It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Why Wait an Hour to Blow the Buildings ?

page: 28
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 07:19 AM

originally posted by: pteridine

originally posted by: NWOwned
a reply to: firerescue

Wait. What?! 'A churning maelstrom', oh, you mean the 'fire induced gravity collapse' right?

You should be aware that all demolitions are 'gravity collapses.'

You maybe should've added though:

But not all gravity collapses are 'demolitions'.

posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 08:31 AM
a reply to: MALBOSIA

The plane in that crash hit soft ground just like in Pennsylvania. The initial impact was snow pack, that it buried into, just like the soft ground in Pennsylvania.

posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 04:37 PM

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: NWOwned

You expect to find intact furniture in the debris pile...??

Maybe an office set or two...??

What do you think happened to it ??

Have a churning maelstrom of steel beams and other heavy materials acting like giant garbage grinder

Anything bigger than a foot in size was ground up . Then debris piles burned for months after destroying what survived

Here are some of the objects that were recovered

Notice keys to office machines, guns from ATF, NYPD, FBI and other Law enforcement offices in complex

Let me get this straight, you feel bad for your neighbor and her loss of her sons and for other victims, which you/we all rightly should feel something but then you take issue with my contention that there should be a lot of heavy steel cased computers clearly evident in the rubble?

And like possibly a few thousand or more (AT LEAST, PROBABLY MORE), since you claim the offices were mostly filled with people and not sand bags or were all empty, and nearly every person who worked in there used a computer (a big heavy steel cased computer from circa 1997-2001), among other things, like heavy glass monitors, metal tables and desks, filing cabinets, giant photocopiers and laser printers, COMPUTER SERVERS, cubicles etc., you know OFFICE STUFF.

Lots and lots of office stuff.

But knowing this, the link you post has not a single picture of even a broken bent up or flattened steel cased computer tower. Contains no busted desks or chairs or copiers or SERVERS. Just some keys and a muddy rusty gun or two. Ok.

Now I got to ask you: What's the matter, why could you not find me a picture of even one churned up computer?

So what you are saying is every bit of office contents, desks, computers, servers, copiers, even water coolers, all OBLITERATED TO TEENY TINY BITS so that you can't even point to pics of even the broken parts, a circuit board or anything.?!!

Is that correct?

You're saying there's none of that stuff left because a couple of tall buildings FULL OF THAT VERY STUFF, fell on it?

posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 06:02 PM
a reply to: NWOwned

Debris was carted to Fresh Kills - a landfill on Staten Island

Everything from wrecked cars and fire trucks to pieces of the aircraft, parts of the Towers and human remains and personal effects

Items were examined and sorted by teams of detectives and FBI

Aerial shot showing wrecked vehicles


Safe Deposit boxes

Notice dont see large parts of office furniture , Can see pay phone. As I said most of the objects greater than 1 foot
inside the building were ground up by the collapse

Vehicles survived because were on street outside

posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 06:07 PM
a reply to: NWOwned

Another video from Fresh Kills showing objects recovered

posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 09:00 PM

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: Pilgrum
a reply to: MALBOSIA

This discussion is about the actual destruction of the buildings but you've mentioned the components of the event that I believe encompass the real area for conspiracy ideas. IE how 4 planes came to be hijacked, who planned it, who knew it was likely to happen and why it wasn't prevented.

Destroyed buildings were just the consequence of any inaction or incompetence at that 'front end' of the event. There's also some potential to question the construction standard of the towers that could have contributed to their failure under the extreme circumstances of being struck by 200 000kg travelling at over 200m/sec followed by uncontrolled fires.

After the event may have been a case of 'never let a good crisis go to waste' but the majority of the USA was crying out for revenge then, not just the government.

The discussion is "why wait to blow up the buildings", and the 'who done it' could very well tie into "why wait?" if we were about to be sold a generation long war that put generations to come in debt for the rest of their lives.

And the majority "as reported" is what I am sure you meant to say about the cries for revenge. The same reporters that were showing those towers collapse 100's of times a day for a year after the fact.

There was value in the footage those towers burning and collapsing from 20 different angles, or else the news wouldnt have used the footage so many times. That is my answer for the question in the OP.

As well as for propaganda and the like purposes they could (the videos) serve as trophy mementos as in "Look what we did! We pulled that off!" kind of way. What do you think about that? Egomaniacs so impressed with their own audacious exploits that they want to capture it on video and replay it over and over.

posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 09:35 PM
a reply to: firerescue

I often think we should just entertain the opposite of whatever gets strongly promoted.

For instance Simon Shack claims the videos are fake but are they? What's the opposite? I think the videos are real.

And I think that because there were indeed people in Manhattan that day, lots of them, probably more people than computer towers in the buildings, and so far I don't think any have said, "I was there on 9/11 and those buildings didn't fall the way I see on all those videos." Haven't heard that.

I also think they're real because in 2001 they'd be hard to fake technically.

I am surprised however looking at the buildings coming down on all the videos because they look like they're exploding and not just collapsing.

And when you add to that that all the various contents of the building, if afterward contents exist at all, what remains of anything is just tiny broken bits you can barely identify. And I'm only talking about contents, never mind the two central cores which also appear to be nowhere to be seen.

So the videos look like exploding and the contents are either obliterated to smithereens or missing altogether... for you could claim everything was crushed by the big bad steel in the big bad buildings but this big bad steel crushing and grinding literally to bits wasn't massive enough while standing to remain standing or grind up an aluminum aircraft while standing.

But what I really want to know is... WHERE DID THE COMPUTER TOWERS GO?

Because I just don't think they all were ground to bits like you so adamantly suggest, no, I think they're mostly missing. And by missing I don't mean the offices were all empty but that there were computers one minute, next minute, there were none.

So if the videos are real and the 'collapses' look like explosions and the contents are obliterated into bits or outright missing altogether, then that cries out demolition. But no survivors saw any conventional demolition explosives and no bombs exploding sounds can be heard on the videos (people there reported hearing loud explosions though etc.) and the seismic data shows no bumps etc.

I think the videos are real and that's because the buildings were going to be blown. There are many angles to show handiwork and to hide shots that didn't look right from view by picking other cameras. They couldn't avoid the buildings coming down being seen etc. So the videos have to be real to match what thousands actually saw.

5. The videos weren't altered but the sound and seismic data were.

See I don't just think everything is there it's just all 'ground up', no, I think most of it isn't even there.

If what's supposed to be there isn't gets conviently explained that it's all there it's just now so broken and tiny it's unrecognizable, well, maybe so, or maybe it's just not there! I mean sure, if the heavy towers fell down and crushed stuff plenty bits would exist, but the pile of bits is too small to be all the contents. Most of the contents, including people, are missing.

Now why are most of the contents not there you ask? It's not there because the videos are real not fake and what the videos show are the buildings being purposely destroyed.

posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 10:04 PM
a reply to: NWOwned

But what I really want to know is... WHERE DID THE COMPUTER TOWERS GO?

You are really stuck on those computer towers.
Lets run with that for a minute.
So all those people that did show up for work didn't notice their computers weren't there?
You have to accept that one of the first things you do when you get to your work station is to login.
IpsoFacto you are saying all those people that showed up and survived concealed the fact they couldn't login that morning.
The people trapped above the impact zone for over an hour didn't report something odd when they call their loved ones for the last time?

"Honey I'm trapped and all the office furniture and computers are missing."

The people in the second tower had more time at their workstations before evacuation.
And none of them reported missing/non working computers.

Oh I didn't see any pictures of the stainless steel sinks from the bath rooms either.
So I guess they took the kitchen sink too.

posted on Jan, 12 2016 @ 05:29 AM
a reply to: samkent

Oh I didn't see any pictures of the stainless steel sinks from the bath rooms either.

Didnt see any toilets either......

2 110 story buildings and NOT A SINGLE TOILET!!!!

Oh the humanity.........

posted on Jan, 15 2016 @ 01:16 PM
a reply to: firerescue

You both are absolutely right,
Those debris piles just aren't high enough!
I mean, where's all the computer towers,
Toilets, sinks & other stuff?

And while you're pondering that,
You know, just to be sure,
Don't forget to ask yourselves:
Where's the two giant central steel cores?!!

posted on Jan, 15 2016 @ 06:58 PM
a reply to: NWOwned

Where's the two giant central steel cores?!!

Here being examined at Fresh Kills ......

You dont really believe the core columns were one continuous beam...??

The core columns were built up from sections bolted together

posted on Jan, 15 2016 @ 07:57 PM
a reply to: firerescue
There is a good pic of the end of a core column section in that fresh kills video that clearly shows the depth of the welds that held it on the next section. The weld is surprising narrow at less than a 1/3rd of the column wall thickness and on the 2 long surfaces only. It's typical of all such pics of WTC welds I've seen in the past so they are obviously the weakest locations in the core structure that held the building up.

Strong enough for 'normal' conditions of wind loading and perhaps the odd earth tremor or 2 but certainly not up to a massive impact as demonstrated (twice).

posted on Jan, 15 2016 @ 08:01 PM
a reply to: Pilgrum

Then they should have fell right away right ? Nothing compared to 120 MPH winds...

posted on Jan, 15 2016 @ 08:35 PM
a reply to: wildb

Surely you're not comparing the force of wind evenly distributed over an entire face of the building to kinetic energy around 4GJ concentrated into part of the area of 2 floors of said building (less than 0.5% of the total face)?

That kinetic energy estimate includes the mass of the fuel on board but not the potential energy of it which was imposed on the structure after impact.
edit on 15/1/2016 by Pilgrum because: formatting

posted on Jan, 15 2016 @ 08:39 PM
a reply to: Pilgrum

Yep, I am..

posted on Jan, 15 2016 @ 11:14 PM
a reply to: firerescue

No I concede there were *some* broken twisted steel columns in the rubble 'pile' -- moved quickly off site, what I mean is where are the two core remnants even to be seen immediately after the 'collapse' on 9/11 and like on pics from 9/12, 9/13?

It's interesting that you only point to a handful of loose damaged beams that are laying only horizontal at a completely different location as evidence of central cores when what I mean is show me the cores vertical, (even remnants thereof) at Ground Zero immediately after the 'collapse'.

My point is, you can't. (Everybody knows the buildings were made of steel...)

It's pretty bad that the paltry HORIZONTAL log pile of beams at Fresh Kills is actually higher than any vertical remnants of the cores at the very site of the destruction.

In fact it's absurd.

posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 02:27 AM
a reply to: wildb

I can see how you could be confused when the design absolute max wind loading on a single face of a tower is quoted as 11E6 lb which is 5E6 kg and that is a very large number. It's distributed evenly over 1 side though and the surface area of a single side is about 25 000 m^2 making the pressure roughly 200 kg/m^2. So roughly the weight of 2 men per m^2 which even the windows could withstand. In support of that calculation I don't recall holes ever being blown in either building during their lifetime by the worst storms.

The planes delivered orders of magnitude greater pressure than that because the force was concentrated into an area of about 25m^2 (0.1% of 1 building side). A great analogy of the pressure effect is one of how an elephant can walk across a cork floor and not leave a mark yet a tiny girl in stiletto heels will punch holes in it.

Anyone with better numbers please chime in.

posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 03:04 AM
a reply to: NWOwned

They were made of mostly plastic Dane with keyboards and monitors. Plastic melts away and you just have misc metal pieces such as a metal drive bay. Most computers at that time didn't have a lot of metal like you choose to believe. Most office desktops would have had a metal base and back 1 piece thr rest plastic. So you wouldnt find casses. Monitors plastic keyboards plastic.

As far as furniture I remember mention of an office depot being in the building but I guess according to you the corporate guys knew it was going to happen and emptied their store??

posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 04:56 PM
a reply to: dragonridr

So your position is everything made of plastic all melted to basically nothing because the fires were just too intense?

Even though only like 15% of each tower was even on fire?

Look if we subtract the fire floors of both buildings, say 20 floors each, and subtract 5 floors for each lobby, then take off 10 floors each for mechanical equipment and throw in 20 floors each for empty office space, what does that leave us?

That's 220-110=110

110 floors of pure office space filled with office materials that weren't even burnt or melted.


The computers were not all bought in the summer of 2001. Many companies run on older computers. I work with a bank that's still running XP on ten year old machines. So we're talking about computers from '97, '98, '99, 2000 etc., and they all were steel casing with plastic fronts. But on like over 180 floors of the towers there wasn't any fires, though in the rubble 'pile', which is more like a rubble 'area', or rubble 'field' you don't even see ANY of the unmelted ones! You see nothing.

Just some steel and dust.

People say there's no office contents discernible in the rubble field because the towers were on fire and office furnishings burn and plastic melts and cubicle walls burn etc., but not every single floor was on fire.

Not even close.

posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 04:59 PM
Maybe they were on a MORNING BREAK at the time , you know how it goes 10 minutes stretches into a hour before you know it ,

new topics

top topics

<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in