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.
From: en.m.wikipedia.org...
Numerous volunteers organized to form "bucket brigades", which passed 5-gallon buckets full of debris down a line to investigators, who sifted through the debris in search of evidence and human remains. Ironworkers helped cut up steel beams into more manageable sizes for removal. Much of the debris was hauled off to the Fresh Kills Landfill on Staten Island where it was searched and sorted.[38]
Your go to line of "sources please" is sad and tiresome. Especially when people have lead you by the noise in other threads and have repeatedly supplied the sources you ask for again and again.
The WTC site and steel was thoroughly sorted and inspected.
If a person cannot be honest that WTC debris was inspected to the extent of sorting on conveyor belts by hand,
Can you send me a credible source to validate this opinion please.
I just haven't had any luck finding it.
Your go to line of "sources please" is sad and tiresome. Especially when people have lead you by the noise in other threads and have repeatedly supplied the sources you ask for again and again.
Really need to do your own research and kick those false narrative conspiracy sites to the curb.
Lots of small documentaries and news articles that back up Wikipedia
You are so biased I think you are Steve Jones himself...........
The WTC site and steel was thoroughly sorted and inspected.
If a person cannot be honest that WTC debris was inspected to the extent of sorting on conveyor belts by hand,
There is no proof of controlled demolition.
The idea WTC steel was sent straight to China is a lie.
The idea WTC steal was not inspected is a lie.
originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: samkent
They have to believe?
You say pulling 1.5 million tons of rubble from a crimescene and selling most of the steel to China isn't a problem at all?
You say they found evidence (for office fires weakening said steel) in the microstructural analysis of this joke they call a NIST report?
Right. Believe in your War with Terror if you like, my condolences for this loss of common sense. 15 years of trollery and all you pseudo-debunkers have to offer is this kind of supposedly strong language from some teen in his ma's basement.
God bless those tax-dollars at work, just imagine we wouldn't have our state sponsored clowns here to hammer the last nails in that coffin.
It's actual evidence for the use of explosives brought foward by desperate infowarfare activists. At least I don't need to read the study from the OP anymore, thanks for the cooperation! May I speak your supervisor now?
originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: pteridine
Nobody said fires can't do that. You're being intellectually dishonest again, which is duly noted as circumstancial evidence nr. 2.
Problem with this firery theory is, that they resorted to fictional evidence in order to support their hypothesis. Which is precisely why the NIST report doesn't fit the standarts for a scientific study. You'll find all that in their microstructural analysis, have some fun not finding actual evidence.
One has to wonder why you folks forget all that whilst demanding cables (from towers full of cables) as actual evidence for the use of explosives. This fact alone is pretty hilarious and more circumstancial evidence for me, being in my head. Just saying the really scientific method has some merit and it would be equally applied to all theories if that's what all this trollery is about.
Which is why I think you folks are rather part of the paid damage control than really interested in debunking lies. Just cut the crappy part and present hard evidence for 'office fires weakened steel' in that joke of a cover-up, I'll doubt you'll find any.
Physician, heal yourself!
If I am paid damage control, I'd like to know where to send my timecard. Bush and Cheney won't pay up.
Is there any actual evidence other than hearsay from your cousins friend of a friend or someone's interpretation of the NIST report?
originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: pteridine
If I am paid damage control, I'd like to know where to send my timecard. Bush and Cheney won't pay up.
Nobody on Ceres cares, sorry. That's a pretty compelling picture I only used to visualise the hypocrisy involved.
I'd consider it to be even worse in case you're not in some way paid for this crap. Seriously.
Is there any actual evidence other than hearsay from your cousins friend of a friend or someone's interpretation of the NIST report?
What? Look, you've wasted my time long enough by now. Go and find something from the NIST-report to talk about, here is a good one for starters.
Ignoring reality you say, let me ask you one thing: is there somebody in your reality capable of comprehending the plain facts Nist presented? Find a supervisor who actually knows his trade, please! Just for the sake of this funny little debate, ya know...
Problem with this firery theory is, that they resorted to fictional evidence in order to support their hypothesis.
www.911truth.org...
originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: samkent
Firefighters witnessed pre-collapse explosions whilst being in the lobby, but that didn't have a great impact on your reasoning either. Did it?
I couldn't even tell if you just made that up after having a few baked beans, eggs from helicopter hens and way too much bacon for your breaking badfast.