It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

WTC-7 Mysteries FINALLY Solved.

page: 58
<< 55  56  57    59  60  61 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 15 2015 @ 09:54 AM

originally posted by: pfishy
a reply to: Korg Trinity

I did read your post. Twice. This is why I asked if that's what you meant, or if I had misunderstood you. I had just asked PublicOpinion if their previous post was trying to paint me on one side or the other, and you started your post with quoting that question and said "I think the definition is clear". Pretty simple to see how I could have misunderstood that, I would think.

I meant that it is easy to define where one sits on the issue. It is simply Black or White or Grey.

It is not my place to state you are this or that.... only your own thought processes can define that.

posted on Sep, 15 2015 @ 09:58 AM
a reply to: Korg Trinity

Oh, ok. I understand what you meant now. And I'm perfectly clear where I stand on the issue. I just don't share my opinion about it on this forum. I prefer to contribute in other ways.
And it's not in the Grey area, in case you care to know.

posted on Sep, 15 2015 @ 10:02 AM

originally posted by: pfishy
a reply to: Korg Trinity

Oh, ok. I understand what you meant now. And I'm perfectly clear where I stand on the issue. I just don't share my opinion about it on this forum. I prefer to contribute in other ways.
And it's not in the Grey area, in case you care to know.

Roll on neural interfaces... words are such an inefficient way to communicate.

posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 12:16 PM
a reply to: pfishy

kay, just to put this out there, it is entirely possible that if the Twin Towers were rigged with explosives, it is entirely possible that they could have been detonated in such a fashion as to make them fall unevenly.

First of all, the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2 commenced where the aircraft impacts occurred. Any explosives placed at the impact locations would have been detonated or rendered useless because the impacts were violent enough to dislodge fire protection. Secondly, there were no secondary explosions when the aircraft struck those buildings.

Thirdly, if for some reason, the explosives remained attached to the steel columns and detonated, the detonations would have sent signals down through the steel structures and into the ground where they would have been detected b seismic monitors in the area, yet no such signals were detected. Seismic monitors detected the impacts and collapse of the WTC buildings, but they did not detect the detonation of explosives, and in addition, no sound of explosions are heard on video as WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 collapsed and to add to that, no evidence of explosives was ever found in the rubble at ground zero.

The sound of explosions, which were later attributed to things that had nothing to do with explosives, were used as so-called evidence by the Truth Movement. They have to understand that since no sound of explosions are heard on video as the WTC buildings collapsed, no demo explosion signals detected by seismic monitors and no evidence of explosive hardware found in the rubble, that no demo explosives were responsible for the collapse of those buildings.

posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 12:36 PM
a reply to: skyeagle409

No need for the lecture. I was merely stating that it is possible that the timing of explosives could be offset enough to give it a more unintentional look. Relax.

posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 03:35 PM
a reply to: pfishy

I was merely stating that it is possible that the timing of explosives could be offset enough to give it a more unintentional look.

Please elaborate in detail.

posted on Sep, 21 2015 @ 12:02 AM
a reply to: skyeagle409

Ok, we know timing is critical in bringing down a building in a symmetrical manner. They could have detonated one corner a few fractions of a second later that the one diagonal from it to make it fall sooner than the other, causing a tilt in the collapsing top building portion.
Again, I'm not saying that happened. Just putting out an idea that came to me while reading other users' posts.
edit on 21-9-2015 by pfishy because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 21 2015 @ 12:19 AM
a reply to: pfishy

In 1993, Ramzi Yousef, nephew of the 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, bombed WTC1 in 1993 in an attempt to topple WTC1 onto WTC2, but look how far he got in this photo.

Photo: 1993 WTC Bombing

You will notice that the steel columns of WTC1 are sitting within that huge bomb crater. Question is, why are they still standing at all?
edit on 21-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 21 2015 @ 12:28 AM
a reply to: skyeagle409

I'm familiar with the 93 bombing. I was talking about a controlled demolition scenario. Which I'm by no means claiming occurred. Just a thought is all.

posted on Sep, 21 2015 @ 05:10 AM

No need to time that precisely because a demolition has always some random in it, i.e. chaos theory. What only matters is to start with the one in which the plane crashed in lower.

posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 03:52 PM

skyeagle409, page 50 : Of course it is BS, and as proof, point out the time lines where demo explosions are heard in the videos as WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 collapsed. If you are unable to provide the time lines, your case will be dismissed.

There have been numerous such videos pointed out to you in this long thread's pages, beginning in the opening post already. It is clear by now that you totally lack the will or intention to view and listen to them. I'll repost a few of them now for the rest of the readers who indeed possess an open mind.

You, matadoor, as a demolition-industry expert, should first listen to these deep, low demolition sounds in the following long video, recorded by a video camera on a tripod on Hoboken Pier, later on another Pier a bit more northwards, 3000 meters / 10,000 feet away from the North Tower. And realize first hand, that there exists a broad Scala of other, military based techniques you and most of your military colleagues have no access rights to.

In dry air at 20 °C, the speed of sound is 343.2 meters per second (1,126 ft/s).
Sound travels faster through water, and even faster, about 2 km/sec, through the upper bedrock crust of Manhattan.
In saltwater, sound travels at about 1500 m/s and in freshwater 1435 m/s.
The speeds of sounds range from 1450 to 1498 meters per second in distilled water and 1531 m/s in sea water at room temperatures (20 to 25 °C).

Thus, the original demolition sounds that accompanied the events you SEE happening with your eyes at the speed of light in the 9/11 Eyewitness video, you HEAR later in it, with your ears.

Traveling at its slowest speed - through air, those sounds arrived 8.74 secs later at the microphone of that camera that stood firmly with its tripod legs on the solid concrete of that Hudson River its Pier, that was embedded with its concrete legs in the same bedrock as under the Twin Towers. The distance to the Towers was 3 Km / 3000meters.
The same sounds traveled fastest through the bedrock under the Towers to that Pier in about 1.5 secs.
The same sounds traveled through the sea water of the Hudson River towards that Pier, 3000 meters away from the Twin Towers, in about 2 secs.

Which probably means that a lot of those sounds you HEAR in this long video are later arriving "echo's" from the first deep sounds that accompanied the events you SAW in the video, and reached that camera-microphone first through the bedrock where that Pier its concrete pillars stood in after 1.5 secs, and a half second later through the seawater of the Hudson River.

You'd better start watching and listening at the 40 minutes position in the below video, and carefully listen to the audio accompanying all the pictures, and read the physics explanations on screen. I think that the original narrators did not fully realize my above arguments.

When you are a genuine worried US citizen, the first seeds of serious doubt regarding the official story will now enter your formerly so solidly based official story believe system :

9/11 Eyewitness. Rare unfiltered / unaltered amateur footage | What was NOT shown on TV :

You will probably ask yourself first, how come I did not hear all those same deep demolition sounds I hear in this above video, in all those main stream videos of 9/11 aired on 9/11 and in the weeks and months and years after that cruel day.? Here's your answer :

The most important video, "9/11 WTC Detonations Finally Revealed" from _BoneZ_ did not get one word to address it, from the usual "debunkers". Because at last you can clearly hear the staccato sounds of the first detonations that forced the top-part of the WTC North Tower to collapse in on itself, starting from the highest plane-impacted floors and working their way upwards through that top-part first. And which already pulverized a great deal of that top-part.
Which effect can not be originating from NATURAL CAUSES.

Time to listen also to that angry man again in this same video by _BoneZ_ , who eye- and ear witnessed the Twin Towers demolitions from nearby, telling us about all the explosion sounds he CLEARLY HEARD when those Towers collapsed, that were taken out from ALL the main networks footage, before it got aired. Because when he got home late afternoon, and listened to the endlessly repeated news clips of those collapses, all those demolition sounds he himself so clearly heard that day, were taken out.

This man's eyewitness account on itself indicates clearly that 9/11 was a full scale false flag operation, supported by many pre-opiniated streams in the US citizenry.
The other fact indicating the same, is that only after years of FOIA pressure, we at last teared those real original videos from the claws of NIST, which kept them away from the public eyes and ears for so many long years.

So you can at last understand why we couldn't hear those demolition sounds in the first few years before some doubters started to file FOIA requests asking for the original video footage from NIST, kept secret by NIST, all those long years already :

Here's another video, this one with two huge explosions in it, accompanying the collapse start of the South Tower.
The first video is screen-marked "10:28am" (should be 09:59am) and is a very brief clip of the South Tower collapse, recorded close by from the south east, next to Trinity Church. Though less than 5 seconds long, this clip offers fairly high quality audio, the most pronounced sound being that of 2 gigantic explosions. They are unmistakable and sound like 2 violent thunder claps (like when FAE's or TB's explode) :


posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 03:56 PM
And of course the full length WTC-7 deep explosion sound video, with that deep sound in it, 2 seconds before the first sign of movement of the east penthouse roof on top of WTC-7.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: Salander

skyeagle409 : We have proven the truthers are not only conveyors of disinformation, hoaxed and bogus videos and doctored photos, but are also known for not telling the truth.

While a stubborn skyeagle409 keeps reposting a 2 seconds shorter copy of the below (FOIA freed from NIST) video over many pages of this long thread, while he acts as if he does not realize up till now that the first 2 seconds with the deep low explosion sound have been cut off from HIS video.
And that the deep low sound starts at the 16 secs position in the Ewing video and that in HIS video the WTC-7 footage is starting when the penthouse starts to move, which happens at the 18 secs position in the by Charles Ewing posted video, so 2 seconds later than the explosion sound.

Then he repeatedly keeps asking the readers to point out the (cut-out) explosion sound in HIS intentionally cut-off video, he keeps re-posting, which he seems not to realize is posting FALSE information, and by now clearly intentionally, after this info is posted to him several times already.
This is the full video with that sound, 2 secs before the east penthouse roof starts to dent :

DEEP SOUND at WTC-7 (2s pass until east-penthouse roof dents):
WTC 7 - HUGE DEEP EXPLOSION (by Charles Ewing Smith)
That deep explosion sound is the only clearly audible explosive artifact in this WTC 7 collapse video :

Title : WTC 7 Explosion - NIST FOIA Cbs-Net Dub5 09. That's a non-YouTube reserve copy of the famous video of the deep explosive sound just 2 seconds before the east penthouse on the roof of WTC 7 started to sink.

This is the audio print-out of the deep explosion sound and the rest of the WTC-7 collapse sound signals in this FOIA freed video :

And this is the 2 seconds later starting WTC-7 video, starting at the east penthouse roof denting, instead of a few seconds earlier in the FOIA requested REAL video. The false one posted too many times by now by skyeagle409.
Moderator intervention clearly not needed, he does a great job himself, by bringing his arguments to such a low level that even a child can see what he is trying to do :

I thus ask YOU, the readers : Who is not telling the truth here.?

posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 04:04 PM
Title : New WTC 7 findings: NIST criminally manipulated computer input data; explosions and extreme heat ignored; key videos cut short :

"[T]here was a rumble [coming from WTC7, which was captured on video a second before collapse initiation]. ... Pop! Pop! Pop! was all you heard until the building sunk into a rising cloud of gray."

2002, Chris Bull and Sam Erman, Editors, 'At Ground Zero: Young Reporters Who Were There Tell Their Stories', p. 97 (words of New York Daily News reporter Peter DeMarco, later of the Boston Globe)

The reader and for sure this site's owners should read this whole above page, last updated on Aug. 27, 2015.
It's well worded and full of VERY interesting links, photos and diagrams. It shows to what pack of lies NIST resorted to, to create a column 79 buckling.
And read the rest of that website too, then make up your mind YOURSELF.

From about halfway in the page, this text and link to a You Tube video is given by Joel van der Reijden, the creator of the website :

MSNBC reporter Ashley Banfield, primarily known for her observation at the time of the WTC 7 collapse at the end of the afternoon, was already at Ground Zero when the towers came down. Around 11:15 a.m., 45 minutes after the second tower had come down, she told her listeners from West Broadway, roughly 400 meters from WTC 7, that she'd heard no less than 4 explosions which sounded like car bombs:

"Yeah, hi, I'm just about 5 or 10 blocks north of the site where these two towers actually came down. We're obviously having a bit of trouble right now maintaining our location as we just heard one more explosion. That's around the 4th one we've heard. The police are telling us they're either car bombs or they are simply cars that have overheated that are exploding. But every time that happens, there's a flurry of activity and more emergency vehicles that come down this road."

While maybe not very well known, these reports are absolutely accurate. We know this from videos that are even less well known than these, the most important being one of Richard Peskin, who was shooting from his high-rise apartment building roughly 650 meters (700 yards) south of Ground Zero.

His tape for WTC 7 starts just before 11:00, right after he heard a major explosion and noticed a new cloud of smoke rise from WTC 7's east side, where later in the day the collapse initiated from. In the minutes after that he captures what appear to be four additional explosions and reports on at least one other he failed to record. So we're talking at least 6 loud potential explosions in the minutes before and after 11:00 a.m. which NIST hasn't addressed. Peskin:

"[Start video; Peskin zoomed in to east corner of WTC 7:] A blast, explosion, or something, because now there is a lot of police activity and sirens and more smoke rising from the ground. [Smoke is rising from the side of WTC 7's east corner, but not exactly clear which smoke cloud Peskin means.] New smoke. So there was some kind of additional explosion, but I don't know what it was. Definitely. Smoke is rising from the ground. Maybe it was a federal building or something like that. Okay. Okay, sweety, I'll call you later.

"[New take:] It's now 11 o'clock. We're still continuing to hear explosions. [Another crack or explosion can be heard.] I don't know what it is. A lot of smoke. ... [Another crack or explosion can be heard.] ... There's a fire [away from of WTC 7]. Maybe a car on fire. [Another crack or explosion can be heard.] ...

"[New take:] [Very loud crack/explosion and echo] It's another explosion. [Seems to be not much after 11:05, judging by the shadows.] ... [New take:] It's now a little bit after twelve."

The initial explosion right next to WTC 7, or possibly inside it, which Peskin failed to capture, appears to have been picked up by at least four other cameras that we are aware of :

These cameras were operated by 9/11 "filmmaker" Gideon Naudet, independent journalist Lucia Davis, firefighter Steve Spak and another unknown camera man. Possibly they picked up different explosions, but at the very least they were all captured in the same period around 11:00am. We know this for a variety of reasons.

If you did get curious by these texts and videos, proceed to read further halfway into that above page.
Explaining about all the other explosions, like the famous Phone boot explosion. He calls it the Lucia Davis clip and used the sun positions (as I suggested so many years already) to time the different videos with explosions in it, and concludes that they all 4, fit well in the Barry Jennings interview explanation by Barry, and that the huge explosion Barry (RIP) told us happened at the 6th floor inside the northeastern stairwell in WTC-7, he thinks occurred around 7 minutes before 11:00 a.m. (10:53 a.m. )
Followed by several additional explosions.!

I would like to see my peers in this thread to dive deeper and in detail into these interesting subjects put on the WTC-7 table, by Joel. He offers much more than the one time stamp waypastvne gave already for the St. Paul's Chapel footage (the one I am still puzzled about because of those strange sun shadows in the window frames), and Joel cross checked it with other videos with the same explosive sound(s) in them.
If you haven't read the rest of this yet, you will certainly be amazed by the additional evidence Joel gathered.
I assure you, it's getting more and more interesting, and detail filled, the further you read....
I repeat, my peers should be all over this new combination of evidence.

And another important WTC-7 video from this thread's page 1, with its 8.5 secs long audio with 9 audible CUTTER CHARGES EXPLOSIONS in the direct onset to WTC-7 its global collapse:
The Ashley Banfield WTC-7 interview, posted by David Chandler :

All these explosive evidence is mostly posted already in page 1 of this thread. And drommelsboef posted halfway in this thread that VALUABLE link to the site.
Are you, skyeagle409, thus unwilling to read and LISTEN, and use good earphones? Or is there some other mysterious influence at play in your mind?
There are many more explosions posted already in this thread alone, you also seem not willing to read about or listen to.
Which is some very peculiar behavior for an USAF technician and private pilot. Which career and skills we normally combine with a tendency to logical thinking.
Where and when have you lost that skill ? Or is it just a result of a lifelong indoctrination in unconditionally following orders or opinions of higher ups, like some dishonest to the core, military brass or some powerful politicians.?

posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 04:17 PM
I extracted some of the more logical comments from the 11,708 Comments on this EdwardCurrent "debunker" WTC-7 video which was posted by skyeagle409 quite some pages ago :

9/11 Commission Ignored Fire-fighter's Account of Explosions Inside WTC.
Schroeder's compelling testimony contradicts official story at every turn.
Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet, Thursday, August 9, 2007 :

Bloom Box 2109315 : Astounding and compelling testimony from a brave 9/11 firefighter that was ignored by the 9/11 Commission has added further weight to the already overwhelming evidence that the Twin Towers were brought down by means of explosives.
Firefighter John Schroeder, assigned to Engine Company 10 directly across the street from the World Trade Center complex, holds back tears and describes his first-hand experience on Sept. 11th in an emotional interview with We Are Change and Loose Change.
Much of Schroeder's testimony directly contradicts the official story (OS) and the 9/11 Commission, to which he spoke, but was ignored.

Perhaps the most important aspect of Schroeder's testimony is his recollection that there was a distinct gap between the plane striking the North tower and the elevators exploding.

"We're standing there in the lobby....all of a sudden we hear (explosion noise) and the elevators exploded like something out of a Bruce Willis Die Hard movie," said Schroeder.
"People just come running out of the elevators on fire....I was like what is going on here, something's up here - I mean the plane's up there now there's fire down here?"
Schroeder said his team were in the North tower for at least 5 minutes after the first plane hit before the elevators exploded, contradicting the official explanation that jet fuel cascaded down the elevator shafts and caused them to explode immediately after the plane struck.

"We said something's wrong here - I mean the plane hit up on the 80th floor - 5 minutes later and the elevators are suddenly exploding on the first level - why?" asked Schroeder.
"There was definitely a distinct time delay between the planes hitting and the elevators exploding," he added.

After attempting to make their way up the towers and then returning back down to the lobby, Schroeder and his colleagues were shocked to see that the lobby was totally deserted.
"We got down to the lobby and everything was blown out, exploded, and we were the only ones in the lobby....everything was exploded, everything was gone, we're like what is going on here?" said Schroeder. Schroeder's team was baffled as to why so much death and destruction was evident in the lower levels of the tower when the plane had hit so high up. "It looked like a bomb went off in the lobby," said Schroeder.

They were also shocked at how the building seemed to be collapsing in on them from the interior. Schroeder's company was heading up to the 24th floor of the North tower when the second plane hit the South tower. "We were tossed like a rag doll by another explosion in our building," said Schroeder. "People were making their way down the stairwells, burnt like you couldn’t believe. We were all shocked, because it seemed as if there was fire everywhere, on so many floors. It just didn’t make sense."

"Explosions, fires everywhere, is something happening that we don't know about here? recalled Schroeder. "I mean a plane just hit - it wasn't an F-14 coming in and shooting rockets at us."

Bloom Box 5016405 ( + edits by LaBTop) : Despite some damage to the south side of WTC7, it essentially came down for the first 2.25 secs of the global collapse (that's over the height of 8 floors! ) at free-fall speed.
Through the path of greatest resistance (straight down) The only way that was physically possible is by controlled demolition.

I edited the last excerpt quite a bit, to make the message crystal clear.
There is no NATURAL way possible for those 2.25 secs of real free-fall acceleration, and the person who will propose and execute a PROPER way to achieve such a result in a NATURAL induced steel high rise collapse, by fires alone, will get about three Nobel Prizes. And after thus having fooled the whole Nobel Committee, that person will receive a supplemental one for being the greatest Magician after Merlin, The Grimm Brothers, Houdini, Dr Who and Rinzwind.

jomper : This NIST computer model of WTC-7's first 2 secs of its collapse sequence doesn't represent what actually happened, doesn't explain how the building fell at free fall acceleration, wasn't based on the examination of any physical evidence from the building and can't be checked by independent experts because its data has been hidden. It's totally unscientific.
NIST will not allow its WTC-7 data fed into its computer animation to be independently verified.

I also edited this excerpt a bit for clarification.

posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 04:22 PM
Posted by skyeagle409 in page 56, this prime example of the ugly sort of yellow UK & US journalism, pure pieces of disinformation in the years after 9/11, titled "Footage that kills the conspiracy theories: Unseen 9/11 footage shows WTC Building 7 consumed by fire", triggered some very well worded "Latest Comments". Just read some of these latests ones :

remorris, NZ, 3 years ago :
At the risk of repetition. WTC7 was an 81 vertically columned, 47 storied steel framed high rise, that dropped into its own footprint in 6.5 seconds +or-.
2.25 Seconds of that in total gravitational free fall. Forensic study found temperatures up to 4,735 F [Molybdenum spherules USGS]. FEMA reported steel vaporized and evaporated with holes in it 'like Swiss cheese'. RJ.Lee found spherical metallic particles 150 x normal building dust, spheres produced by molten droplets being violently introduced into air.
Independent analysis of DUST found active thermitic material [Harrit/Jones : Bentham].
High grade energetics IN the dust. Molten metal was seen in the piles 'running down the channel rails like in a foundry'.
Eyewitness testimony of explosive events before, during and after aircraft strike were established 118 times in audio transcripts [Barry Jennings.FDNY transcripts].
NIST report is a 'probable THEORY', based on computer modeling un-tested by peers or x-examination paradigms not for public disclosure.

Poseidon, Bristol, 3 years ago :
For those who complain that opponents of the official 9/11 story just "cry about melted steel and stuff", I'll explain the significance. The laws of probability, thermodynamics and thermo-chemistry dictate that military-grade unreacted nano-thermite does not form spontaneously, and office fires of hydrocarbons burning in air of up to 21% oxygen cannot melt iron or steel. The time evolution of a spontaneous process will be in the direction of increasing entropy; thus, a sophisticated, highly energetic, nano-engineered accelerant comprising 40 nanometer-thick aluminum plates and 100 nanometer iron oxide grains requires a 'creator' - e.g., the U.S. military.

Dr. Ed Kendrick of, Kansas City, US, 3 years ago :
The record is being written longingly--establishing who are complicit in the cover-up. Those who deceive with intent to conceal a crime are as guilty as the perpetrators of the crime. It's not to late to whistle blow about your assignments to cover-up who really did 9/11. It is clear by the ratings that this disinformation article, and the growing awareness of the 9/11 bamboozle, indicate growing awareness and courage to speak truth to those who abuse positions of power--especially in the media. An informed citizenry depend upon media. This article violates the trust in media to inform. Turn yourselves in--but to whom? Wikileaks? We will succeed to the degree that we confront and expose pure evil. All together now!

Brian Good, California, 3 years ago :
Not only fell in free fall, but fell in near-perfect symmetry. This can happen only if all the structural support is removed simultaneously. And consider that according to NIST's theory of an internal collapse, the columns at the east end of the building failed though they were carrying no load beyond their own weight.

Adrian M, Stevenage, UK, 3 years ago :
At a press conference in Nov 2008 Shyam Sunder, Lead Investigator for NIST stated (correctly) that it was impossible for Building 7 to have collapsed at free fall acceleration due to resistance from the steel structure below.
The problem was that it's easy to measure the acceleration of the collapse, so when the NIST final report was released a month later they were forced to admit in it, that the building fell in free fall for 2.25 seconds. They have since completely refused to explain how.
This is one of hundreds of problems with the official investigations. The people who believe 19 hijackers managed all this support the Bush Administration conspiracy theory.
Acknowledging that the official story is impossible is frightening but our politicians are still making decisions today based on a false flag operation from a decade ago.
Those who support the official story avoid facts in their arguments and just rely on abuse and poster Sara Goldstein is a classic example. Do your own research.

posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 04:22 PM
a reply to: LaBTop

Thank you for that video.

If you Liston at the 36:41 mark you can clearly hear multitudes of explosions before the WTC fell.
Best evidence yet.
I also can hear four separate explosions before the first Tower fell.

Anyone believes that there were no explosions after watching this video is lying to themselves.

posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 04:44 PM

Anyone believes that there were no explosions after watching this video is lying to themselves.

You got that right, great post's Btop..

posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 06:07 PM
a reply to: LaBTop

That is not evidence of demo explosions at ground zero and as proof, the challenge for you is to point out the time lines where demo explosions are heard in the following videos. Failing to provide those time lines will be proof that no demo explosions occurred during the collapse of WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7. Now, it's time for you to point out the time lines of demo explosions in the following videos.

Here is what demo explosions sound like, so you can use the following video to compare with the WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 videos.

If you can't point out demo explosions in the WTC videos, It will be clearly evident that no demo explosions occurred as the WTC buildings collapsed and that will explain why seismic monitors in the area did not detect demo explosions as those buildings collapsed.

The challenge for you is to prove demo explosions occurred as WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 collapsed. IN failing to do so, will make my point very clear that no demo explosions occurred at ground zero.

The ball is now in your court.
edit on 23-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 06:14 PM

If you can't point out demo explosions in the WTC videos, I will be clearly evident that no demo explosions occurred as the WTC buildings collapsed.

He already did that, funny only your videos fail to have true audio. Maybe your hearing is not so good, go back and listen with head phones, if you don't hear explosions I would suggest you see your doctor..

posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 06:19 PM
a reply to: wildb

He already did that, funny only your videos fail to have true audio.

That won't work because you cannot mask demo explosions. Not only that, other videos, some form news agencies, depicted no demo explosions either, which explains why no demo explosions were detected by seismic monitors.

Now, I am waiting for you to point out the time lines in the three WTC videos. Failing to provide the time lines depicting demo explosions will make my point that truthers are guilty of deception and spewing disinformation.

Now, how long do I have to wait for you to post those time lines? To put it simply, either you post those time lines for all to see and hear or you have lost your case. Simple as that!
edit on 23-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 55  56  57    59  60  61 >>

log in