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.

 

Another One That Didn't Bite The Dust

page: 1
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2015 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Here's another one that refused to follow 9/11 physics.


Why didn't it turn into highly energetic dust clouds? How could it remain in one lump after falling such a height? Perhaps the girders in this building are the same type that Irn Bru is made from.




posted on Oct, 11 2015 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Kester

obviously there was not enough jetfuel, paper, and office furniture inside to bring it down.
plus, somebody probably got fired for that right?



posted on Oct, 11 2015 @ 03:54 PM
link   
How is what you showed in that video anyway close to what happened to the Twin Towers?

One involved a clear demolition near the base while the other involved planes slamming into the upper levels.
edit on 11-10-2015 by opethPA because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2015 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Kester

Looks like the demo charges did not go off on the top floors.



posted on Oct, 11 2015 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Ooooops, so now what they gonna do?



posted on Oct, 11 2015 @ 11:29 PM
link   
They were the highest flats in Europe for some time, fact fans.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 12:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Just seen a claim in the news that all charges detonated.

As I understand it demolition is a very finely tuned job. Too much force and you've got bits flying all over the place. Better to use the minimum which can result in an incomplete job. Not really an embarrassment for the demolition company, it's just part of the job.

My own experience of demolition is that sometimes it seems the memory of having stood there so long keeps them there in apparent defiance of gravity. Then suddenly, you've got to move fast.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 12:06 AM
link   
a reply to: unifaun

Still higher than some.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 12:11 AM
link   
a reply to: CthulhuMythos

If it was up to me I'd call in The Dudesons. They're specialists in this kind of thing. Here they are testing one of their wacky 9/11 theories.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 12:31 AM
link   
a reply to: opethPA

The similarity is the top part of the buildings falling towards the ground.

The main difference is the top parts of the WTC towers disintegrated before hitting the ground as indicated by the outer wall sections left standing.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 02:05 AM
link   
If the demolition company had just set some fires on a few floors, and poured some jet fuel on the top floors, the whole building would have came down perfectly in it's own foot print, and would have disintegrate all the concrete in mid-air. Just like the WTC.

After watching all the videos of the WTC office fires, I just cant believe demolition companies are still in business. Who needs them now?
edit on 12-10-2015 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 02:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
the whole building would have came down perfectly in it's own foot print, and would have disintegrate all the concrete in mid-air. Just like the WTC.


Except the WTC buildings did not come down in their own footprint, that is just a truther silly made up story.

Except all the concrete was not disintegrated in mid air, that is just another truther silly made up story.

Why do truthers tell such silly made up stories all the time here?
edit on 12-10-2015 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 03:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

I believe both towers were meant to detonate on impact. Both failed to detonate causing a delay while the back-up plans were carried out resulting in the photographic and video evidence that exposes the fraud. Hence the ridiculous 'intensely hot fire' story which contradicts all the photographic, video and thermal image evidence. The original story was going to be 'baggage handlers put bombs on the planes'. It was mentioned a few times in the first couple of days then the story vanished.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 04:22 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

We can nitpick over the exact meaning of all concrete disintegrated in mid-air.

We can also study the photographic and video evidence of the destruction of the buildings and subsequent grading and burial of the concrete on the Fresh Kills Landfill. Try 1:08 in this video for example.
Notice the investigators are told to look for evidence among the debris. If they were told to view the debris itself as evidence they would very soon realise the average particle size indicates extraordinary demolition.

Some of the photographs of the destructive process show the rows of concrete panels in the core blowing out. They are seen as striations in the dust cloud. There are some good examples of such images on this page. www.ussartf.org...
edit on 12 10 2015 by Kester because: remove word



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Did you notice those loud booms just before the building fell?
Did you notice those debris ejections before the building fell?
Funny how 911 did have any.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Kester



I believe both towers were meant to detonate on impact.


It didn't happen. There were no secondary explosions when the planes struck the WTC buildings and there are no secondary explosions evident in the videos as the WTC buildings collapsed.
edit on 12-10-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Kester



Notice the investigators are told to look for evidence among the debris. If they were told to view the debris itself as evidence they would very soon realise the average particle size indicates extraordinary demolition.


According to the experts, no evidence of explosives was ever found at ground zero, which is understandable considering that no demo explosions were detected by seismic machines.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce



Except the WTC buildings did not come down in their own footprint, that is just a truther silly made up story.


Considering the widespread damage to surrounding buildings that was caused by the collapse of the WTC buildings, you be the judge.



Except all the concrete was not disintegrated in mid air, that is just another truther silly made up story.


That is what happens as buildings collapse. Check this video out and explain what is causing the massive amounts of dust in a demolition operation that doesn't require the use explosives.




Now, explain why a huge bomb failed to transform WTC1 into a pile of concrete dust in 1993



Why do truthers tell such silly made up stories all the time here?


To make a mockery of themselves, and we can take a look here as an example in case you missed it before.



Disinformation Killed 9/11 “Truth”

By 2009, the 9/11 “Truth” Movement was so inundated with disinformation that it had become a laughingstock. The easily-discredited claims (lies) contaminated the greater issue and soiled dissenters across the board. “Turd blossom” was a Karl Rove phrase that could describe what the movement had devolved into. The media, whether corporate or foundation-funded, could find people ranting about “the Jews” or the Illuminati, the Lizard People, the missiles, holograms, mini-nukes or space beam weapons vaporizing the Twin Towers.

Many trolls, and some public personalities, appeared to be professional disinformation artists hard at work concocting and posting this crap online, which others repeated to their own detriment. One cannot easily prove that a specific person is a paid shill, a disinformation agent, a cyber agent provocateur, but be assured they are out there, and “out there.”

DISINFORMATION TO DISCREDIT

Author Thomas Pynchon wrote, “If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers.” I’ll go one better and in the process explain modern cyber disinformation: If they can get you asking stupid questions, then their lapdog media can dismiss you as a “nut.”

www.911truth.org...



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



After watching all the videos of the WTC office fires, I just cant believe demolition companies are still in business. Who needs them now?


Could it be the widespread damage to surrounding buildings that was caused by the collapse of the WTC buildings as the reason why fire is not used by the demolition companies?



posted on Oct, 13 2015 @ 12:24 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

www.nist.gov...

22. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues?
NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.


You specify Ground Zero when in truth the Fresh Kills landfill is the relevant location. NIST specify steel when all building materials, particularly the concrete, are relevant.

Have you seen negative test results published somewhere? If so where? All I'm aware of is a complete avoidance of any testing.
edit on 13 10 2015 by Kester because: spacing

edit on 13 10 2015 by Kester because: (no reason given)

edit on 13 10 2015 by Kester because: wording



new topics

top topics



 
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join