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.

 

Why Wait an Hour to Blow the Buildings ?

page: 24
7
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Notice that as the WTC collapses, debris are seen outpacing the collapse, which effectively proves that the building did not fall at free fall speed and you would have noticed no sound of explosions as well.




posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


That is the sound of structural failure, not explosives. There are major differences between the two.


That is your opinion and not a fact. Your evidence is?



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 06:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

You would have also noticed that there is not one WTC video that depicts the sound of demolition explosions. Case in point; no seismic data depicting demolition explosions.



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 06:46 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


That is the sound of structural failure, which has nothing to do with explosives. Proof can also be found in the seismic data.


I have to disagree.

There is seismic data that proves that and LaBTop proved it.



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 06:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

I have the backing of structural and civil engineers, architects, firefighters, and even demolition experts.



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

That is the sound of structural failure, which has nothing to do with explosives. Proof can also be found in the seismic data.


Was I talking about sound.? I am waiting for you to post your source for your last post, and I am waiting for you to post the physics from your other post, we can't move forward until you do, so pony up please..
edit on 7-1-2016 by wildb because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 06:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: wildb


Notice in that video the camera shakes about two seconds before the collapse starts, every other video does the same thing.. Hum did the ground shake, seems it did..


Yes I did noticed that, it is in most videos taken that day.

The only thing that can explain that, is explosives going off at ground level.


Yes I agree, as I said before, things that were going on at ground level are ignored..



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 06:52 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

Okay, here you go.



AE911Truth lies about "118 Witnesses"

On your main page, you state that 118 first responders heard sounds of explosions "at the plane impact zone - a full second prior to collapse". I've read and re-read AE911truth's Graeme MacQueen's paper "118 Witnesses" and can't find a single witness who reported hearing an explosion at the impact zone a full second prior to collapse, much less 118.

The majority of witnesses (all 31 in the "bomb" category and well over half in the "explosion" category) use the term bomb or explosion to describe the sound DURING the collapse. IE, the roar of the collapse sounded like an explosion/bomb. The remaining accounts describe explosions well before and well after the collapses, as explicitly described by the first responders, and many say they believe in hindsight that the explosions were electrical (Stephen Gregory) or the like. Will you please provide me with information on which eyewitness(es) reported an explosion a full second prior to collapse at the plane impact zone, or remove this at the very least misleading/worst case dishonest claim from your main page? The 118 first responders deserve nothing less.

www.internationalskeptics.com...


Apparently, "AE911 Truth" has come under attack from other 9/11 conspiracy theorist after it was determined they were being mislead and lied to by "AE911 Truth." In fact, some of its former associates have left that group due to its questionable practices.



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

Okay, here you go.



AE911Truth lies about "118 Witnesses"

On your main page, you state that 118 first responders heard sounds of explosions "at the plane impact zone - a full second prior to collapse". I've read and re-read AE911truth's Graeme MacQueen's paper "118 Witnesses" and can't find a single witness who reported hearing an explosion at the impact zone a full second prior to collapse, much less 118.

The majority of witnesses (all 31 in the "bomb" category and well over half in the "explosion" category) use the term bomb or explosion to describe the sound DURING the collapse. IE, the roar of the collapse sounded like an explosion/bomb. The remaining accounts describe explosions well before and well after the collapses, as explicitly described by the first responders, and many say they believe in hindsight that the explosions were electrical (Stephen Gregory) or the like. Will you please provide me with information on which eyewitness(es) reported an explosion a full second prior to collapse at the plane impact zone, or remove this at the very least misleading/worst case dishonest claim from your main page? The 118 first responders deserve nothing less.

www.internationalskeptics.com...


Apparently, "AE911 Truth" has come under attack from other 9/11 conspiracy theorist after it was determined they were being mislead and lied to by "AE911 Truth." In fact, some of its former associates have left that group due to its questionable practices.


Your post is dismissed, it has nothing to do with the questions I have asked you, so, you are not going to answer them, therefore your case is also dismissed, I cannot debate you if you do not answer my questions, can I.. ??



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 07:06 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


You would have also noticed that there is not one WTC video that depicts the sound of demolition explosions. Case in point; no seismic data depicting demolition explosions.


This debate is supposed to be honest, You continue to make the claim there was no seismic data, I can prove you wrong right here.

LaBTop proved it and here is his rebuttal to your claim.


Anyone WITH some education can tell you what example of ten- to thirty-fold cheating YOU missed in your repeatedly posted picture.
I'll give you one clue : the word nano is in it.
The honest picture would need a lot more vertical space : 14.6 plus 28.0 times more vertical space.

You are either missing quite some necessary education, or intentionally posting misinformation, and I have come to the conclusion after reading 91 pages of your stubborn endless diatribe, that the latter is the case.

If you resize your diagram to honest comparable dimensions, the REAL TRUTH would stare you in the face....
That red square would be in its vertical dimension, 42.6 times as big as it is now.!




ADMIN EDIT


Massive copy-and-paste from another thread removed. It's highly redundant to cross-post across threads and posts. Please link to the post, do not recopy the post.
edit on 7-1-2016 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


I have the backing of structural and civil engineers, architects, firefighters, and even demolition experts.


So do we, and our scientist put their names on their technical Reports



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: skyeagle409


I have the backing of structural and civil engineers, architects, firefighters, and even demolition experts.


So do we, and our scientist put their names on their technical Reports


Good question , I would like to see that.. but answers are not forthcoming..
edit on 7-1-2016 by wildb because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409



]International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
Reload this Page AE911Truth lies about "118 Witnesses", is made aware, then lies further...


Your source is questionable, and by reading it is mostly "opinionated" and nothing more.




Apparently, "AE911 Truth" has come under attack from other 9/11 conspiracy theorist after it was determined they were being mislead and lied to by "AE911 Truth." In fact, some of its former associates have left that group due to its questionable practices.


We all know how the Truth-movement was hijacked many years ago by many disinformation to deliberately make anyone who doesn't support the OS narratives to be frown a pond.
edit on 7-1-2016 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958




We all know how the Truth-movement was hijacked many years ago by many disinformation to deliberately make anyone who doesn't support the OS narratives to be frown a pond.


That is the truth...



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Dear Informer1958,

First... thank you for your logical, fact based posts. As someone who has been HEAVILY involved in 9/11 research since 2001, I can only just smile and say I truly appreciate your efforts here. You are a better man than I.

At this point in the game, I have given up trying to debate with people such as skywhatever. Constantly using false information, and quoting "debunking" sites to prove their point... after a while it just gets so tiring.

So... thank you for keeping up the fight.


And to skywhatever... to say that there is no audio, video or seismic proof of explosives is just a blatant lie. Just a complete and utter lie. And comments like that are doing nothing to further finding the truth. And to whomever else who said the noises were "structural failure".. Sir, were you there that day? Did you hear these sounds with your own ears? I have friends in the FDNY who were. Who were on location, and who would very much disagree with your comments.



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 08:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Where's the seismic spike that depict WTC explosions? If you look at the data, there are no spikes that depict WTC demolition explosions.

.
edit on 7-1-2016 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: DerekJR321



And to skywhatever... to say that there is no audio, video or seismic proof of explosives is just a blatant lie.


Tell that to the experts.



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."


Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief ’s Assessment

The jet collapsed the ceilings and scraped most of the spray-on fire retarding asbestos from the steel trusses. The steel truss floor supports probably started to fail quickly from the flames and thecenter steel supporting columns severed by plane parts heated by the flames began to buckle, sag, warp and fail. Then the top part of the tower crashed down on the lower portion of the structure. This pancake collapse triggered the entire cascading collapse of the 110-story structure.


911-engineers.blogspot.com...





ADMIN EDIT


Massive copy and paste removed.
As mentioned in this thread, this is an infraction that will no longer be tolerated. Action has been taken regarding this members account status.
Please do not copy and paste large amounts of content from other sources.
edit on 7-1-2016 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409



Where's the seismic spike that depict WTC explosions? If you look at the data, there are no spikes that depict WTC demolition explosions.


They are in the grafts, read the comments under the grafts, LaBTop made it very simple for everyone to understand them.



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409



This video appears to use NIST's own data models to prove the steel was never in any danger of weakening from fire.

What do you think about this?



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



We all know how the Truth-movement was hijacked many years ago by many disinformation to deliberately make anyone who doesn't support the OS narratives to be frown a pond.


I've caught many 9/11 conspiracy theorist posting disinformation that was deliberately planted in order to discredit the truth movement. Remember, I had made a reference to a hoaxed WTC 7 video and not long afterward, 9/11 conspiracy theorist, who were unaware that I made a reference to that hoaxed video, posted that hoaxed video as their evidence that WTC 7 was demolished by demolition explosives.

Now, you've got Richard Gage and "AE911 Truth" being slammed by other conspiracy theorist, and amazingly, that includes "VA Today" as well. Steven Jones has been discredited at BYU and he has been slamming 9/11 conspiracy theorist who have been spewing additional disinformation regarding the non-existent WTC nukes and even Judy Wood as been active as well, pushing her space beam theory, and she has been under attack by 9/11 conspiracy theorist and now, Steven Jones and Richard Gage have both been caught lying about thermite and remember, it was Steven Jones who mislead 9/11 conspiracy theorist with a doctored photo.

Now, advocates of the no-plane claim have now come under attack from other 9/11 conspiracy theorist who have claimed that the 9/11 aircraft were military aircraft while other 9/11 conspiracy theorist have claimed the airliners were switched and flown under remote control, and now, "Pilots For 9/11 Truth" have been debunking claims of 9/11 conspiracy theorist who have stated that American 77 conducted a NoC flight path before striking the Pentagon, and "Pilots For 9/11 Truth" has been under attack by 9/11 conspiracy theorist who have claimed that American 77 flew a NoC flight path.

Gordon Duff, of "VA Today," whose website as been a reference source for 9/11 conspiracy theorist, has now admitted that much of what he writes is disinformation. Ever wondered why WTC nukes was later changed to mini-nukes?



new topics




 
7
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join