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.

 

If Someone Proved one point Would Accept the rest?

page: 17
5
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 12:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



That's right, you are not going to convince me of anything. Specially "911 Myths.


And, the myths are:

According to truthers, this photo depicts molten steel.

Molten Steel

Now, the rest of the story.



That is just one example of many as to why the Truth Movement has no credibility.


" I do not believe in your conspiracy theories nor do I believe in the OS disinformation...


If you had done your homework, you would have found that demolition experts, structural and civil engineers and architects with no ties to the government are those who have concluded that fire, in conjunction with impact damage, was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings. Even firefighters have come to the same conclusion as well.

You have to understand that you cannot change the laws of physics from the comfort of your keyboard and reality doesn't depend on what you think.

edit on 23-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

So if a nuclear device was detonated why was no radiation detected at the site ????

You are aware that the NY City department of Health had an investigator on site from time 2nd plane
hit the South Tower

Equipped with sensitive radiation detection equipment

Yet was not able to detect any radiation




Within minutes of the crash, McKinney sent a radiological health inspector to check the site for any radiation sources. He reached Richard Borri, a senior scientist in the department’s office of Radiological Health, who like most people from DOH, was on his way to work when the first tower was hit.





While I was walking down Church Street, with all my instruments, I came within 1000 feet of the South Tower, and unfortunately the building came down,” says Borri, sounding every bit the unruffled scientist. “It’s a good thing I walked slowly.”



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

A greater blunder would be listening to your absurd and unrealistic claims.

It appears you are one of those posters who must attack somebody in order to post. Here, Gordon Duff, there Balsamo, and elsewhere Gage. It seems that's all you have.

I'm interested in substantive posts, not petty posts like yours.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 09:05 AM
link   
***ATTENTION***

All members please review this link.

This forum is held to a much higher debate and civility standard than others. Removed posts in this forum can and do result in instant ATS account termination. Please bear that in mind when authoring posts.

Thank you.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: firerescue

I am certainly no expert, but I know enough to observe that a Geiger Counter, probably what your guys were using, detects only certain types of radiation, not ALL types of radiation.

The more compelling evidence is the view from above--hot spots in several places at WTC observed from satellites overhead. And of course the molten metal that remained for about 3 months, reported by all the local media, detected in the air by the DELTA Group and Mr. Cahill.

Those phenomena simply could not have been caused by the NIST explanation of office fires and gravity.

Further, the presence of elements such as Barium and Strontium, Thorium and Uranium, also strongly suggest a nuclear event.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander

Further, the presence of elements such as Barium and Strontium, Thorium and Uranium, also strongly suggest a nuclear event.


The presence of elements such as Barium and Strontium, Thorium and Uranium, strongly suggest a Portland Cement Event.




Barium (Ba)
Barium, classified as a metal, is number 56 on the periodic table. Ba is typically found in the raw materials, particularly limestone or clay. In some instances, barium can also be found in fuels, such as coal, at levels up to 24.5 ppm (Bhatty 2004).
Because barium is not a volatile metal, it is generally incorporated into the clinker when introduced into the kiln.

Strontium (Sr)
Strontium is the 38th element and a metal. The presence of Sr is not uncommon in the raw materials, particularly in CaCO3 sources, such as limestone (Bhatty 2004). The concentrations are not especially high, however.
Because Sr is not volatile, it is generally trapped in the clinker, where it would not be uncommon to find strontium at levels on the order of 0.5 percent by weight



etd.auburn.edu...



Burning coal in boilers to create steam for power generation and industrial applications produces a number of combustion residuals. Naturally radioactive materials that were in the coal mostly end up in fly ash, bottom ash and boiler slag. These residuals are called TENORM--Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials--because burning removes the coal's organic constituents, concentrating the trace amounts of naturally occurring radionuclides:

uranium
thorium
potassium
their radioactive decay products including radium. (The amount radium in coal can vary by more than two orders of magnitude depending upon the type of coal and where it was mined.)
About 80 to 90 percent of fly ash, bottom ash and boiler slag is non-radioactive minerals, typically silicon, aluminum, iron and calcium.



www.epa.gov...



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




You should be, especially since a number of countries around the world had issued warnings to the United States about OBL and al-Qaeda in the weeks and months prior to the 9/11 attack.


Okay okay, now can you honestly say you don't understand how I'm going to
view that? Or do you really believe willful ignorance is a defense? Oh wait....



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander



A greater blunder would be listening to your absurd and unrealistic claims.


In addition to Gordon Duff, Steven Jones, Rob Balsamo, Richard Gage, I have mentioned others as well.


It appears you are one of those posters who must attack somebody in order to post. Here, Gordon Duff, there Balsamo, and elsewhere Gage. It seems that's all you have.


All three have been caught lying, so the question is; why do truthers continue to use them as references? In addition to those truther websites, I have mentioned them as well.


edit on 23-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs



Okay okay, now can you honestly say you don't understand how I'm going to
view that? Or do you really believe willful ignorance is a defense? Oh wait....


Other than the pre-9/11 warnings, you should have taken a hint as to what OBL and al-Qaeda did after their 9/11 terrorist attack, which should have told you why 9/11 was not a false flag operation.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander



I am certainly no expert, but I know enough to observe that a Geiger Counter, probably what your guys were using, detects only certain types of radiation, not ALL types of radiation.


Let's take a look here because the following photos are not indicative of a site that has been contaminated with radiation.



Photo 1: WTC Ground Zero Site

Photo 2: WTC Ground Zero Site

Photo 3: WTC Ground Zero Site

Photo 4: WTC Ground Zero Site

-------------------------------------------------------

Proper Dress in Radiation-Contaminated Environment

Photo 1

Photo 2


As you can see, there are major differences in the way clean-up crews are dressed in relation to crews dressed for a radiation-contaminated environment and crews at WTC ground zero.



The more compelling evidence is the view from above--hot spots in several places at WTC observed from satellites overhead.


Hot spots can be expected and are nothing new. Here are some examples.



Queensbury warehouse fire still smoldering two days after start

QUEENSBURY — Firefighters were still dousing hot spots Monday at a blaze that began more than two days ago in warehouses rented by SCA Tissue. "It's the biggest fire in our history as far as a big commercial building," said West Glens Falls Fire Chief Mike Gordon.


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.


Hobby Store Still Smoldering After Saturday's Fire

Lynchburg, VA - The remains of The Collector's Lair were still smoldering on Monday. Officials still do not have a cause, but confirmed the fire started in the basement of the building. Investigators say it will probably continue smolder for days until they can get to the bottom of the 12 feet of rubble. "A little hard to see it go," said frequent shopper of "Collector's Lair," Chris Morris.

Locals like Morris have been stopping by to get one last look. "There's a lot of stuff in there. I'm not surprised it's burning this long," said Morris.


Officials say Caldwell plant fire smoldered for days

Firefighters work at the scene of a structure fire as a portion of the Land O’ Lakes Purina Feed building collapses in the background, Sunday evening in Caldwell.


Fire at Yuma-area packing shed to smolder for days

YUMA, AZ-
A fire that destroyed a group of produce packing sheds east of Yuma is expected to smolder for days as piles of burned cardboard cools and foam building insulation continues to send up smoke.


Great Chicago FireGreat Chicago Fire

Once the fire had ended, the smoldering remains were still too hot for a survey of the damage to be completed for days.




And of course the molten metal that remained for about 3 months,...


Rusting iron generates heat and in some cases, rusting iron can gernete temperatures high enough to start fires. it is process known as


reported by all the local media, detected in the air by the DELTA Group and Mr. Cahill.


Those phenomena simply could not have been caused by the NIST explanation of office fires and gravity.


Yes it could have and was expected when you look at the history of building fires that continued to smolder for days. Now, take a look here and understand how iron produces heat.



Iron Burns . . . Slowly

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. But rusting is a slow process that gives off very little heat. It becomes a fire hazard only when a lot of iron is allowed to rust in a closed-up space.

www.highlightskids.com...

edit on 23-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

I know this has prolly been debunked but I hope it helps
bring you up to speed any way.




posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

Another grand illusion was the claim that United 93 was shot down.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Even inexpensive survey meters (Geiger Counters, to the layman) would be perfectly capable of detecting the leftover elements produced in a nuclear event. The ones used by a city hazmat department are much more sensitive than the ones I'm referencing, with a detection threshold at the microcurie level or lower. If there had been a nuclear weapons event, any survey meter would have been capable of detecting the byproducts.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:45 PM
link   
So we have come full circle again.
Back to silent nukes with undetectable radiation.

Isn't it about time that the conspiracy crowd admits that the OS makes more sense than all these quaky theories?



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent

"Undetectable Radiation".
Yeah, if I could invent that, I could probably leverage it into radiation that has no effect on biological matter. Then I'd be Rothschild wealthy. That could be fun, I guess. Get the Koch Brothers to shine one shoe, and Soros to shine the other...



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 07:25 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent

Then again, I'm not nearly the kind of person most people would want to have that kind of political influence. I'm big into personal accountability.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: pfishy

I am a layman, and happy to admit you're correct about various detection meters.

In this case, all things considered, especially the speed with which so much forensic evidence was whisked away by the authorities, I cannot help but realize there is a substantial chance that any evidence gathered suggesting a nuclear event might also have been whisked away.

As the lady head of EPA said, before anybody had sampled the air and before Mr. Cahill and the DELTA Group had sampled the air, "the air is fine, nobody has anything to worry about", or words to that effect.

After all, there was much deception going on. A story and narrative was being told, hammered into the public psyche, and a nuclear event was definitely NOT part of that narrative.

Some serious force was required to turn those steel columns into pretzel shapes. Some big force was required to blow those pieces into adjacent buildings. Some strange event was required to damage all those vehicles as they were damaged, and something was responsible for the sicknesses of those first responders, sicknesses so very similar to those seen at Chernobyl.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Well, I can't attest to any evidence that might have been removed before it was able to be detected, but I still have my doubts that a nuclear event is a viable explanation. The main reason being there's practically no way to have removed all of the contamination it would have left behind in a thorough enough manner in any time frame which would have precluded it being detected by civilians first. Many more types of companies keep survey meters on hand than most people realize.
Any company that tests welds, tests construction materials, any hospital that provides radiotherapy, many companies that do lead paint removal, coal-fired powerplants, scrapyards. As far as the smoke traveled the contamination would certainly have affected someone who would have taken notice of a huge change in background radiation the moment they turned a survey meter on. Now, I'm sure that a power plant or maybe a hospital could have been kept quiet through threat of a subsidies withdrawal. But I honestly believe that had it been a nuclear event, there would have been at least some corroborating evidence brought forward by now.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

As far as what I believe actually occurred, well, nevermind. I have beat that horse to death already. But please understand, I am not trying to attack you personally. I'm just sharing my insight as to why that's one of the very few scenarios I will argue against, on either side of the debate. The others being the really fringe hologram and space beam ideas.
And I can understand why you favor the theory as well. It does certainly seem like it could have caused much of the physical damage to and around the buildings. Though I don't think it was actually enough damage for a nuke or two. But it certainly does have it's attractive points, and I can't fault anyone for believing it. I'm just trying to provide some details that you may want to know.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander



In this case, all things considered, especially the speed with which so much forensic evidence was whisked away by the authorities, I cannot help but realize there is a substantial chance that any evidence gathered suggesting a nuclear event might also have been whisked away.


The WTC nuke story was a hoax and what you are doing is pushing that hoaxed nuke story, which proves my case that trutherrs are guilty of spewing disinformation, hoaxed and bogus videos and photos on a regular basis.



The Dimitri Khalezov "WTC was nuked" hoax

www.takeourworldback.com...


WTC steel was examined. In fact, I once posed with a piece of WTC steel at the Rio Vista Airport, CA., during our special event a few years ago. Much of the WTC steel has been given away and even used in the construction of the USS New York.



Some serious force was required to turn those steel columns into pretzel shapes.


I have shown that fire, not explosives, was responsible. I guess you missed these photos on what fire does to exposed structural steel, so here they are.

Photo 1: Fire Weakens Steel

Photo 2: This 350-foot-long Building Fell Victim to Fire

WTC Steel



Some serious force was required to turn those steel columns into pretzel shapes. Some big force was required to blow those pieces into adjacent buildings.


Now, explain why a huge bomb failed to throw these steel columns of WTC 1 anywhere in 1993.

Steel Columns of WTC 1 Sitting in Huge Bomb Crater



Some strange event was required to damage all those vehicles as they were damaged,...


That was the result of terrorist flying airliners into WTC 1 and WTC 2.


... and something was responsible for the sicknesses of those first responders, sicknesses so very similar to those seen at Chernobyl.


Your post is further proof that you are spreading disinformation and here's the proof.



Ground Zero Workers File Billion-Dollar Health Lawsuit

MONDAY, Sept. 13 (HealthDayNews) -- Nearly three years to the day of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, lawyers for more than 800 "Ground Zero" rescue and clean-up workers announced Monday a billion-dollar class-action lawsuit against owners of the World Trade Center for exposing the workers to allegedly toxic conditions.

Contained in this "toxic waste pile," according to Sawyer and Worby, were:

* 200,000 pounds of lead from the estimated 50,000 personal computers in thousands of World Trade Center offices
mercury contained in the towers' more than half a million fluorescent lights dioxin from oil and fuel

* 2,000 tons of asbestos

* Benzene from more than 91,000 liters of burned jet fuel

* Cadmium, PCBs, and up to 2 million pounds of toxins known as polycystic aromatic hydrocarbons.

All of these contaminants have strong links to pulmonary, skin or immune system ailments, as well as cancer, Sawyer said. He predicted that long-term cancer rates among clean-up workers could rise to five to seven times the norm during the coming decades.

news.healingwell.com...


9/11 Ground Zero Workers Reach Claims Settlement

Asbestos and other harmful construction materials were used in the building’s construction during the 1970s, and when the towers collapsed all those materials were pulverized into airborne microbes; which were breathed in by every individual there for weeks and months. This is not to suggest that every single person there will develop cancers and deadly diseases, but the chances of such a disease have become more possible because of the exposure.

When airborne asbestos fibers are breathed into the lungs there is a risk of developing mesothelioma, a cancer affecting the lining of the lungs. Mesothelioma and other asbestos related illnesses are at risk in construction/demolition areas when proper safety practices are not taken seriously or ignored.

www.asbestos.net...


Nothing there about radiation sickness nor nukes as responsible for their sickness because the nuke story was a hoax.



edit on 25-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)







 
5
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join