WTC-7 Mysteries FINALLY Solved.

a reply to: Informer1958

I am not the person who operated the seismographs during 9/11, the experts who were operating those seismographs are the folks debunking your seismic data claims.

Protec Decumtation Services, Inc.

On 9/11 Protec field technicians were utilizing portable field seismographs to continuously record ground vibrations on several construction sites in Manhattan and Brooklyn for liability purposes.

Protec was operating portable field seismographs at construction sites in Manhattan and Brooklyn on 9/11, and these seismographs were recording ground vibration throughout the timeframe of events at Ground Zero. These measurements, when combined with more specific and detailed seismic data recorded by Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, help to provide an unfiltered, purely scientific view of each event.

As our report states, Protec was engaged in vibration monitoring activities on private construction sites in Manhattan and Brooklyn on 9/11. Because these portable field seismographs were not physically installed and manned on the Ground Zero site, we do not feel it is appropriate, nor scientifically possible, to categorically state that data from these monitors alone can specifically prove or disprove the existence of an explosive catalyst. In general, portable field seismographs are far less technologically advanced than permanently installed instrumentation such as the monitors at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, which is why we chose to comment in detail on the Columbia University data before commenting on the Protec data. For example, the Columbia seismographs can pinpoint a relatively accurate geographic location for a vibration event, (i.e., “this event likely occurred at or near Ground Zero”), whereas portable field seismographs do not possess this capability. However, that said, the fact that the Protec monitors were activated and recording does appear to have some value in that they did not record vibration spikes that could be even remotely associated with explosive events during the timeframe in question.

911encyclopedia.com...

a reply to: skyeagle409

Maybe Labtop can explain why Lamont-Doughterty and Protec can't correctly interpret their own seismographic data. Informer doesn't understand any of this and only repeats what she has heard, by rote.

a reply to: pteridine

Maybe Labtop can explain why Lamont-Doughterty and Protec can't correctly interpret their own seismographic data.

It is amazing that LaBTop, who is not a seismograph expert, tells real seismograph experts that they are wrong because the seismograph experts have said their seismograph machines did not detect demolition explosions, which is backed by the fact that no demolition explosions are heard as the WTC buildings collapsed. Even experts near the collapse of WTC 7 have said they heard no demolition explosions.

...Informer doesn't understand any of this and only repeats what she has heard, by rote.

You are correct, and he has been known to jump on burning 9/11 conspiracy bandwagons on a regular basis.

a reply to: pteridine

Maybe Labtop can explain why Lamont-Doughterty and Protec can't correctly interpret their own seismographic data. Informer doesn't understand any of this and only repeats what she has heard, by rote.

Perhaps they were paid to not interpret their own seismograph, to fool everyone that the OS is all true.

As if science cant be bought.

a reply to: skyeagle409

It is amazing that LaBTop, who is not a seismograph expert, tells real seismograph experts that they are wrong because the seismograph experts have said their seismograph machines did not detect demolition explosions, which is backed by the fact that no demolition explosions are heard as the WTC buildings collapsed. Even experts near the collapse of WTC 7 have said they heard no demolition explosions.

While your bad mouthing LaBTop, it was him that caught you using a fraudulent video and exposed you as a fraud.

You have no credibility here.

You are correct, and he has been known to jump on burning 9/11 conspiracy bandwagons on a regular basis.

We all know that, You are a very special snow flake, because it is against ATS TC to be bad mouthing other members on ATS yet the MOD's seem to always skip past your posts when you do it. How interesting

a reply to: Informer1958

While your bad mouthing LaBTop, it was him that caught you using a fraudulent video and exposed you as a fraud.

What fraudulent video? LaBTop's claim that a demolition explosion was heard before WTC 7 collapse was false, a fact underlined by the fact, no such explosions were detected on seismographs nor heard in any of the many WTC 7 videos. Apparently, he mistaken something else as an explosion because experts on the scene near WTC 7 have stated they heard no demolition explosions.

a reply to: Informer1958

Perhaps they were paid to not interpret their own seismograph, to fool everyone that the OS is all true.

TRANSLATION: You have no evidence to backup your claim they were paid off.

Attention:

A reminder that this forum is under extra scrutiny due to the emotional nature of this topic for some.

Do not reply to this post.

edit on 11/9/2015 by Blaine91555 because: (no reason given)

a reply to: skyeagle409
Do you mean those explosion sounds in nist vídeos were just somebody farting really loud?

a reply to: Informer1958

Perhaps they were paid to not interpret their own seismograph, to fool everyone that the OS is all true.

So now all the seismologist on the planet have been paid off too.

My initial reaction was that WTC 7 was pre rigged with explosives because it was a DoD controlled building with the CIA in it so that if any attack happened the building would be destroyed. But from the looks of it, I can't tell if it was a preplanned controlled demolition or an outside force of directed energy / some device used that could bring down the building like that which I personally don't understand.

I saw a video of the inside of WTC 7 with secret service police inside on the main entrance and up the escalator where he claimed the building was empty. It was posted to the internet. It is clearly not accurate because dead bodies were inside the building and the witness is now missing, or dead and the answer can not be clarified. The type of damage I saw in that video had differences between a conventional controlled demolition and it seemed more of a directed energy type destruction like we saw in the other twin towers even tho the camera apperance looked more like a conventional demolition.

We know that people did die inside WTC 7 as one witness said there were dead bodies he stepped over. He is now alleged to be dead, but he could potentially be alive in hiding. The name I don't remember but it has been used before and is found on the internet and even on here.

Four star General Wesley Clark refuses to comment on building 7 and says it doesn't deserve an answer. He had direct access to military brass and is very intelligent.

John Kerry mentioned he thought the building may have been brought down in a controlled fashion.

Was typing this fast and I apologize if some was repetitive. The point here is that the WTC site was destroyed where the main targets were WTC 1, 2 and 7 and other buildings had soke structural damage as well.

But we know 1.2 and 7 had full collapses and the highest concentration of energy focused on them.

The WTC attacks were indeed predicted with ongoing war games where Osama Bin Ladens image was used which are available on the internet as well. Please see Amalgam Virgo 1 and 2. Also available on the internet.

Did Bin Laden cause this to happen? No, he didn't have the capability and the USA was using his name on it before it even happened.

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Informer1958

Perhaps they were paid to not interpret their own seismograph, to fool everyone that the OS is all true.

So now all the seismologist on the planet have been paid off too.

a reply to: aj023

My initial reaction was that WTC 7 was pre rigged with explosives because it was a DoD controlled building with the CIA in it so that if any attack happened the building would be destroyed. But from the looks of it, I can't tell if it was a preplanned controlled demolition or an outside force of directed energy / some device used that could bring down the building like that which I personally don't understand.

WTC 7 DOD controlled building ....???

That would be news to Salomon Smith Barney brokers which leased out 90 % of the building

CIA had small office in building, so did DOD .

Some other government agencies also leased space . Secret Service had a floor and half

But most of the building was leased by Salomon and other financial firms

List of WTC 7 Tenants

en.wikipedia.org...

If you have the DoD, Secret Service Police and CIA amongst others, you don't belive the building gets additional protection? The additional tenants were just that, tenants filling space. Since powerful federal agencies had access, those parties have the control of the building essentially.

EVEN Giuliani's command center was allegedly in WTC 7.

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: aj023

My initial reaction was that WTC 7 was pre rigged with explosives because it was a DoD controlled building with the CIA in it so that if any attack happened the building would be destroyed. But from the looks of it, I can't tell if it was a preplanned controlled demolition or an outside force of directed energy / some device used that could bring down the building like that which I personally don't understand.

WTC 7 DOD controlled building ....???

That would be news to Salomon Smith Barney brokers which leased out 90 % of the building

CIA had small office in building, so did DOD .

Some other government agencies also leased space . Secret Service had a floor and half

But most of the building was leased by Salomon and other financial firms

List of WTC 7 Tenants

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: aj023
My initial reaction was that WTC 7 was pre rigged with explosives because it was a DoD controlled building

Do you have any evidence at all it was a DOD controlled building? Anything at all?

I saw a video of the inside of WTC 7 with secret service police inside on the main entrance and up the escalator where he claimed the building was empty. It was posted to the internet. It is clearly not accurate because dead bodies were inside the building and the witness is now missing,

More nonsense, no one died in WTC 7....

The type of damage I saw in that video had differences between a conventional controlled demolition

Of course it had differences, as WTC 7 was not a controlled demolition!

We know that people did die inside WTC 7 as one witness said there were dead bodies he stepped over.

What was that "witness's name? Who exactly died in WTC 7?

Just more truther made up stories.

a reply to: aj023

We know that people did die inside WTC 7 as one witness said there were dead bodies he stepped over. He is now alleged to be dead, but he could potentially be alive in hiding. The name I don't remember but it has been used before and is found on the internet and even on here.

Nobody died in WTC 7 - it was evacuated soon after first plane hit . Building was searched by FDNY who did not find any
bodies - did find extensive damage and fires breaking out on multiple floors

Dead bodies comes from Barry Jennings who was told to watch step on way out and IMAGINED was walking over bodies
because had eyes closed.......

Can read oral history o FDNY members explain what saw and did that day

graphics8.nytimes.com...

a reply to: aj023

If you have the DoD, Secret Service Police and CIA amongst others, you don't belive the building gets additional protection? The additional tenants were just that, tenants filling space. Since powerful federal agencies had access, those parties have the control of the building essentially.

In my town the FBI leases a floor in a office building right down the street . Their floor is secured because of the nature
of their business. They do not control the building. The building is not rigged with explosives

We had a meeting of my fire department - the building inspector explained situation in case of fire on that floor

Building is sprinkler so fire probably not get very far. In case we need access have several agents who live nearby
and in case of alarm will respond and let us in. Otherwise if need immediate access we will use our forcible entry tools and
BREAK THE DOORS DOWN...!!!!

You are clearly ignorant ........

a reply to: aj023

My initial reaction was that WTC 7 was pre rigged with explosives because it was a DoD controlled building with the CIA in it so that if any attack happened the building would be destroyed. But from the looks of it, I can't tell if it was a preplanned controlled demolition or an outside force of directed energy / some device used that could bring down the building like that which I personally don't understand.

If explosives are not firmly placed on steel columns of buildings, the blast waves will simply flow around the steel beams as wind flows around a flag pole. Case in point, the 1993 WTC 1 bombing where steel columns of WTC 1 sat within a huge bomb crater.

Photo: WTC 1 Steel Columns Sitting Within Huge Bomb Crater

Notice that the huge blast failed to throw those steel columns anywhere.

a reply to: aj023

it seemed more of a directed energy type destruction like we saw in the other twin towers

You watch too much SciFi.
If they existed don't you think that 14 years later we would be using them on ISIS?

Did Bin Laden cause this to happen? No, he didn't have the capability and the USA was using his name on it before it even happened.

You could use a history lesson.

a reply to: Kadagraks

Do you mean those explosion sounds in nist vídeos were just somebody farting really loud?

There were no sounds of demolition explosions as WTC 7 collapsed and there are several videos of the collapse and not one video depicted the sound of demolition explosions as WTC 7 collapsed.

In the following photo, notice how WTC 7 is being seriously impacted by the collapse of WTC 1.

Photo: WTC 1 Collapse Impacting WTC 7

There are no secondary explosions as debris from the collapse of WTC 1 tear into the south wall of WTC 7 and I might add that WTC 7 tilted toward the south in the final seconds of its collapse.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Farts then.
Yeah, all that dust must be really structure damaging.