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.

 

WTC-7 Mysteries FINALLY Solved.

page: 11
160
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:02 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

Again you did not read my above post

Steven Jones Tells 9/11 "Debunkers" to Put up or Shut up!

”What you need to know about "Peer-review"


That just destroyed your fairy-tail conspiracy theory.

And where is your peer review science debunking Jones paper, that's right you don't have one.

So all you can do is depend on pseudo debunking websites.




posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



So many debunkers desperate that they have to create lies to squash credible science. None of this surprises me I have already seen it on this thread.


I disagree because I have caught truthers posting disinformation. For an example, they claimed that molten steel was found in the ground zero rubble and that was their thermite evidence, which flies in the face of scientific reality because thermite burns only for a short period of time and does burn for days and weeks.

If they knew anything about science, they would have understood why stored iron is known to generate temperatures high enough to start fires.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:09 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


Steven Jones was responsible for his own demise. Even his colleagues at BYU dismissed him outright. We can take a further look at Steven Jones who has been instrumental in making the Truth Movement a laughing stock.


You are so desperate that I am LOL

You have nothing to support your OS climes but to attack what science has proven. In fact all you are doing to forming your own "conspiracy theory" and hoping you can get the casual reader to believe your BS



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



And where is your peer review science debunking Jones paper, that's right you don't have one.


Apparently, you didn't bother to read one of my previous post where the reputation of Steven Jones was trashed by his own colleages and others.



Brigham Young University doesn't want anything to do with the paper

The BYU physics department has also issued a statement: "The university is aware that Professor Steven Jones' hypotheses and interpretations of evidence regarding the collapse of World Trade Center buildings are being questioned by a number of scholars and practitioners, including many of BYU's own faculty members.

Professor Jones' department and college administrators are not convinced that his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review." The College of Engineering and Technology department has also added, "The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones."



edit on 29-7-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
And where is your peer review science debunking Jones paper


Hold on, you are the one making the silly claim, it is up to you to back that claim up - which you are unable to do!



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:12 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


I disagree because I have caught truthers posting disinformation. For an example, they claimed that molten steel was found in the ground zero rubble and that was their thermite evidence, which flies in the face of scientific reality because thermite burns only for a short period of time and does burn for days and weeks.


I am not that Truther so do not lump me with others that may have been wrong. Again you are attacking Truthers

And what did create the molten steel?



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:17 AM
link   
Truthers seem very confused, was it silent explosives, or alien beam weapons, or nanoo thermite that was used to bring down the WTC buildings? Not to mention pod carrying planes, mini nuclear weapons, missile firing planes, holographic planes etc. etc.

They really should make one silly conspiracy theory up and stick to it!



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
And what did create the molten steel?


What molten steel? There is no evidence of molten steel....



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:17 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce


Hold on, you are the one making the silly claim, it is up to you to back that claim up - which you are unable to do!


I did back up my argument, I can't help it if you stick your fingers in your ears and eyes tightly close and chose not to read the science that was put before you.

You completely ignored my post.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



And what did create the molten steel?


Let's take a look at this photo where it was claimed was proof of thermite reaction, which they said, brought down the WTC buildings.

Truther evidence that thermite brought down the WTC buildings

More truther evidence of thermite

Now, for the rest of the story as to what caused that molten steel.

Photo 1

Photo 2

Those cuts were produced by high temp wands and torches.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:22 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce


What molten steel? There is no evidence of molten steel....


Are you saying that all the NYC Firemen lied that saw the molten steel that was running like a river under the WTC, and was melting their boots. Because I do remember that Mainstream media reporting this?

I understand it doesn't fit the OS narrative.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:25 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce


Truthers seem very confused, was it silent explosives, or alien beam weapons, or nanoo thermite that was used to bring down the WTC buildings? Not to mention pod carrying planes, mini nuclear weapons, missile firing planes, holographic planes etc. etc.

They really should make one silly conspiracy theory up and stick to it!


So you lump everyone who has a different "opinion" than you as all above. Nice attack, however it doesn't make you very credible does it.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



Are you saying that all the NYC Firemen lied that saw the molten steel that was running like a river under the WTC, and was melting their boots. Because I do remember that Mainstream media reporting this?


That was aluminum, not steel. Check it out because recorded temperatures at ground zero were far too low to melt steel.



Aluminum and the World Trade Center Disaster

Aluminum was present in two significant forms at the World Trade Center on 9-11:
(i) By far the largest source of aluminum at the WTC was the exterior cladding
on WTC 1 & 2. In quantitative terms it may be estimated that 2,000,000 kg of
anodized 0.09 aluminum sheet was used, in the form of 43,600 panels, to
cover the faÄade of each Twin Tower.

(i) The other major source of aluminum at the WTC was the aluminum alloy
airframes of the Boeing 767 aircraft that crashed into the Twin Towers on the
morning of 9-11. It may be estimated that, on impact, these aircraft weighed
about 124,000 kg including fuel; of this weight, 46,000 kg comprised the
fuselage and 21,000 kg made up the mass of the wings – all of which were
fabricated from aluminum alloys. Modern airframes are invariably constructed
from series 2000 aluminum alloys. Alloy 2024 is a typical example containing
93 % Al, 4.5 % Cu, 1.5 % Mg, and 0.5 % each of Mn and Fe. These metallic
additions to aluminum lower the melting point of the alloy from a value of
660 C, for pure aluminum, to about 548  C for alloy 2024. This relatively
low temperature indicates that the fires within the Twin Towers were quite
capable of melting at least some of the Boeing 767 aluminum airframe
structures remaining in the WTC before its collapse.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 01:26 AM
link   
Its my bed time folk I can carry on tomorrow, nice chatting with you all.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 06:18 AM
link   
At 4:47 / 9:41 into Achimspok's video on page 2, it seems I have missed something very interesting.

He in fact found exactly the same sequence of explosions as I now did.
But following excellent different logic. Very well done.!

His work also corroborates my Opening Post, and that of Dr. Andre Rousseau and Prof. Dr. Brown and David Chandler and A&Efor911Truth.

www.youtube.com...


He measured a WTC-7 roof pixel its HORIZONTAL movement, just like David Chandler did for the VERTICAL movement sequence of a WTC-7's roof pixel.
Achimspok's horizontal movement diagram screen shots by me :
files.abovetopsecret.com...




The seismic spike in accordance with that deep rumble in the ground :
files.abovetopsecret.com...




The seismic spike at onset of the East-West vibrations.
Achimspok :

IF some floors failed on the east side, then WHY did the building swung towards the west side FIRST.?
IF the early vibrations were caused by FAILING floors, then WHY a seismic spike started the vibration.? Ex. given, a failing floor 13 would need at least 3 seconds before the debris would hit the ground (causing seismic vibrations)
A buckling COLUMN 79 wouldn't cause a seismic spike as well !
A BUUH BOOOOM at ground level would release a certain amount of falling debris.
Masses from a higher level hit the ground later but with increasing energy. :

files.abovetopsecret.com...



See NOW his animation of those 2 inches wide west-east movements starting at 7:31 / 9:41 in his video, to the end. Those W-E vibrations lasted 6 seconds, then the DENT in the east penthouse roof started to develop (The CIANCA photo).
And in that, now earliest period of visible movements in the video material, of 6 seconds, we also hear that DEEP SOUND in the Ewing Smith video of the onset and global collapse of WTC-7, starting about 4 secs before the DENT develops.

At the end of Achimspok's superb video, we see that first huge cloud of BLACK soot of those 9 explosions that obliterated those 7 lower floors, rolling into that south-north oriented street, where Ashley Banfield and her camera crew stood.( West Broadway, Church Street or Greenwich Street )
9:35 / 9:41 : "finally the smoke extended at street level"



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Great OP, star and flag.

As far as the OS'ers on here, you amaze me. You disbelieve everything that counters the official story, and it represents volumes of proof that the OS cannot be correct, yet you not only defend it, you make fun of people ("truthers") who are bold enough to speak out against this travesty against mankind.

If you have studied this to any significant degree, and state that the OS is 100 percent correct, then you just might be a shill.
edit on 29-7-2015 by Jchristopher5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop

The quality of your work you have put into your threads here on ats is by far the best I've seen ,the evidence you have amassed should be pick up by mainstream media,in fact this is the type in investigating they should be doing.As they scour the internet all the time for stories these day but I doubt they will touch this so it clearly it shows there are others pulling the strings.
Its outrageous and shocking that anyone can deny the complicity our government had in 911...may there be justice for the families and hero's somewhere somehow.
thank you LabTop for your time and work you have put into all of your threads on 911



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 08:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce
Truthers seem very confused, was it silent explosives, or alien beam weapons, or nanoo thermite that was used to bring down the WTC buildings? Not to mention pod carrying planes, mini nuclear weapons, missile firing planes, holographic planes etc. etc.

They really should make one silly conspiracy theory up and stick to it!


Convenient method of 'debunking' that I always see in these threads. Throw the weaponized 'truther' label at someone who doesn't believe the official narrative. Then you try and attach all the most ludicrous theories that very few if anyone actually believes to the person.

You seriously think anyone on 2015 ATS is debating alien beam weapons or holographic planes? Are you serious? Not being disingenuous at all? You actually think this? C'mon, I give you more credit than that, I'll allow you to say that you're being intellectually dishonest with yourself to prove a point and I will accept it. No questions asked.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 09:12 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

There is ample evidence of molten steel. Many people talked about it, and many of them were recorded on video talking about it. The local TV stations covered it.

Only a person in denial of facts, or willfully ignorant, would claim it didn't exist.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: waypastvne

I hate to tell you Vne, but at the pentagon was AA77, not AA11. You must have gone so far past Vne that you missed the details.




new topics




 
160
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join