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

Bones: Forensic evidence indicating the use of explosives on September 11th, 2001.

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 01:57 PM
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

My only intent was the OP, I don't have exp in explosives or collapses. But simple math and seeing the videos of how the debris rained down it satisfies my curiosity as to how the bone fragments got on the roof.
I also would like an explanation as to how and why they missed the bone not once but three times.

Possibly they scoured the roof top with magnets like we use in construction or maybe they just didn't give a flip or think much of any rock, slag, or metal fragments in the ballast boxes which lead to the obvious missed bone.

This being said I still have my questions like everyone else, but as long as we deal in facts and not disinformation we will learn the truth regardless of what is exactly the truth.

posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 03:30 PM
a reply to: ColdWisdom

Let me ask this question...Is there any evidence in existence of human bone fragments being ejected during a crush accident?

posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 03:44 PM

originally posted by: Mandroid7

originally posted by: elementalgrove
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

Excellent thread!

To me it seems that it would defy physics for bones caught in official lie of a "pancake theory" would be able to make their way to a roof top like the Deutsche Bank!

Kind of reminds me of the physics defying passport that made its way to the ground!

I don't buy the official story either, but you don't know much about physics if you think millions of tons of steel and concrete falling like a pancake would not displace the air in between the floors. It can only go outwards.

Ever jump on a juicebox? It would smash everything in there to dust, including fragile bones.

I would test the fragments for traces, before using bones found nearby as proof of explosives.

There was a rumor of aluminum oxide found in dust, was that ever debunked?

metal oxide phases have been identified including phases rich in Al, Ti, Pb, Bi, Mo, Zr, Sn, Cu, and others.

Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust

Here's the rub:
0.54% dust is Si/Al-rich, 20% iron and mineral wool. But there's more...

All debunks got debunked as of yet, correct me if I'm wrong.

S&F for keeping the 9/11 forums alive and kicking.

posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 03:52 PM
What is more plausible to the impartial mind not wedded (as many here are) to the pancake theory of the collapse of the two towers: were the tiny bone fragments created by crushing debris or violent explosives?
Answer: explosives. Besides, there was no pancaking going on! Each floor did NOT fall on the next lower floor in succession. Instead, the video evidence shows CLEARLY (except, of course, to those so blind because they don't want to believe their eyes) each floor being blown to smithereens (IMMEDIATE CONVERSION INTO DUST) not by mechanical pressure of falling floors but by successive explosions.

Even NIST eventually discarded the pancake theory:
“NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor system - that connected the core columns and the perimeter columns - consisted of a grid of steel 'trusses' integrated with a concrete slab). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon.”
This blows to smithereens the absurd theory that, firstly, the pressure of thousands of tons of debris ground human bones to fragments a few millimetres long and then compressed air expelled lots of dust and debris, including this human detritus, sideways or up into the air to settle on the roof of Deutsche Bank. What a load of phooey! The odd squirts of smoke through windows dozens of floors BELOW the destruction line, where there had not been any fires burning and where the air would NOT be compressed, is blatant and classic evidence of demolition charges detonating prematurely inside the tower.
Those who cling to the official explanation of the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2 cannot explain why the bone fragments were so SMALL. That is the crucial issue, not why they ended up on the roof of a neighbouring building. Even NIST admitted that pancaking did not happen. That means that the bones could not have been reduced to such small fragments merely by crushing. Only explosives could have done the job.

posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 04:16 PM
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

It took energy to lift all the building components that composed the towers into place during construction. That energy remained in the structure as potential energy.

PEgrav = mass • g • height

When the towers collapsed, the potential energy was released. The amount of energy released by the fall of all that mass must have been colossal, equal to an explosion, IE the release of all the energy used to lift the mass in the construction of the building, and probably would do the same type of damage to a human body that an explosion would, not to mention the blunt force trauma of a skyscraper disintegrating and falling all around you would fragment a human body pretty thoroughly and the kinetic energy of the building collapse could have sent the remains a considerable distance out from the collapse point. I dont think we need an explosion to explain it. I am not saying that explosives didnt play into it, they may have, but the collapse of the structure and the energy released in the collapse could probably produce what has been observed in bone fragments thrown out on an adjacent roof.
edit on 7-10-2016 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 05:19 PM
a reply to: openminded2011

The revelation that “several portions of remains” recovered from the Pentagon and Shanksville ended up in a landfill was mentioned briefly on the latter pages of a report released Tuesday after an investigation led by retired Army Gen. John P. Abizaid.
The report said that the Sept. 11 remains in question “could not be tested or identified,” apparently because they were too small or charred to allow for DNA analysis. The remains were cremated and then mixed with biomedical waste at the Dover mortuary, where they were given to a contractor who incinerated them and dumped the residue in a landfill.

Portions of 9/11 victims’ remains taken to landfill, report says

I guess collapsing towers are out of the picture at the Pentagon or Shanksville, let me put it this way then:
can we explain the similarities without submitting the use of explosives?

posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 06:03 PM

originally posted by: AnkhMorpork

That slomo zoom at the end showing what's going on under the canopy of debris ejection is very telling.

Bumping this for re-examination.

posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 07:02 PM
a reply to: tmeister182

Tooth was recovered from tree at Shanksville crash of United 93

In the late fall of 2001, as Shaler and his colleagues were engaged in the slow work of conducting DNA tests on the thousands of fragments from Ground Zero, pathologists at the Pennsylvania and Pentagon sites were moving much more quickly. Many of the remains were burned and badly damaged, but identifiable. In Pennsylvania, Somerset County coroner Wallace E. Miller and his team scoured the "halo"—the field and woods surrounding the crater left when United Airlines Flight 93 plunged into the ground. The debris was everywhere. Trees were draped with scraps of luggage, clothing, bits of the fuselage and human remains. Walking through the crash site in the days after the attacks, Miller's eye caught a flash of light 20 feet up in the branches of a hemlock tree. "I only noticed it because the sun happened to hit it at just the right angle," he says. A tree climber brought it down. It was a single tooth with a silver filling. Eventually it was matched to one of the passengers.

posted on Oct, 8 2016 @ 02:46 AM
a reply to: firerescue

Was it fractured or fragmented in any way at all?

posted on Oct, 8 2016 @ 07:11 AM
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

If you had read the article carefully would have noticed the tooth was intact

Pointing out the degree of fragmentation the body underwent and scattering of remains

In this case the impact of United 93 into the ground

posted on Oct, 8 2016 @ 02:46 PM
a reply to: micpsi

Then were is the shrapnel that fragmented the bones? Or the audio of demolitions setting off?

posted on Oct, 8 2016 @ 02:55 PM
a reply to: tmeister182

Look up bring crushed by fork lift and multiple it by a few thousand times. Or rod mill accidents. Or ball mill accidents. Note: I am not implying dust explosion.

posted on Oct, 8 2016 @ 03:09 PM
Or even more morbid. Look up rotating equipment accidents. Broken bodies with very little equipment damage. Think about a person caught in a building collapse powerful enough to snap floor connections.

Also, to fit the conspiracists narrative, each floor needed demolitions. That's a minimum of 220 charges between the two towers. No audio, no demolitions shrapnel with remains or bodies, nor physical evidence of demolitions.

posted on Oct, 8 2016 @ 07:20 PM
a reply to: neutronflux
Please stop.
You explain nothing but you argue abut everything that supports a conspiracy.
Whether BONES can be broken into small pieces by crushing is not of issue. A sausage maker can answer that.
The question is how such an outcome would be possible within the time constraints known.

If you want to see how badly explosions can mangle bodies, maybe you can for I can't.
This is the best description I was able to find after (for me) a lengthy search, " When the blast wa
ve hits the human body, rapid compression and
decompression result in transmission of pressu
re waves through the tissues, resulting in
damage primarily at junctions between diffe
rent tissues (e.g., bone and muscle, at the
interface between tissue and air

As best as I can tell, nothing like these chunks, pieces and bits are COMMON. It appears explosive effects could do this ripping, piecemealing of flesh. We don't have much expertise on this because these are the only buildings to have been destroyed like this with so many people involved. (Okla. City?)
If anyone here has the knowledge, it would most likely be first responders.
I'm not.

Also you do not have much info on the explosions recorded, the shrapnel patterns, or the sites that provide this. Go there.

posted on Oct, 9 2016 @ 07:41 AM
a reply to: largo

Stop what.

Human bones are easily crushed by just being bumped by a 5000 pound forklift. Think what a building collapse is capable of causing. 110 floors of potential energy converting to kinetic energy.

If explosives were used that ejected human remains, there would be a spray of demolitions shrapnel from the demolition blasts into the streets. No reports of shrapnel ever recovered with human remains. No reports of shrapnel ever from morgue staff. No demolitions shrapnel found imbedded in buildings next to the site. Witness that reported explosions at the WTC never hit by shrapnel.

No audio of demolitions setting of in WTC videos. A minimum of at least one per floor. A minimum of 110 detonations for one tower. The more realistic estimate would be at least five detonations per floor. That's 550 blasts for one tower.

No columns worked on by demolitions at WTC. No columns with drilled holes or altered for demolitions prep.

The hand sorting of WTC debris by police at the pile and staging areas found no physical evidence of demolitions. No shape charge fragments, no blasting caps fragments, no remote detonation device fragments, no ignition systems, nor evidence of steel worked on by demolitions.

Fact, top down demolition has never been used floor by floor.
Fact, explosive demolition of a building taller than 50 floors has never been used.

Some how the precise timing of a top down demolition on a building 110 floors, with a system compromised by fire, was carried out twice in one day.

There is no physical evidence for the impossible narrative of the precise timing needed to used demolitions on the towers which would have been compromised by fire.

edit on 9-10-2016 by neutronflux because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 9 2016 @ 07:53 AM
a reply to: largo

And war injuries from war time means nothing. The research of military explosives means nothing. Bunker buster bombs. Landmines that jump up into the air and fragment during detonation. Landmines for tanks and vehicles. Bombing of buildings. Hand grenades. Shrapnel from antipersonnel artillery rounds that set-off overheard. Flack from anti-aircraft rounds. Dam busting bombs. Cratering charges. Sabotage of bridges.

Yeap. Not much expertise on the use of charges and the resultant effects on humans, vehicles, and equipment sense the discovery of black powder and on.

posted on Oct, 9 2016 @ 08:12 AM

originally posted by: AnkhMorpork
a reply to: firerescue

Was it fractured or fragmented in any way at all?

Slightly off topic but food for thought. Teeth are the most difficult of the human bodies "bones" to break or crush. The well known serial killer case in Canada where the man fed his victims to his hogs, the hogs will eat an entire human body and expel the teeth in their excrement because they can't digest the teeth. This was how they identified something like 28 bodies on his land from forensic teeth collection and identification.

posted on Oct, 9 2016 @ 08:18 AM
At some point someone's gonna have to bring some real evidence that explosives were used to end the argument. Otherwise one is short changing ones self by eliminating the physics and dynamics involved with a collapsing building and the effects and dynamics involved during the collapse on the victims and the materials contained within the collapse by throwing out the baby with the bath water so to speak.

You cannot and will not ever find the truth by assumptions.

posted on Oct, 9 2016 @ 08:37 AM

originally posted by: Floridagoat
At some point someone's gonna have to bring some real evidence that explosives were used to end the argument. Otherwise one is short changing ones self by eliminating the physics and dynamics involved with a collapsing building and the effects and dynamics involved during the collapse on the victims and the materials contained within the collapse by throwing out the baby with the bath water so to speak.

You cannot and will not ever find the truth by assumptions.

Or just come up with theories like dustification to continue books sales.

Or claim WTC site clean up crews, equipment operators, firefighters, police, NYFD fire investigators, NYPD bomb squad, rescue workers, first responders, morgue staff, demolitions experts, sheriff's department, FBI, FAA, NIST, homeland security, air traffic controllers, and so on conspired to hide and destroy evidence.

posted on Oct, 9 2016 @ 09:24 AM
a reply to: neutronflux

See i'm not one that bother's myself with the information that keeps you/me from the truth. Any simple sound explanation that dispels a theory that is then thrown out and disregarded is the worst avenue of thought. Regardless if one perceives the explanation as wrong, lacking, or a fabrication to cover an undetermined cause, truth won't be found in that mindset.

Certain things like the entire JFK assassination are relevant in regards to 9-11-2001. One can see in that case alone the amount of theories only diluted the approach to truth, and IMO its 10 times worse in regards to 9-11-2001 with the theories.

Anyone that hasn't worked demolition or construction in any fashion will have a hard time understanding the environment of destruction as it occurs, much like a jackhammer impacting concrete as you work to remove the substrate, the upper floors in essence acted much like a jackhammer would as the upper floor section intact started its fall impacting each hard point on every floor the lightweight(not your standard 3000-3500 psi concrete mix) concrete pulverized with each impact.

I'm not proving anything or out to prove any point but simply understanding the environment. That day has several things that bother me and i'm sure that will continue like it does with everyone in their own certain ways.

My first obvious question to the rigged explosives theory is why would you rig the whole building like that only to not do the top floors and risk your plot being unfolded? What happened if that upper section just fell off to one side and left the building there where all the "explosives" would have been eventually discovered? Wouldn't you just rig the whole thing like they really do demo work on high rises? I suppose you could say that something misfired etc., but then you could just keep inserting anything you want at any point to come to an explanation.

Side note- I recently saw a fires effect on a standard 12 foot by 6 foot enclosed trailer. within the trailer were some batteries in an ammo can that caught fire or something the fire marshal said, the point was there was about 20 - 50lb bags of cleaned whole corn stored inside. That fire burned so hot it warped the axle, drooped all the steel frame on the bottom and completely melted all the aluminum sides down into puddles or solidified aluminum and ashes.

So yet again yes in my mind a fire with certain other elements on fire can burn hot enough to undermine, destabilize, and completely destroy the integrity of steel. All it takes is one weak point to start the chain of destruction.

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in