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: 44
160
<< 41  42  43    45  46  47 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Korg Trinity




Funny that because that is exactly what you're doing when you dismiss without consideration the clear evidence that refutes the OS.

But there is no evidence to support anything other than the OS.
YT vids are not evidence.
Even Richard Gage does not have evidence. Just speculation on his part.


No evidence.... Really?

A simple denial of all the evidence is proof in itself of the inability of people to objectively look at 911.



1. The way the buildings came down

2. The fires and temperatures of the fires

3. Nano thermite.... Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

4. A cover up

There is however more than a wealth of other evidences that I could and will add... but the video speaks for itself.


edit on 1-9-2015 by Korg Trinity because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Korg Trinity




posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Korg Trinity




posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Korg Trinity




posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 10:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Korg Trinity

just to let you know that guy is lying in your video. There was no molten steel at ground zero and I might add that thermite cannot generate molten steel more than one minute.

Investigators with no ties to the federal government have stated for the record they found no evidence of thermite and explosives.



posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 10:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Korg Trinity

There is no evidence of demo explosions in your videos. It is apparent that the guy have never heard explosions. Why did he say to turn up the volumn to try to hear explosions?

Now, let's take a look here and tell us at what time line can demo explosions be heard as WTC 7 collapses and if you are unable to identify the time lines where demo explosions can be heard, then you have no case for demo explosives.



Now, I can easily point out time lines where explosions are heard during the demolition implosions in this video.


edit on 1-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 10:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Korg Trinity

Now, let's take a look at the debunking of David Chandler.




posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Korg Trinity



Funny that because that is exactly what you're doing when you dismiss without consideration the clear evidence that refutes the OS.


Let's not forget that your evidence of demo explosions in WTC 7 was a hoaxed video that you posted.



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

There was so much molten iron there that it was all over the local media. They applied Pyrocool (trademarked name), and for the first time ever in its use, it failed to put out the fire.

Whatever the reason for it, the molten iron polluted the air, as measured by Thomas Cahill and the DELTA Group from California. Iron microspheres in the air can result only from boiling iron.

Anybody denying the existence of it is not being honest. "hot spots" were recorded from orbiting satellites, including AVIRIS and others.



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander




There was so much molten iron there that it was all over the local media. They applied Pyrocool (trademarked name), and for the first time ever in its use, it failed to put out the fire.

Just what kept this iron in it's molten state?
Thermite has a burn time measured in seconds. Not hour or days.



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander



There was so much molten iron there that it was all over the local media.


There were no pools of molten iron.



They applied Pyrocool (trademarked name), and for the first time ever in its use, it failed to put out the fire.


Smoldering fires that last for days after a fire is nothing new.


Whatever the reason for it, the molten iron polluted the air, as measured by Thomas Cahill and the DELTA Group from California. Iron microspheres in the air can result only from boiling iron.


There was nothing at ground zero that could have generated pools of molten iron.


Anybody denying the existence of it is not being honest. "hot spots" were recorded from orbiting satellites, including AVIRIS and others.


The recorded hots spots were far too low to melt iron.



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 06:15 AM
link   
I guess one is referring to the satellite temperature pictures. Why not putting these questions in a logical flow diagram?

If explosives or whatever is not able to give that temperature rise then the question is if fire is responsible for that.

If fire is able to give that temperature rise (for the whole area, wtc7, twins etc) then case closed.

If fire is not able to give that temperature rise then what did cause it?



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 07:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: Salander



There was so much molten iron there that it was all over the local media.


There were no pools of molten iron.




1. Molten Metal: Flowing and in Pools











edit on 3-9-2015 by Korg Trinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Korg Trinity

To show how ridicules your videos and photos are, the last photo you posted in regard to temperature readings, will tell you that the recorded temperature of 1160 degrees F., 1340 degrees F. and 1377 degrees F. are much, much too low to melt steel, but those temperatures are above the melting point of aluminum, which was used on the facade of the WTC Towers and in the construction of the 9/11 airliners.

Your photo #4 does not depict molten steel. Do you know why? Try using that machine to lift honey and you will get the hint that the photo does not represent anything in a molten state.

You have people reporting molten steel, but firefighters are not experts to determine whether the molten metal is aluminum or steel. Since temperatures recorded on the image that you posted depicts temperatures high enough to melt aluminum, but far too low to melt steel, it simply means the molten metal pools they saw was aluminum from the WTC towers and from the airframe of the 9/11 airliners. A simple process of elimination that automatically ruled out steel by that very fact.

You blundered again when you posted a video of Steven Jones when Mr. Jones was caught lying on many occasions. In fact, even BYU of Utah has distanced itself from Steven Jones.

You need to do a better job next time because your videos have been dubunked on many occasions. BTW, thermite burns out after a matter of seconds, so there was no way thermite could have generated pools of molten metal days later.

Did you know that rusty iron in storage can generate temperatures high enough to start fires? Did you know that fires have been known to smolder for many days after a fire?




edit on 3-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: drommelsboef


I guess one is referring to the satellite temperature pictures. Why not putting these questions in a logical flow diagram?

If explosives or whatever is not able to give that temperature rise then the question is if fire is responsible for that.

If fire is able to give that temperature rise (for the whole area, wtc7, twins etc) then case closed.

If fire is not able to give that temperature rise then what did cause it?


Fires are known to smolder for days after a fire.



Packing shed fire will continue to smolder for next few days

The fire that broke out earlier this week at the Bruce Church produce packing sheds will continue to smolder for the next couple of days and produce some light smoke, but there are no longer any flames coming from the site.


Burned buildings in Hinton could smolder for days

HINTON, W.Va. -- Hinton Fire Chief Ray Pivont says five apartment buildings destroyed by a fire could smolder for days.



, but rusty steel and iron can also generated temperatures as well. Check it out.



Iron Burns

Sometimes a big load of iron in a ship can get hot. The heat can even set other materials on fire. That’s because the iron is rusting, which means it is burning very, very slowly. Iron rusts in a chemical reaction called oxidation. That means the iron reacts with oxygen gas from the air.

Oxidation is the chemical reaction that occurs when anything burns in air. Like most oxidations, rusting gives off heat."

www.debunking911.com...

edit on 3-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 02:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
Here's a good example of a point I was trying to make a few pages back: steel under intense stress will fail with a loud explosive bang.



More steel. More stress. Bigger bang.


The usual thought process mistake.
That is an example of steel getting STRESSED to the max, then failing.
I didn't see King Kong lifting up the top of both towers, to STRESS the steel core columns and exterior columns to the max.
What we see, is the compression and then buckling of some of those columns, AFTER a still uncertain initiation process that covered only micro seconds.
Doubters say it were explosives, Skeptics think it was a naturally induced collapse.

Charles M. Beck then showed those Skeptics with his undeniable math, combined with his, copied from NIST pages, Twin Tower steel strength data, that it was utterly impossible for EVEN half of all those core and exterior columns to fail under the life load of the weight of their top parts. He even introduced in his math calculations a cut in half of the strength of ALL vertical and horizontal steel in those tops, and still the leftover strength of half of that steel (which he proposed was left with half of its strength), was a few magnitudes stronger then the life loads.

Again, you needed to introduce King Kong again, to push those tops through the rest of those towers.
As we all know, King Kong doesn't exist, only in Hollywood.

So, where did that extreme overload come from?

E.X.P.L.O.S.I.V.E.S.


References :

1. The discussion about Charles M. Beck's three papers from Cornell University :
arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0609/0609105v8.pdf
Title : Mathematical Models of Progressive Collapse.

2. Those three Beck papers are especially extensively discussed in my 27 L.Abtop Academia.edu pages, together with a lot more related mathematical, architectural and engineering papers.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 03:21 AM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop



Again, you needed to introduce King Kong again, to push those tops through the rest of those towers.


Do you mean like this demolition process where upper blocks crush through lower blocks without the use of explosives?




posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 10:29 AM
link   
I can't find my post back, but there is not much similarity between the twin tower collapses and verinage

- Verinage starts in the middle, will it work at 10% from the top ?
- Verinage is used for concrete structures
- Verinage is used for completely stripped buildings
- Verinage has no huge ejections of huge mass, it's more into its footprint



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 03:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: drommelsboef
I can't find my post back, but there is not much similarity between the twin tower collapses and verinage

- Verinage starts in the middle, will it work at 10% from the top ?


The collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2 started at the aircraft impact points. Any thermite or explosives planted in that area would have been rendered useless. In addition, there were no secondary explosions as those aircraft slammed into those buildings, which should have told the CT folks were were no explosives planted at the points of those buildings.

In other words, neither thermite nor explosives are responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings.



- Verinage is used for completely stripped buildings


And yet, the WTC buildings were not stripped, which simply means the WTC buildings were not prepared for demolition because structural pre-weakening and stripping are part of the explosive implosion preparation process. One ton of explosives could have been planted on each floor of the WTC Towers and detonated and yet, the WTC Towers would have remained standing minus their exterior and interior walls, but the steel structures would have remained standing, and once again, we can take a look here as a reference and notice where the steel columns of WTC 1 are standing after a huge bomb was detonated beneath the building in 1993.

WTC 1 Photo



- Verinage has no huge ejections of huge mass, it's more into its footprint


That is because the buildings were properly pre-weakened and stripped. The WTC Towers were also covered by thousands of light weight aluminum panels that given the height of those buildings, would have flown outside the building's footprint.
edit on 4-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 05:29 PM
link   
skyeagle409: Thermite or explosives planted in that area would have been rendered useless ?

In that case the plane did its job and if it didn't the unaffected area would do the job. That's not hard to understand.
I'm not sure what you mean with secondary explosions. Not everybody things and say the same thing. I'm no noplaner.

skyeagle409: And yet, the WTC buildings were not stripped.....

I don't think you understood what I mean.

Heavy weakening = No explosives (verinage)
Normal weakening = explosives to do the weakening at the time of demolition
No weakening = heavy explosives to do the weakening at the time of demolition

skyeagle409:One ton of explosives could have been planted on each floor of the WTC Towers and detonated and yet, the WTC Towers would have remained standing

But you believe NO EXPLOSIVES are needed at all, why that much then ?


ps. there seems to be another demolition expert who is convinced that the towers were demolitions

www.youtube.com...



new topics

top topics



 
160
<< 41  42  43    45  46  47 >>

log in

join