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.

 

NYC World Premiere. Firefighters, Architects & Engineers: Expose the Myths of 9/11

page: 7
114
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: RogueWave

There is no name, but the video has been uploaded by a number of people.




posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

sure



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

See, this is where your ittle debunking attempt falls apart. You were talking about hoaxed/edited videos yourself. I share your concern. Therefore I cannot accept the evidence you are using to prove that there were no audible explosions.

If you can't prove what the source is, and can't prove it is the original, unaltered vid, your argument is meaningless.

You see how that works?
edit on 12-9-2015 by RogueWave because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: FlySolo



I'm reading up on ground effect and what real pilots have to say about it. it's a complicated matter of aerodynamics. But before I'm done and come back with an army of information, I will tell you ground effect theory is bunk.


Ground effect vehicles prove that flying in ground effect is not bunk as you claim.

Photo: Ground Effect Vehicle



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

What about pilot experience, could a novice pilot know about and create ground effect?
edit on 12-9-2015 by crazyeddie68 because: Content



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:52 AM
link   
I don't know anything about ground effect, lampposts getting hit or explosions. I don't consider myself a truther or an operating system.

All I know is, when these towers came down I was amazed at how they did. Like they said in the video, these building fell right through the path of most resistance. The first tower top part topples, you can see it. But then, it just falls straight down. Like there is absolutely no resistance. This just doesn't make sense to me. A-symetrical structural damage and fires usually do not make for a fully symetrical collapse. I haven't heard a single good argument explaining this.
Much in the same way I haven't heard a single good argument for the lone shooter theory. It's just not what I'd expect, and it makes me feel somewhat uncomfortable.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
And, misinformed. When I caught truthers posting false information in regard to the 9/11 aircraft, I decided to check out this main source of information, which led me to the "Pilots for 9/11 Truth" website, where I as shocked at the disinformation and lies that the founder of that website was spewing, which was then, used as references by truthers.

As a pilot since 1969, I knew that what he was posting was disinformation and lies because what he was spewing did not reflect reality in the real world of aviation and I challenged him about it, but he continues to post disinformation and lies at that website, in effect, duping truthers.

All of us know that the truth movement has been infiltrated...

I know it and I think you do as well.

The whole agenda behind this is to discredit the truth.

I suspect that you have fallen for it hook line & sinker.

On the other hand, those behind the original 'story' have demonstrated that they have lied to us about everything.

You disregard all 'truthers' because some of them have lied and yet at the same time you believe the authorities who not only have lied, they have clearly demonstrated that they are the ones BEHIND the infiltration of the truth movement.

Should we stop believing the truth just because lies exist?

The same scenario has taken place in Science, Religion, Education, and politics, etc.

Does that mean that all scientists, theologians, teachers, politicians are liars?

As long as you continue to argue the case for those in power, your credibility will remain non-existent.

Have you ever wondered WHY that little lightning bolt symbol below your avatar has an 8 next to it?

I can assure you that if the perpetraiters in DC were to ever log onto ATS, their stats would look similar.

This is in no way an attempt to belittle you, all I'm saying is that you believe what you do for all the wrong reasons.

You keep referring to 'truthers' as if it were a dirty word.

I can assure you that most here are wondering why.

That's a sure fire way to poison your own pot...



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyeddie68



What about pilot experience, could a novice pilot know about ground effect?


Ground effect is taught in flight school. Student pilots are required to demonstrate soft field techniques which requires knowledge of how to use ground effect to lift their aircraft off the ground before takeoff speed is reached. Ground effect can be sued to cushion landings as well, but works much better with low wing aircraft with flaps deployed.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   


The first tower top part topples, you can see it. But then, it just falls straight down. Like there is absolutely no resistance. This just doesn't make sense to me. A-symetrical structural damage and fires usually do not make for a fully symetrical collapse. I haven't heard a single good argument explaining this.


What you must understand is the Law's of Physics were suspended that day, it's the only answer that fits...



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




After 14 years, the 'OS' remains standing and all truther claims have been debunked.


No they haven't, firefighters architects and engineers say you're lying.
And appear to be paid to do so.
edit on Ram91215v59201500000015 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:01 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:02 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Jubei42



All I know is, when these towers came down I was amazed at how they did. Like they said in the video, these building fell right through the path of most resistance.


Which is evident in this photo.

Photo: No Free Fall Collapse

Notice in the upper photo that debris, which are falling at free fall speed,, are outpacing the collapse of the WTC Tower, which is proof that the building is not falling at free fall speed.


The first tower top part topples, you can see it. But then, it just falls straight down.


It was not possible for the top of the WTC Tower to topple over because with all of that weight concentrated on a small area, there was no way the hinge point could continue to support the weight of the upper block and the only way to go was straight down from that point on.



Now, let's take a look at this demolition method that doesn't require the use explosives.





randyvs wrote:

No they haven't, firefighters architects and engineers say you're lying. And appear to be paid to do so.


That is false and here the proof that I am correct.

Case in point.



Civil & Structural Engineers on WTC Collapse

"The aircraft moved through the building as if it were a hot and fast lava flow," Sozen says. "Consequently, much of the fireproofing insulation was ripped off the structure. Even if all of the columns and girders had survived the impact - an unlikely event - the structure would fail as the result of a buckling of the columns. The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."

There are 120,000 members of ASME(American Society of Mechanical Engineers) who do not question the NIST report. There are also 370,000 members of IEEE(Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) who do not question the NIST report. There are also 40,000 members of AIChE(American Institute of Chemical Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report. There are also 35,000 members of AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) who do not question the NIST report.


Towers Weakened by Planes; Brought Down by Fire

Only a handful of architects and engineers question the NIST Report, but they have never come up with an alternative. Although at first blush it may seem impressive that these people don't believe the NIST Report, remember that there are123,000 members of ASCE(American Society of Civil Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report. There are also 80,000 members of AIA(American Institute of Architects) who do not question the NIST Report.

edit on 12-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: crazyeddie68



What about pilot experience, could a novice pilot know about ground effect?


Ground effect is taught in flight school. Student pilots are required to demonstrate soft field techniques which requires knowledge of how to use ground effect to lift their aircraft off the ground before takeoff speed is reached. Ground effect can be sued to cushion landings as well, but works much better with low wing aircraft with flaps deployed.
OK,what about a novice pilot in a commercial airliner?Is that possible?Honest question, BTW.
edit on 12-9-2015 by crazyeddie68 because: Content



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:41 PM
link   
ATTENTION! STAY ON TOPIC! NO PERSONAL ATTACKS!

Fourteen years after the events, 9/11 topics still tend to elicit strong feelings and strong opinions. Many questions still remain, and theories abound. That's understandable, and we are committed to ensuring all ATS members are free to discuss the subject without fear of ridicule or retaliation.

To make that possible, it is IMPERATIVE that all members participating in 9/11 discussions remember to stay focused on the topics and avoid resorting to ad hominem attacks of any kind against anyone. Any attempts to do so or otherwise indulge in trolling are subject to decisive action, and given that organized trolling has gotten bad enough to temporarily shut down the forum before, we have little patience for it.

In particular, the practice of posting accusations of any kind against any member (e.g., "shills", et al) is the modus operandi of 9/11 trolls (and trolls in general), explicitly prohibited and may result in immediate suspension of posting privileges or account termination.

Let's remember that soliciting or posting personal information of any member is prohibited by the AboveTopSecret.com Terms And Conditions Of Use, so please don't.

The easiest way to avoid trouble is to focus on the topic itself, avoid personal commentary of any kind, and support or refute claims with citations, references or other evidence. Opinions or speculation are always welcome, of course, but only when they are on-topic.

Anyone encountering violations of the terms & conditions is encouraged to alert the staff, avoid feeding the trolls by responding and give us time to handle things. If you truly think someone is trolling, a "shill" or otherwise devoted to disruption, don't post it: alert us, instead.

If anyone should disagree with or have any questions about anything I post here, please don't hesitate to send me a private message, but don't reply directly to this post, lest it cause topic drift.

And, as always, thanks to everyone willing to discuss this subject with civility and cogency.

You're the best!



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

I mean the explanation of ground effect at the pentagon in bunk. Saw your picture, you look like a decent respectable fellow. If I may, I believe you have been fooled into the OS. As I stated, the plane is 44 feet in height. Add ground effect to that, how high would the plane be? What is the height of the outer wall breach?



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


"Pilots for 9/11 Truth" website


So what your saying is Pilots for 911 truth is a lairs website? And your the only "expert" on the 911 topic, because you are an airplane mechanic?
What your saying is all these pilots are lairs and only you know the real truth to whom, what, where, and when about 911?



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: FlySolo

Where are the time lines indicating demo explosions that I've asked for? There are no demo explosions in that video.

Here is what demo explosions sound like.





Now, let's take a look at WTC2 close up and provide us with the time lines where demo explosions are heard.



Now, lets go here and provide us with the time lines where demo explosions are heard.





As you may notice, all the video of demolitions in your post are filmed relatively close-up, with nothing standing in the way of the buildings. Show me a shot of wtc7 that close and with audio.

Thanks,

soulwaxer




top topics



 
114
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join