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.

 

Melting steel?

page: 22
16
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   
a reply to: samkent
Without even hitting play on your video, you can see debri dust/smoke paths that are arching up before they start falling. I just posted the definition for gravity and collapse. Your video disproves a purely gravitational collapse from just the thumbnail graphic. There is no need for a response because without propellant there really is no excuse for the debris arching up, flying sideways, and then descending to Earth. The descending to Earth should have been the only observation if it were purely a gravitational collapse.




posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 08:50 AM
link   
a reply to: DeceptioVisus




Without even hitting play on your video, you can see debri dust/smoke paths that are arching up before they start falling.

You are seeing something that is not there.
Nothing was propelled up.

So why is it that only a few people believe in some grand 911 conspiracy?
Why do hundreds of thousands of world engineers believe the OS?
No one has ever been able to explain how Bush and crew could dupe:
World engineers
World physicists
World fire fighters
World news media

Care to try to explain ?



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus

Has anyone actually taken a look at the plans for the WTC buildings?

archive.org.../n0/mode/2up

The structural support of the buildings were the core in the middle and the outside structure. With trusses from the core to the outer wall. The fire weakened the strength of the trusses and the buildings collapsed. Makes sense.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: samkent
Your telling me gravity caused the outwardly arching debris paths in the upper left of your thumbnail? What about the other side of the photo where large sections of debris can be seen far away from the building above the dust cloud? How did gravity get that there? Saying you can't see or it's paper is hot garbage and has no logic behind it.

It's very simple. Look at the dust trail behind the large piece of debris in the upper right corner. If this was gravity it would be a trail straight down or at least a straight path. There would be absolutely zero horizontal movement, once the debris "gives way" from the rest of the building and yet you have shown definitive proof of this happening. Ignoring this or the fact that other debris was ejected horizontally is just a huge act of willful ignorance.

I don't need to go deeper than that. Melting Steel has been proven to have happened and now this thread has been successfully derailed. You can't debunk your own videos that show proof of propellant/explosives. Oh, the irony.

Irony: "the full significance of a character's words or actions are clear to the audience or reader although unknown to the character." www.google.com...

Gravity: "the force that attracts a body toward the center of the earth."

Collapse: "(of a structure) fall down or in; give way."

I hope now that I have spelled this out for you that your end result is figuring it out. Like I said, you can apply physics, logic, observation, engineering, science and any other field of study of Earth's natural laws to what happened on 9/11. It stands as an indisputable fact that not one single honest, accurate, objective or repeatable explanation has ever been given that explains how these three buildings were demolished the way they were, unless you study the independent professionals at AE911truth.

Take care....



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: samkent

Please link the "hundreds of thousands?" I linked a few thousand, more then a few. Such hyperbole. I have never mentioned Bush or his act as an incompetent Commander in Chief, who couldn't have envisioned planes flown into buildings. Somehow he couldn't complete a sentence as president, yet he was very articulate when running for governor of Texas in 1994.

www.youtube.com...

They have you fooled to the point it's really not funny. Of course Bush 43 didn't plan this. He was an actor and potential CIA stooge just like Obama, the Clinton's, and his father before them. Please look up Prescott Bush and the U.B.C. if you want to know where the Bush family loyalty comes from. Right now you seem woefully ill informed.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: DeceptioVisus




If this was gravity it would be a trail straight down or at least a straight path. There would be absolutely zero horizontal movement,

You forget the compressed air being forced out by the pile driver effect of the top of the building.
Also the building mass has to force debris outward as new mass is added.

Look if the effect in the videos was suspicious there would have been thousands of experts screaming from day one.
But all we have are a few internet junkies and out of work engineers with questions.

Right now there seems to be two or three on this website in this thread who disbelieve the falling debris.
None of them are experts.
None of them have physics degrees or any degree in the required science.
That's why this conspiracy will always remain a 'theory' among a handful.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: DeceptioVisus



You guys are almost funny. Gravity doesn't fling things.


Let's take a look here and take a look how debris is being flung away from the building.





Everyone of these people are on record stating they believe WTC7 was due to some kind of demo, not fires or structural damage.

Then look over this list of 2000+prominent and professional architects and engineers.

www.ae911truth.org...


You've just committed another serious blunder by posting a reference to AE911 Truth without doing a background check. AE911 Truth has been caught lying and is guilty of deception, deceit and spreading disinformation.

Do a background check on Richard Gage and AE911 Truth and you will find that he has been caught lying and passing false and misleading information and AE911 Truth is now a discredited organization.



"Robert F. Marceau, with over 30 years of structural engineering experience"
"Kamal S. Obeid, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Berkeley and 30 years of engineering experience"
"Steven L. Faseler, structural engineer with over 20 years of experience in the design and construction industry"
"Alfred Lee Lopez, with 48 years of experience in all types of buildings"
"Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis"
"Antonio Artha,with 15+ years of experience in building design"
"David Anthony Dorau, practicing structural engineer with 18 years’ experience in the inspection and design of buildings"


Now, let's look at some real numbers.



Civil & Structural Engineers on WTC Collapse

* 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:

* There are 123,000 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.

911-engineers.blogspot.com...

edit on 21-12-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




Do a background check on Richard Gage and AE911 Truth and you will find that he has been caught lying and passing false and misleading information and AE911 Truth is now a discredited organization.


Much like you..ay..



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

Apparently, facts, evidence and the laws of physics backup what I say.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

Apparently, facts, evidence and the laws of physics backup what I say.


Only in a cartoon, and you know it..



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

I see that you continue stalling at posting video time lines that you claim, proves that explosives were used. Question is, how along are you going to stall at posting those time lines.

Now, let's take a look here.

Photo: Fire Weakens Steel Beams

As I have correctly asserted, facts, evidence and the laws of physics backup what I say.
edit on 21-12-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




I see that you continue stalling at posting video time lines that you claim, proves that explosives were used. Question is, how along are you going to stall at posting those time lines.


Memory problems again, or is groundhog day a snap shot of your life.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

You are stalling again, Where are those video time lines?
edit on 21-12-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

You are stalling again, Where are those video time lines?



Aliens from the planet Zeernof stole them, along with your reality..



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

You are stalling again, so let me help you out. Point out the time lines where explosions are heard in this video.



In case you do not know what demolition explosions sound like, you can review this video and use it to compare with the video above.



edit on 21-12-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

Thanks for showing the video again that shows arching plumes of smoke and dust tailing the debris and a how impossible it would be for gravity to cause this wide of a debris field. There is no disputing these details without blinders.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: DeceptioVisus
a reply to: skyeagle409

Thanks for showing the video again that shows arching plumes of smoke and dust tailing the debris and a how impossible it would be for gravity to cause this wide of a debris field. There is no disputing these details without blinders.



His video has been debunked....



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: DeceptioVisus



a reply to: skyeagle409

Thanks for showing the video again that shows arching plumes of smoke and dust tailing the debris and a how impossible it would be for gravity to cause this wide of a debris field. There is no disputing these details without blinders.


To let you know that the Verinage demolition method does not use explosives, yet debris are ejected away from the buildings and dust plumes are forced away from the buildings as well.

Verinage Demolition: No Explosives Used

Now, explain why structural columns were not ejected horizontally in the following video during a demolition using explosives.


edit on 21-12-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

In order for you to debunk that video, you have to provide the time lines where explosions are heard and failing that, you have no case. Now, go ahead, debunk that video with the time lines that depict the sound of explosions as WTC 1 collapses. Failure to do so will prove my case that you have no case for explosives.

WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory
.
edit on 21-12-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: DeceptioVisus


NIST personnel are excluded for the simple fact they have already been caught lying on numerous occasions, from molten steel...


Do you mean solidified molten steel in these photos?

Photo 1: Molten Steel

Photo 2: Molten Steel


edit on 21-12-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
16
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join