It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
That's a poor example, there are a heap of reasons why such an aircraft should have an attempted reconstruction, the Pentagon et al was a crime scene.
originally posted by: MrBig2430
If it's red and liquid, it isn't steel. Most likely aluminum or lead.
And that block shown at the start of the video is silver. That means aluminum.
Black body radiation charts are proof of that so deny physics if you wish, that's your right....
originally posted by: Zaphod58
Nm. I bow to the people t that obviously know more than me about military protocols and deployments. You're all right.
I forgot, that if you look at the twin Tower monuments and the New "one world" -trade Center it looks like the constellation orion, just like the pyramids.
There is no block at the start of the video, but if you mean the still seen before you open the video, that is an aggregate of God knows what materials..
I say it's aluminum, but we both agree that at one point it was molten and liquid. I see steel - assuming it's rebar - sticking out of the block. It's rusted. That is a pretty good indicator that the chunk you call an aggregate wasn't steel, or it would be rusty too. Actually, it's a slam dunk that it's not steel.
As for your Aluminium, it will be as near silver coloured at it's melting point as best most camera could pick up.
Yes, and my point is that metals can be heated past their melting point, just like water.
edit on 13-4-2016 by MrBig2430 because: (no reason given)
originally posted by: Elementalist
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
I'm so curious why you've been in almost every 9/11 thread for years, using the same formula.
"Look here, not there, this is right, that doesn't matter".
That's the oldest trick in the book!
If.you don't mind, what compels you to continue sit down, open a Web browser, log in ats, go to 9/11 forums, and continue this, year after year?
Why does your version of 9/11 need to be repeated year in and year out?
Don't you get sick of the same argumentative, repetitive and lame discussions after so long? As if, you said your piece 100x, anyone can go find them, I'd not give anymore energy :/
@OP - as others pointed out, he implies not states, that there could of been a COVER UP, not support as if they followed through the attacks.
They covered them up, as someone said, SA is an American customer and vice versa (military and oil), that relationship has a VERY wealthy exchange, a couple concrete towers wouldn't change that..
And so it is, here we are 2016 and they are still in bed
originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
a reply to: DJW001
And what do you think he meant by this statement ?
Asked if the support was from government, rich people or charities, the former senator replies, “all of the above.”
“I think it’s implausible to believe that 19 people, most of whom didn’t speak English, most of whom had never been in the United States before, many didn’t have a high school education, could have carried out such a complicated task without some support from within the United States
...“The redaction of the twenty-eight pages has become a coverup by two Presidents, and coverup implies complicity,” Sharon Premoli, who is co-chair of 9/11 Families United for Justice Against Terrorism, said.