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.

 

University of Alaska Fairbanks Professor Launches New 9/11 Research Project

page: 4
44
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Doctor Smith




You show us an example of a steel frame building collapsing from fire. It just doesn't happen. Their are numerous examples of buildings burning 10 times hotter and longer with no collapse. None fall in their own foot print or collapse in any way.

Which one of your numerous examples was struck by any airplane let alone a 767?


Were talking about building 7 which wasn't struck by a plane. If the 2 larger buildings failed, they would break off at the point of impact. Not collapse in their own foot print at free fall speed.




posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: samkent

But thanks for doing the research to show how under the right conditions a metal structure can fail. I wonder what kind of pressure was was created when the towers failed? An event that would cause a three pound shock wave would crush most homes. At 10 pounds, most buildings are flattened.


Obviously metal will fail under certain conditions. But according to all the experts, those conditions weren't met. Not even close.

Shills waddle around talking nonsense about boats and other unrelated examples that don't matter. Notice they still haven't found one steel frame building in history that collapsed straight down at free fall speed. I'm waiting!

Chirping crickets.
edit on 27-4-2016 by Doctor Smith because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Planes strike WTC 7...??

WTC 7 was ringed by buildings of over 40-50 stories tall - WTC 7 was 47 stories. Explain how one slips a plane in there?

Explosives planted in building? Explain how one plant explosives in occupied building without anyone noticing?

Explosives also deteriorate with age becoming either unreliable or unstable.



No one said WTC7 was hit by a plane. I was fatigued and misquoted the height of building 7. Here's a site that has the facts on building 7. Also 1 example of another buildings burning much hotter for longer and never collapsing.

Building 7 facts and examples

But notice no examples of any buildings collapsing in their own foot print, at free fall. For any reason other than controlled demolition.

edit on 27-4-2016 by Doctor Smith because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Doctor Smith

You are very wrong. Numerous persons have debunked you truthers. David Dunbar / popular science magize consultanted 300 experts to publish books and articles on the facts of 9/11. Skeptic Magazine has done research and repeatedly debunked truthers claims. Skeptic magazine uses qualified and scientific experts. Actually .gov has a very scientific report on how building 7 fell. Maybe you truthers can sue the government to retract the report if you believe it is not based on fact. Be a big step for your cause for all to see in court were there are consequences for purgery.

The only items of silence are to the questions I have asked. Names of witnesses seeing explosions due to demolishions. Buildings that were in fires ten times hotter. Any rebuttals to given facts how steel reacts when heated. Why would the government risk being discovered during a long term project to rig building 7 to exploded. Why would Obama not expose Bush's hand in the event if there was something to expose?



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Doctor Smith




If the 2 larger buildings failed, they would break off at the point of impact. Not collapse in their own foot print at free fall speed.

Not according to Implosion World.
Implosion World on 911.

But then again you are just going to say they are in on it.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 10:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
they would break off at the point of impact.


So what exactly would support them to cause the top to topple over?


Not collapse in their own foot print at free fall speed.


WTC 1 and 2 did not fall at free fall speed, and as for falling in their own footprints, just how do you think all the other buildings were severely damaged?

Why do some people keep pushing this silly made up story?



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Doctor Smith

I think popular science, skeptic magizene, other jornals have more professional image at stake and under more scientific scrutiny than 911research.wtc7.

Problem with truther lies, they can easly be created at a faster rate and with less energy than it takes to debunk them. I can fly like Superman and I have wittnesses. Debunk that.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Doctor Smith




Obviously metal will fail under certain conditions. But according to all the experts, those conditions weren't met. Not even close.

Please list the names of the experts you are talking about.
I have experts that were actually on site.
Read page 2 of the article.

Protec was contracted to observe and document the deconstruction of the site.
They took thousands of photos. And personally examined 'untold' amounts of debris.
Protec was operating seismographs at construction sites in the area on 911.

Back to your claim it should have tipped over they specifically statebuildings over 20 stories cannot be made to tip over like a tree.

All you have is Richard Gage and his lies.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 10:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Doctor Smith




Obviously metal will fail under certain conditions. But according to all the experts, those conditions weren't met. Not even close.

Please list the names of the experts you are talking about.
I have experts that were actually on site.
Read page 2 of the article.

Protec was contracted to observe and document the deconstruction of the site.
They took thousands of photos. And personally examined 'untold' amounts of debris.
Protec was operating seismographs at construction sites in the area on 911.

Back to your claim it should have tipped over they specifically statebuildings over 20 stories cannot be made to tip over like a tree.

All you have is Richard Gage and his lies.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

I think the term is "cognitive dissonance", not diversity. Different meanings with the words changed.

I do believe that's the right term you are looking for.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 10:29 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

So what exactly would support them to cause the top to topple over?

In my world. When you cut down something like a tree. The top falls over. Timber. The stump is sticking out of the ground. If you cut the tree higher the stump is exactly that height.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 10:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Try this site.



I guess a lot of you have heard about the website ae911truth where a group of individuals claim that what happened to WTC 1, 2 and 7 could not have happened.




This is just a claim, because they have nothing to show for their allegation that it could not have happened the way it did.




You won't find any calculations that show how the NIST Report is wrong.




there are also 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 Repor




There are also 35,000 members of AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) who do not question the NIST report.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

No, gave you numorous sources of articles and reports from people that have there professionalizem on the line. Not going to name all the names from the 300 persons used in the popular science / mechanics articles because you are to lazy to do it yourself. Like I said, if you think the government reports are lies, sue to have them retracted. Makes me wonder why you didn't. Might try go fund me?



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

No, gave you numorous sources of articles and reports from people that have there professionalizem on the line. Not going to name all the names from the 300 persons used in the popular science / mechanics articles because you are to lazy to do it yourself. Like I said, if you think the government reports are lies, sue to have them retracted. Makes me wonder why you didn't. Might try go fund me?



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 10:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
In my world. When you cut down something like a tree. The top falls over. Timber. The stump is sticking out of the ground. If you cut the tree higher the stump is exactly that height.


Oh dear, you really think buildings are like trees.... Just why do you think a building can stop the KE of the falling section, and cause it to topple over?



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 11:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Two factors go into the way a tree falls. They are not a balanced column. Branch distribution is greater usually to one side, making a tree more likely to fall to to a selected side. Buildings are straight columns built so all froce is straight down into the foundation. A trees roots spread out to counter the force cause by the spread of its branches. Trees do not hold thier loads like a building.

Second, you cut a tree in notches to encourage a tree to fall maybe in a desired direction. But also notching a tree does not pinch the chainsaw. A pinched chainsaw can get stuck beyone a person's ability to pull it out or the ability of the motor to drive the chain. If you cut in a line perpendicular to the tree, the weight of the tree pushes straight down on the chainsaw making it very stuck and stopped.

Things do fall into there own footprints. Pull a table cloth fast enough, a dinning set falls straight down back into its footprint.

You Mr Smith never cut down a tree or very unskilled at it.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Oh, a tree cannot be compressed into its self by gravity to be more dense. A building made to maximize space can be. And gravity wants to pull things straight to the centure of the earth. Why a plumb Bob can be used to make a straight line. So gravity pulling straight down on the WTC which was broken from inside out will want to fall straight to the centure of the earth. Laws of physics. What are you a doctor of?



posted on Apr, 28 2016 @ 02:20 AM
link   
The more I think about it. Bridges, when they fail, tend to fall straight down by gravity trying to pull them to the centure of the earth. So, yes. Large structures have a history of falling into their own "footprint" when failing internally. The towers were not pushed over by an external force, so why would gravity not pull them straight down compressing the towers?



posted on Apr, 28 2016 @ 03:48 AM
link   


I think popular science, skeptic magizene, other jornals have more professional image at stake and under more scientific scrutiny than 911research.wtc7.
a reply to: neutronflux

Their definitely under tight control. LOL. Need to keep those jobs.




Problem with truther lies, they can easly be created at a faster rate and with less energy than it takes to debunk them. I can fly like Superman and I have wittnesses. Debunk that.


It's a lot harder to disprove the truth.



posted on Apr, 28 2016 @ 04:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
The more I think about it. Bridges, when they fail, tend to fall straight down by gravity trying to pull them to the centure of the earth. So, yes. Large structures have a history of falling into their own "footprint" when failing internally. The towers were not pushed over by an external force, so why would gravity not pull them straight down compressing the towers?


If you knock one of the legs of a steel chair. Which way does it fall? Does it crush itself and fall straight down? Or does it fall to the weak side with no support?

If not. Show me an example in a building other then the 3 buildings on 911. Can't do it.




top topics



 
44
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join