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: 5
160
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 04:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: six67seven
1. Dr. Brown probably deserves 24/7 security so that he doesn't commit suicide via two shots to the head.

2. Not sure if thenewamerican.com link is accurate.


Regarding point 2. :
Perhaps a try at the WayBack Machine website will get that link back , since I tried a lot of search words, but Google does not deliver any results for that page.

A Search at the New American.com resulted as the earliest one :
29. Key Report on OKC Bombing (Crime)
... otographic, seismic, and blast data by Robert D. Vernon, president of Microlithic Technologies, adds even more credibility to the already overpowering evidence that high-explosive charges were used al ... Created on 30 July 2001.


For six years, former Oklahoma State Representative Charles Key and a small group of dedicated supporters have conducted a heroic and intensive inquiry into the Oklahoma City bombing. Against incredible odds and enormous political pressures, they have produced a critically important report on "the deadliest terrorist attack ever on American soil." Their nearly 600-page study — the size of a Los Angeles telephone book — is an impressive achievement and a vital contribution in the quest for justice. Jam-packed with important court documents, trial transcripts, affidavits, expert testimony, photographs (including 50 full-color evidentiary photographs), illustrations, suspect sketches, FBI and ATF documents, and eyewitness statements, the Final Report finally presents the American public with the definitive report on the bombing and the subsequent federal investigation/cover-up and trials.

Timothy McVeigh, the convicted and confessed "lone bomber," has been executed, but that does not close this case. Along with millions of other Americans, the members of the Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee (OKBIC) are convinced by overwhelming evidence that McVeigh did not act alone and that his co-conspirators are still at large. Unlike most other Americans, however, the OKBIC members have not merely followed the bombing investigation through media reports and government press releases; they have been directly, personally involved, literally immersed in the investigation of the bombing almost since day one.


And here is an excerpt on seismic evidence, but no mention of Dr. Brown :


A completely new in-depth analysis of photographic, seismic, and blast data by Robert D. Vernon, president of Microlithic Technologies, adds even more credibility to the already overpowering evidence that high-explosive charges were used along with the truck bomb. The excellent color photographs and computer-generated illustrations of the Murrah Building greatly enhance the effectiveness of Vernon’s compelling presentation.

A significant portion of the Vernon study is devoted to examination of the evidence concerning the size of the crater created by the truck bomb. "Of all the items of physical evidence at the Murrah Building site, the crater, its location, and its dimensions are the single most significant indication of the location and performance of the explosive device that was allegedly contained in the Ryder truck. Yet no item of evidence has been more widely misreported and misrepresented."

Vernon shows that government statements, press reports, the government’s expert witnesses at the trials, and supposed "expert" studies all greatly inflated the size of the crater, which thereby provided "evidence" for a much bigger truck bomb, thus rendering the government’s scenario more plausible.

FBI Special Agent Dave Williams, one of the FBI lab "experts" singled out for special censure in the previously mentioned IG report, claimed that the crater was 32 feet in diameter. A study by a federal Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT) composed of personnel from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) lists the crater diameter as 28 feet.

As Vernon demonstrates from photographic evidence, though, "the actual, penetrating crater cannot reasonably be construed to exceed 18 feet in its longest dimension." This is very significant. Vernon notes: "The very foundation upon which all further BPAT blast loading calculations were based — an explosive charge equivalent to 4,000 pounds of TNT — was a deceptively overstated crater diameter.... According to the BPAT’s own calculations, a lesser air blast ... would have been insufficient to have caused column G16 [A7] to fail in shear."


The web page its bottom line :
Final Report on the Bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Building, April 19, 1995, by the Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: 2001, 576 pages, paperback.

More in this category: « OKC Bombing: Precursor to 9/11?
Monday, 28 January 2002 Written by William F. Jasper.

William F. Jasper, “Were There Two Explosions?,” The New American, Vol. 11, No. 12, June 12, 1995,
www.thenewamerican.com...
See also William F. Jasper, “Seismic Support,” The New American, Vol. 11, No. 16, August 7, 1995,
www.thenewamerican.com...
William F. Jasper, “Multiple Blasts: More Evidence,” The New American, Vol. 13, No. 07
March 31, 1997,
www.thenewamerican.com...
David Hoffman, The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror, p. 1-2, 1998, Federal House, Venice, CA.
William F. Jasper, “Proof of Bombs and Cover-up,” The New American, Vol. 14, No. 15
July 20, 1998,
www.thenewamerican.com...




posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 05:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: deloprator20000
The fall of WTC 7 is the most difficult for skeptics to explain and the explanations they do offer often do not stand up to scrutiny.

Yet, another way to show that explosives were used is to analyze the seismic and audio data using spectrum analysis. It could be that the sounds and vibrations of explosives have a different spectral signature than does a collapsing structure. Furthermore, it may be possible to triangulate where certain sounds came from in the building and correlate that with the spectral signature, showing that it may or may not have the signature of explosives.

Comparing the sound signatures made by demolished buildings with those made by unplanned collaspes will also help. The visual differences alone are quite revealing.


WIKIPEDIA : Oklahoma City bombing conspiracy theories.

"Forensic Seismology revised" for the OKC bombing, Nairoby bombing, Kursk explosion, Carlsbad gas line explosion :
web.mst.edu...

edit on 28/7/15 by LaBTop because: typos.



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 05:30 AM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop

Good OP Job, good follow up, good points

Well done Sir!


edit on 28-7-2015 by EartOccupant because: Spelling



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 06:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: Rocker2013

I'm starting to think these threads are a way for truthers to give themselves stars.

I thought this issue had been "solved" years ago.


I agree, they seem to be doing nothing more than preaching to the choir and giving each other a pat on the back, while refusing to consider the actual scientifically proven evidence supporting what actually happened on that day.

I'm also beginning to wonder just how many of these "truthers" weren't even alive when this event took place, and have based their entire belief on a handful of carefully manipulated YouTube videos by other conspiracy theorists.



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 06:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
LaBTop, this dovetails nicely with the public statements by Barry Jennings (Deputy Director of the Emergency Services Department for the New York City Housing Authority), He has repeatedly told his story of hearing explosions on the 20th and 22nd floor while trapped inside. He stated that not only did an explosion demolish the stairway he was descending leaving him dangling for his life, but that he and his co-worker saw afterward that BOTH twin towers were STILL STANDING.


I advice you to listen and LOOK very careful to the Dylan Avery interview with Barry.
You are intelligent enough to notice what I also found. There is a visible edit-jump in the footage at the moment Barry said he hung on the railing of the 6th floor stairs, and had to climb up to the 7th and then 8th floor --jump-- and both towers were still standing.
Everything points to a intendedly placed edit. Since Dylan explained first that Barry had asked to not air that video since he expected lots of troubles with his bosses. And then Barry did the BBC interview that the BBC then aired inside an anti-9/11 conspiracies broadcast.
Which Dylan thought to be a break in confidence, and decided to put the interview indeed up.
With that very suspicious hick-up in it, just before the words " both Towers still standing".

Btw, that stairwell explosion must have occurred between 9:59:04 and 10:28:31 a.m., for at least one Tower to have been still standing. If Barry really said that both towers were still standing just after that explosion, then that must have happened BEFORE 9.58 a.m.



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 06:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: ParasuvO
Why does it have to make sense to you ??? Criminal organizations operate on levels you do not understand, but I bet you BELIEVE you know just how everything works.


No, I don't claim to know how everything works, I claim to know that science beats suspicion and unfounded beliefs EVERY TIME.

Here's the difference between people like me and people like you...

We look at all the available information and evidence to form a conclusion, and when new evidence is provided we alter our opinion based on that information.
If someone tells me their cat can fly, I demand to see evidence of that flying cat. If I see that evidence, then I change my perception.

You, on the other hand, believe a fanciful tale of what happened because you distrust those telling you. That's it, that's all, even in the face of all the actual evidence, and even when you can offer absolutely no scientific information to support your claim and discredit the science already offered to support what actually happened, you will actively believe the most unlikely theories, instead of the proven events - because you have "suspicions".
Someone tells you their cat can fly, and you accept it without question because the big bad gubment might not want you to know that cats can fly. When someone then tells you that there is no evidence for flying cats, you'll scream "that's what they want you to think!!!!" When someone demands that you then prove that you have seen a flying cat, you say "ask my friend with the flying cat!"

Produce the damn cat!
edit on 28-7-2015 by Rocker2013 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 06:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: liveandlearn
I remember hearing a longer version of Sliverstein speaking about this many years ago.

link

A second, one-minute video clip on the WTC 7 collapse is taken from a PBS documentary. In this clip, the owner of building 7, Larry Silverstein, talks about the World Trade Center 7 collapse on 9/11, stating "I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me that they were not sure they were going to able to contain the fire." Silverstein then relates his conversation with the fire commander: "I said 'you know, we've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.'" Silverstein follows this with, "and they made that decision to pull, and then we watched the building collapse." To see this clip:


Pull it implies there are already mechanisms in place to collapse the building. Question is did the fire chief know or did Silverstein just word it that way cause it seemed to me it was his (silverstein's) suggestion

you tube

Apologies, tried to embed but has been a few years and guess things have changed.



As has been said over, and over, and over again... "pull it" refers to the act of "pulling the people out" and giving up on trying to save that building.

This has been rehashed over and over again, to the point of stupidity.

Which is the more PLAUSIBLE scenario here, and the one supported by all the available evidence?
That he wanted to prevent further loss of live and was referring to the abandoning of that building?
Or that he was a part of a massive conspiracy to not only murder thousands of people, but somehow managed to rig up a building with explosive devices no one ever saw, made no sound on detonation, took the building down in a way even demolition experts refuse to accept was anything like a standard demolition, and did so without leaving any evidence of this actually happening, despite the thousands of people who worked in that building and the hundreds of people who were actually there that day.

Once again, you're claiming that the most outlandish version of events must be true, while ignoring all the available common sense and scientific data to support that conspiracy.

When he said "pull it", he was referring to pulling those people out and letting the building burn/collapse.



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 06:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: mymojo
Im a civil engineer, and havr a PE in New York.

Yes, WTC 7 came down by controlled demolition, and the towers came down by advanced nuclear weaponry..

Please google RICH SHERIDAN APFN 911

Thanks.


If you're a civil engineer and you believe that was a controlled demolition, then you need to be fired and replaced with someone who understands SCIENCE.

Just like all those "architects" who fail to understand the weakening point of steel, or the method of construction used in the towers, or the time line of the collapse of WT7 - they should all be fired too because such a ridiculous belief and refusal to accept reality calls into question their competence in their field.

But, I don't believe for one moment that you are actually a civil engineer.



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013



This cat?
It must be true!



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 06:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: Rocker2013



This cat?
It must be true!


Ah, dammit!
Now I have to reconsider my opinion and instantly accept that all cats can fly, rejecting any evidence to the contrary!

I'm sure someone will be along any moment to tell me about photoshop, or to tell me that a split second of time captured in an image can be misunderstood.

But don't worry, I'll absolutely reject their opinions and believe that all cats can fly, because after all, you showed me it, and we all know that the evil cat overlords are in cahoots with the big bad gubment.



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 07:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: In4ormant
This cat?
It must be true!


Then there is this one....




posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 07:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: In4ormant
This cat?
It must be true!


Then there is this one....



They have be militarized!!! Haliburton!!! FEMA! PTA!



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 07:12 AM
link   
Someone PLEASE start the flying cat conspiracy thread. I'm just too lazy. We can make all kinds of connections



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 07:28 AM
link   
I never bought any stock into any 9/11 conspiracy theories. However one fact I am almost certain of hearing either on radio scanner records or video that a man said they were gonna "demo the building" or "demo 7". No conspiracy about it if that's what I heard since I understood this would be done to ensure safety of a controlled fall versus chaos.

First people thought the fire dept had a back up plan in store to do this but there has been video of some self proclaimed retired fire dept guy of New York. I doubt fire dept would be in charge of this but could be something by owner or insurance or emergency management. Ya know the specialists around every state that have state and national training to respond to crazy things like this. They have been highlighted in the past in regards to nuclear and bio fall out.

You can debate what I heard since I have no recording but maybe other heard this?




a reply to: LaBTop




posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 07:38 AM
link   
If you believe Labtop then ALL professional seismologists are in on the conspiracy too.

To believe in this conspiracy 99% of these must be in on it:
Physicists
Architects
Engineers
Professors
Pilots
TV news
Print news
NYPD
NYFD

Did I miss some?



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 07:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
If you believe Labtop then ALL professional seismologists are in on the conspiracy too.

To believe in this conspiracy 99% of these must be in on it:
Physicists
Architects
Engineers
Professors
Pilots
TV news
Print news
NYPD
NYFD

Did I miss some?



Not to mention that whoever was responsible has developed an almost entirely silent form of explosives, given that we do not hear the expected detonation of explosives prior to that building falling.

They also did a really bad job of their "professional demolition" too, apparently causing explosives to go off while where were still people inside the building (witnesses), and without actually detonating enough to bring down the building the first time.

Did they mess up and have to send their ninja team of explosives experts back in with more magical invisible and silent explosives to bring the rest of it down after that witness managed to escape?

And, come to think of it, the conspiracy theorists are saying that someone inside heard explosions and that this is proof that explosions were heard, and then we know that no explosions were heard from outside the building... so which is it? Did their star witness inside the building hear and see explosions, or not? How come he had this experience inside the building, but when the building supposedly was detonated we heard nothing?

Could it possibly be that their star witness who heard and saw "explosions" inside the building actually saw and heard the blasts from the planes, from debris, from collapsing parts of the building he was in?

They also put their explosives in the wrong places, clearly, because the internal structure of the building collapses at one end before the rest of it falls down. But they don't want you to see the penthouse collapsing through the building before the rest of the structure collapses, instead they'll skip that part entirely and go straight to the whole facade falling and claim that's when it began...

I would really love to know what material they used to demolish that building, because it was completely silent and left no evidence behind!

Defying the laws of physics is marvelous, isn't it? We now have the mysterious power to set off an explosive without it producing any shock wave or sound at all... incredible indeed.
edit on 28-7-2015 by Rocker2013 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 08:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: samkent

Did I miss some?



Yes, you did

The more than a million people in NYC on that day who DIDN'T hear any explosive charges detonating before or during the collapse of building 7.
The millions of people watching the news all around the world who DIDN'T hear any explosives detonating before or during the collapse of building 7.

We're somehow supposed to believe that everyone in New York was suddenly rendered deaf, when any explosives detonated to take down that building would have been heard for miles around, throughout Manhattan at the very least.



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 08:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rocker2013
The more than a million people in NYC on that day who DIDN'T hear any explosive charges detonating before or during the collapse of building 7.
The millions of people watching the news all around the world who DIDN'T hear any explosives detonating before or during the collapse of building 7.

We're somehow supposed to believe that everyone in New York was suddenly rendered deaf, when any explosives detonated to take down that building would have been heard for miles around, throughout Manhattan at the very least.


Well obviously they used super duper sekret "hush a boom" silent explosives!



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 09:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: CALGARIAN
Yes, this was def FINALLY resolved... back in 2001.
The MASSIVE amount of fire debris that crushed the side of the building caused it to collapse.

WHY (or who) would have planted explosives in WTC7? lol.



Lol WTC 7 was two blocks away from the towers. NO other buildings collapsed from "falling debris" besides that one. For MASSIVE amount of debris falling, I don't understand the magic of it skipping two city blocks and magically drilling WTC 7 at a perfect point to make it collapse.

The real world doesn't work that way. There's very good reason when any news special speaks of 9/11 they DO NOT bring up Tower 7, at all. It defies common sense, and flies in the face of anyone with a brain between the eyeballs.
edit on 28-7-2015 by Flesh699 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2015 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Rocker2013
The more than a million people in NYC on that day who DIDN'T hear any explosive charges detonating before or during the collapse of building 7.
The millions of people watching the news all around the world who DIDN'T hear any explosives detonating before or during the collapse of building 7.

We're somehow supposed to believe that everyone in New York was suddenly rendered deaf, when any explosives detonated to take down that building would have been heard for miles around, throughout Manhattan at the very least.


Well obviously they used super duper sekret "hush a boom" silent explosives!


It was the stealth drone cats



new topics

top topics



 
160
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join