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.

 

You Haven't Seen This !

page: 2
57
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


That video is a disinformation video that I have warned people about.


What did I say in my above post?


Of course the OS supporters are going to scream these videos are all fake. If so let them prove these videos are fake and if they cant, then we can assume a missal was fired into the Pentagon.


Your "opinions" are not the facts here. Please prove the OP video is a hoax?


Photo 1: Cruise Missile

Photo 2: Cruise Missile


The fact is, Your photos have absolutely nothing to do with the video in question, nothing.


Now for the rest of the story before those photos above were doctored. I might also add that the booms in WTC 7 were not the result of demo explosions and has been used to discredit 9/11 conspiracy theorist.


False.

You were DEBUNKED by LaBTop in another thread (WTC 7) and you were caught using edited videos to fool everyone.




posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 12:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



You were DEBUNKED by LaBTop in another thread (WTC 7) and you were caught using edited videos to fool everyone.


LaBTop's claim was bogus from the beginning and he has been debunked by structural and demolition experts and teams that were operating seismographs in the area who have stated that their seismographs did not detect demo explosions as WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 collapsed.

In other words, he has no case for explosives. Do I need to post evidence and comments from those who were operating those seismographs?
edit on 7-11-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 12:15 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


LaBTop's claim was bogus from the beginning


Another fallacy.


he has been debunked by structural and demolition experts and teams that were operating seismographs in the area who have stated that their seismographs did not detect demo explosions as WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 collapsed.


Another fallacy.

LaBTop ripped you to pieces and brought credibly science to support his claims. The fact is, all you did was ignored most of it and ridiculed it, because you could not debunk the real science behind it.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 12:21 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409



In other words, he has no case for explosives. Do I need to post evidence and comments from those who were operating those seismographs?


No one is interested in Popular Mechanic's debunked pseudo science. That was debunked many years ago by top experts and has been presented to you many times.

Your seismographs that you keep spamming on all these 911 threads has been proven a fraud, and proven a fraud by LaBTop himself in a recent 911 thread.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 12:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



LaBTop ripped you to pieces and brought credibly science to support his claims.


Amusing considering that real civil and structural engineers, demolition experts, seismograph operators, and architects have debunked his claims with their own scientific evidence and the laws of physics.
edit on 7-11-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 12:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

That won't fly. If you have a problem with the seismographs and data, take it up with the experts who were operating their seismographs so they can tell you personally that you are incorrect.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 12:42 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


Amusing considering that real civil and structural engineers, demolition experts, seismograph operators, and architects have debunked his claims with their own scientific evidence and the laws of physics.


That is another fallacy and the hardcore fact is, you have been DEBUNKED over this issue.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 12:45 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


originally posted by: LaBTop

Originally posted by: Informer1958
A reply to: skyeagle409


That won't fly. If you have a problem with the seismographs and data, take it up with the experts who were operating their seismographs so they can tell you personally that you are incorrect.


You have been DEBUNKED.



skyeagle409 : Everything you have posted has been debunked. About that WTC 7 video you posted, there are no demo explosions, which is why you were unable to provide the demo explosion time lines that I have asked for. Apparently, you forget about your own admission recently.


The fact is, You have taken my comments about LaBTop to a new level. You have spun my comments, and contents to levels I have never seen.

As far as my video in question to why you do not hear explosions, it's because you have selective hearing in my "opinion".

As for your silly made up time line, The fact is, LaBTop already debunked it, but you didn't know that because you failed to read his OPs.



He is using about twenty times now in this thread, a deliberately butchered WTC-7 collapse video. One or two times is perhaps a mistake, not 20+ times, this was his latest one, READ it HERE, then read my following last and only explanation to him, with my time-lines regarding demolition explosions :

skyeagle409 his video follows, it begins as the east penthouse has already sunk away, clearly lacking the first 3 to 4 secs from my full video :



Below you can view MY posted video, with its first 3 extra seconds and that deep explosion sound in them, and after that there are no further sounds audible to human ears : sounds from the WHOLE further TOTAL collapse.
That deep explosion sound thus must have been one hell of an explosion, to be recorded by a news camera from some six-hundred meters away. That area was full of packed together, high buildings, which clearly muffled the full collapse sounds enough so that they were indistinguishable for the human ear from background noise, i.o.w. while the whole further collapse of a 47 story building doesn't deliver any clear audible sound after that first deep explosion sound is heard, which means that that deep sound was MUCH stronger and louder than the whole following 47 stories full of thick steel, thundering and crashing down, which was not picked up by the SAME camera microphone.
Start listening and watch that east penthouse at the 16 seconds position in this video posted by me in my OP, made by Ewing Smith, at the onset of its 18th second you hear that deep sound, which must have been much louder than the whole following global collapse, THEN, at the onset of the 19th second, you see the east penthouse roof start to fall down, and that's where the above butchered video STARTS, so that above one misses a full THREE SECONDS.
This is MY OP-posted full video :



These original first 3 seconds with that deep sound of a huge explosion have been cut off from his endlessly reposted butchered video.
And then he stubbornly keeps asking the readers to show him the time lines where we can hear demolition explosives in HIS butchered video.

While he knows very well of the existence in my OP of the original full video, and that my OPs show to the keen reader, that you have to combine all the explosive sounds in my OPs listed videos :

The Ashley Banfield video with 9 explosions in it (it starts at 2:00/9:56) :
www.youtube.com...


Then combine them with my below seismogram and then you see and have heard the clear WTC-7 demolition time line as laid out by me, multiple times already in this thread :



WTC-7 demolition time line : One big deep explosion sound 3 seconds (speed of sound +/- 333 m/s, distance 2 x that = 1+2 secs ) before the east penthouse started to sink down (a thermobaric bomb perhaps) to weaken the lower 8 floors, followed by 9 softer explosions, only audible in the Ashley Banfield video, during the 8.25 seconds that it took the first of the 9 explosions to let both penthouses sink below the WTC-7 its parapet roof line, and then the full 8 lower floors their load bearing capability suddenly gave way after those last few explosions from those 9 you hear in the Ashley Banfield video displaced the already cut, vertical steel from the last remaining intact columns in those 8 floors, and then the first 2.25 seconds of free fall acceleration started, being the first few seconds of WTC-7 its global collapse of about 6 seconds total.

And every real physicist knows what 2.25 secs of FREE FALL ACCELERATION means :
NO resistance at all over the height of 8 floors, in other words :

AN UNNATURAL, man made EVENT.

And that can NEVER EVER be accomplished by a NATURAL collapse with its chaotic nature and ever changing increasing resistance values against any natural downwards acceleration, all the way down for every piece of naturally formed debris.


What does science say about the 2.25 second interval of collapse in which the rate of fall was "Indistinguishable from free fall" :
"The rate of acceleration seen by ALL mass regardless of weight, towards the earth, at sea level, within a vacuum is *9.8m/s^2*.
Meaning that any bending, crushing, breaking of connections, removal of structural resistance, below the mass that's accelerating, is occurring without the assistance of energy from the accelerating mass.
Zero resistance created by the hands of wicked men.

The same video WITH those additional 3 seconds in it is been posted by me in my opening post, so no one can excuse himself anymore that he did not know that. It's clear to everyone reading this thread's OPs, that my page 1 post 1 posted Ewing Smith video starts a few seconds BEFORE the east penthouse starts to sink away, while that endlessly reposted butchered video starts when the east penthouse is already in the process of sinking away, thus missing those important 3 seconds with that deep sound of a huge explosion in them. And following that deep sound, the same microphone doesn't pick up any more such loud sounds, neither does it pick up the sounds of the following global collapse of 47 stories full of protesting STEEL, audible for human ears. Then we proceed to the Banfield video, to hear those 9 softer explosions that cover the 8.25 seconds period that it took to let both penthouses sink fully away into the 47th roof floor and further downward into the core of WTC-7

Reference
www.journalof911studies.com...
See his WTC-7 remarks.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 12:46 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409



That won't fly. If you have a problem with the seismographs and data, take it up with the experts who were operating their seismographs so they can tell you personally that you are incorrect.


There's the proof read it.

You have been DEBUNKED.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 01:09 AM
link   
After all these years I was wrong. I was 90% sure it was an inside job, until I've seen these videos with new eyes.

Many more questions than answers....

PS for those who know what I am talking about, examine the smoke and fire.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 01:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Still no demo explosion timelines and still no sounds of demolition explosions in the videos, not to mention that your seismic data evidence has been debunked by team members who were operating seismographs in the area during 9/11.

Once again, there is no case for demo explosives at ground zero.



Did experts on the scene think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition?

We have spoken with several who possess extensive experience in explosive demolition, and all reported seeing or hearing nothing to indicate an explosive detonation precipitating the collapse.

edit on 7-11-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 01:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

False, and here's further proof.



American Society of Civil Engineers

Towers Weakened by Planes; Brought Down by Fire

911-engineers.blogspot.com...



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 02:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: Informer1958

Still no demo explosion timelines and still no sounds of demolition explosions in the videos, not to mention that your seismic data evidence has been debunked by team members who were operating seismographs in the area during 9/11.

Once again, there is no case for demo explosives at ground zero.



Did experts on the scene think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition?

We have spoken with several who possess extensive experience in explosive demolition, and all reported seeing or hearing nothing to indicate an explosive detonation precipitating the collapse.


Who are these people can you link their credentials, a web site or something on record ? Do you have any names ? Who do they work for ? How many of experts are you talking about ? We need specifics.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 05:07 AM
link   
To answer the thread, yes I've seen that video before and it was examined and declared a CGI fake which I'd agree with as the explosion itself is a particle system and by the look of it its from 3DSMAX, obviously that is a personal viewpoint as similar particle systems are on other software.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 05:13 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

Serious ?



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 05:25 AM
link   
a reply to: zatara

I'm what you would consider a "truther"...but this video is rather poor. There is many inaccurate information contained within. The only interesting part is that wing going behind the building. That bit is worth checking out.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 05:30 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

you should really quit it man. There is ample evidence of large booms prior to collapses. Booms that might be detonations going off. We don't really know. Anyone denying it, is doing an ostrich.

And before you say anything or demand proof...please just google it.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 05:47 AM
link   
First five minutes of the video and I was rolling my eyes. Than he gets to the clip of the airplanes wings going behind a building it's clearly flying in front of and nearly dropped my coffee. Just Wow!

Welcome to your Orwellian future boys and girls. We've arrived.

So I took the liberty of reviewing another copy of that video in case someone was tinkering with the one in the OP. Sure as #, same thing.


edit on 7-11-2015 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 05:48 AM
link   
I do believe that the whole 9/11 was a strange conspiracy however the video(Aerial view) showing the missile hitting the pentagon is fake.

I have edited a great deal of videos in adobe premier and after effects and I know when the motion tracking tool has been used. The explosion doesn't track to the original video correctly and it appears to hop around between frames(if you look closely). The video has also been deliberately made poor quality which helps blend in the effects, a common practice for these types of videos.

The other video of the plane's wing going behind the building is just stupid. Its obvious the building is closer than the twin towers by looking at the size of the windows.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 06:18 AM
link   
a reply to: PickledOnion


The other video of the plane's wing going behind the building is just stupid. Its obvious the building is closer than the twin towers by looking at the size of the windows.

There it is, good eye.



new topics

top topics



 
57
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join