabus, social stigmata or just name-calling at best and hence anything from cognitive dissonance to plain ignorance became part of our daily life, where you have to hush-hush-talk with lowered voice and only tell decent, trusted folks what you really think. But it's not just the chatter regarding bosses or teachers anymore, now it's politics as well and doublethink all over the place. The formerly free press retarded to some Propaganda center for the daily spin and many good papers got lost in transition to Big Media as well, now it's mostly all digitalised copy-paste crap with some rare exceptions to prove my point. I know... scissors were already in some heads before. But now, more than one decade later, I can really see how this effect multiplied like a growing cancer-cell. There is no market for differentiated thinking anymore, that got lost in transition to this Brave New Reality as well. Get rich or die trying, be a friggin celeb and stop reading 9/11 threads!



Obey I don't. And you probably don't either if you read this, so take that as a big heads up. Time to take back our legacy and to just give a friggin frick! Differentiated thinking is finally a hell of a concept we should all be able to agree upon, innit? Even opinions got sometimes lost in that transition as well, no big thing at all.

"Only wondering we advance" (Subcommandante Marcos)





posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 10:32 PM
link   
There's just so many experts on the subject!
edit on 24-7-2015 by sophie87 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

Nobody cares about disinfo agents or about the official story?
Well, I think people really do care, especially the families of all the victims.
Sorry to double post
edit on 24-7-2015 by sophie87 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 10:42 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant

Steel columns recovered from WTC

911research.wtc7.net...



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 10:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: In4ormant

Steel columns recovered from WTC

911research.wtc7.net...



Superman must have bent them. They are indestructible by any earthly means I've been led to believe.



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 10:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Bilk22

Aluminium airplane versus steel ship 1945

en.wikipedia.org...:Hinsdale_APA-120_-_kamikaze.jpg

So tell us again how an aluminium airplane cant penetrate a steel ship

Aluminium airplane versus masonry building 1945

en.wikipedia.org...:Bomber_Crashed_into_Empire_State_Building_1945.jpg

Tell us again how and why an aluminium airplane cant penetrate a solid masonry building



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 11:11 PM
link   



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: sophie87


Yes really



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 11:24 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant

Really?
edit on 24-7-2015 by sophie87 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join