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: 25
16
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:26 PM
link   
I'm sure that many more are reading these posts than posters.
It's simple there are no sounds of explosives in any of the videos.
There was never any physical evidence of explosives used.
99% of the worlds experts do not believe there was explosives used.




posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:27 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




Now, let's try WTC 2, and point out the video time lines where you claim, demolition explosions are heard.


Not heard, seen..



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:30 PM
link   
a reply to: DeceptioVisus

Simple. To prove that there is no case for explosives at ground zero. Now, explain why these explosive demolitions did not fling structural columns anywhere.




posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
I'm sure that many more are reading these posts than posters.
It's simple there are no sounds of explosives in any of the videos.
There was never any physical evidence of explosives used.
99% of the worlds experts do not believe there was explosives used.



Unsubstantiated claim...



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: DeceptioVisus

Simple. To prove that there is no case for explosives at ground zero. Now, explain why these explosive demolitions did not fling structural columns anywhere.



Another pointless and irrelevant post...



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:32 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

Just to let you know that demolition explosions make a lot of noise, which you don't hear in the WTC videos.

Here is another example of what demolition explosions sound like.




posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

The demolition explosions you hear in that video is what you don't hear as WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 collapse.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

Just to let you know that demolition explosions make a lot of noise, which you don't hear in the WTC videos.

Here is another example of what demolition explosions sound like.




Again, Another pointless and irrelevant post...



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:34 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

He is correct because the overwhelming majority of architects, structural and civil engineers, demolition experts and firefighters do not support the claims of 9/11 conspiracy theorist.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




Simple. To prove that there is no case for explosives at ground zero. Now, explain why these explosive demolitions did not fling structural columns anywhere.



Anyone who didn't ride the short bus to school everyday can explain it.
And if you can't you must have been on that bus.




posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

The video proves my point that WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 were not taken down by demolition explosives.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

The demolition explosions you hear in that video is what you don't hear as WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 collapse.



Hundreds if not thousands heard just that..



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:38 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

Your video is not evidence that explosives were responsible for the destruction at ground zero.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

The video proves my point that WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 were not taken down by demolition explosives.



No it does not...



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

Considering that you are unable to post the WTC video time lines where explosions are heard, I have to conclude that your comment is false.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:41 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

Considering that you can plainly hear the loud sounds of demolition explosions in that video, which you don't hear in the WTC videos, I am right on the money.


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



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




Your video is not evidence that explosives were responsible for the destruction at ground zero.



I know that. It simply demonstrates your thinking.
And how obvious it is that you are here to bog down any
productive discussion about 911.

Like I said pal, tell the truth, the whole truth.
edit on Rpm122115v45201500000035 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

Considering that you have failed to post evidence of molten steel, nuclear bombs, thermite and explosives at ground zero, you have no case.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

Considering that you are unable to post the WTC video time lines where explosions are heard, I have to conclude that your comment is false.



I am very able, my comment is not false as its my opinion..



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

Considering that you can plainly hear the loud sounds of demolition explosions in that video, which you don't hear in the WTC videos, I am right on the money.



No you are not, lack of sound is not evidence of anything..
edit on 21-12-2015 by wildb because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join