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.

 

9/11 Conspiracy Debunkers

page: 36
24
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:45 AM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Don't forget...

Well, that is the authors opinion...

The proof against the fairy narrative was never peer reviewed.

The accounts were never trial given testimony, not under oath, with no chance for cross examination, so their is reasonable debt to the proof the fairies are debunked.




posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 07:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Why would a nuke bomb create molten iron for 90 days?



Because we all know jet fuel will create molten iron for 90 days. 9/11 invented new laws of physics.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 07:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Why would a nuke bomb create molten iron for 90 days?



Because we all know jet fuel will create molten iron for 90 days. 9/11 invented new laws of physics.


I didn't know there was molten metal there after 90 days, do you have a link?



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 08:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Why would a nuke bomb create molten iron for 90 days?



Because we all know jet fuel will create molten iron for 90 days. 9/11 invented new laws of physics.


You are assuming that there was molten iron present. If you look at the thermal images, you will see the heat signature move outwards and slowly abate. Think about how underground fires would behave as they consumed combustible debris.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Are you talking about the molten slag from plastic, lead, copper, aluminum, dry wall, ash, char, fabric, ciders, and smoldering material the WTC.

For your false molten iron narrative, have you any proof of what would cause iron to be molten for 90s, allowed workers and machines access to remove the debris, and not have whatever reaction that was going on to melt threw steel dump truck beds?

Show that the WTC pile was hot enough at any given time to contain molten iron....


edit on 7-6-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed wording



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 04:49 PM
link   
I think the conspiracy believers have their nuke ideas crossed.

Assume explosive nukes were used to blow out supports:
1. There would not be any nuclear material to react and keep molten steel hot for months.
2. Radiation detectors would have bee going off for blocks.
3. Windows would have been blown out for blocks.
4. Ear drums would have burst.
They call it a nuclear explosion for a reason.

Assume fission nukes were used to melt through the supports:
1. How do you start an instant fusion reaction for support after support, floor after floor?
2. The material would have burned through 70 floors of debris to get to sub basement.
3. Nuclear radiation would have killed anyone working on the pile within days.
4. Radiation detectors would have singing like Monica Lewinsky.

Show me where I am wrong. Or admit nukes were NOT used.
edit on 7-6-2017 by samkent because: word choice



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Does anyone know if the firefighters, police, city emergency response, ERs had the ability to check for contamination from a dirty bomb on 9/11? If they checked for contamination through the city emergency response crews?

If the first responders had the capability and checked for dirty bombs on 9/11, the truth movement would ignore the facts.

If the city crews checked, found nothing to report, and then the information would just slip threw the cracks?


As pointed out before, the contamination would be long term too.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent

I'd give more credit to guys with hacksaws than nuclear devices.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent

Let me play conspiracist.

Oh? there where radiation detectors that should have indicated the presence of fission products from a nuclear device?

Oh, WTC survivors and clean up workers should have showed up with radiation burns, radiation sickness, dying from radiation poisoning at the ERs?

Well. It's a government coverup. It's all a lie people didn't have illnesses from radiation. There is reasonable doubt the reports of no radiation illnesses and no radiation deaths are truthful. There was no trial testimony on nobody died or was sick from radiation resulting from 9/11.

The whole OS is lie.... insert favorite conspiracist's cliche...



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 10:37 PM
link   
You don't need radiation detectors. A nuclear explosion will always leave isotopes. That is to say, atoms with a number of neutrons different from normal.

Finding isotopes would be absolute, irrefutable proof of a nuclear device. And I'm sure if anyone in the academic community suspected it, someone in the academic community would have looked for them.

It's simply not possible at all for a nuclear device to have been used.


However, it's also not necessary. The thermite theory is really the only one that has been put forward by anyone with an academic background. Jones may not be very photogenic, but he graduated from a PHD program with honors, and worked as a physics professor for over a decade. He is a genuine, credentialed, physicist.

It wouldn't need to be a floor by floor complete demolition. 3 meters of free fall is all that is necessary for a "hammer effect". And nobody in the academic community seriously disputes that 3 meters is enough.

But there is some dispute about what could have lead to 3 meters of free fall in the initial collapse....... How the supports managed to fail completely all at once, rather than partially supporting the structure long enough to pad the collapse.


edit on 7-6-2017 by bloodymarvelous because: to long



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 06:43 AM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous




rather than partially supporting the structure long enough to pad the collapse.

Didn't you see the tower fall through first?
How much "pad" time is enough to say it wasn't instant failure of all supports?



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 07:08 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux



Does anyone know if the firefighters, police, city emergency response, ERs had the ability to check for contamination from a dirty bomb on 9/11? If they checked for contamination through the city emergency response crews


YES

the NYC Department of Health sent a health physicist equipped with radiations detectors right after first plane hit

Here are some excerpts from few years back when dealing with other fruit loops claiming nuclear bombs brought down
WTC . Link to original article is no longer active



Within minutes of the crash, McKinney sent a radiological health inspector to check the site for any radiation sources. He reached Richard Borri, a senior scientist in the department’s office of Radiological Health, who like most people from DOH, was on his way to work when the first tower was hit.




While I was walking down Church Street, with all my instruments, I came within 1000 feet of the South Tower, and unfortunately the building came down,” says Borri, sounding every bit the unruffled scientist. “It’s a good thing I walked slowly.”





That was fortunately not the case, Borri found, using a portable liquid scintillation counter, which measures radioactivity like a Geiger counter. The high-tech portable gadget he carried, one of the few available in the United States, is far more precise than its century-old cousin, the Geiger, counter with a much more refined ability to detect any kind of radioactivity.




Although Borri didn’t turn up any problematic radioactive readings by the end of the day, his work would be supplemented by the federal Department of Energy, whose technicians remained on site and continued to sample. [Only during the last days of the Ground Zero cleanup would radioactive testers find any evidence of radioactive emissions, from a pharmacy laboratory located within one of the buildings.]


THE FDNY HAZ MAT unit carried out surveys in the afternoon once off duty members had arrived - original crew was killed
in collapse



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Right after 911 an AL QAEDA operative was assigned task of taking down Brooklyn bridge

He would try to slice through the suspension cable with a torch



In late 2001, while in Pakistan, Faris went to a travel agency to have some expired airline tickets to Yemen re-issued for several unknown colleagues. He claimed to be a preacher from Tablighi Jamaat, a missionary group.
In early 2002, Faris was introduced to an operative identified only as "C-2". He learned of a plot allegedly involving the simultaneous destruction of the Brooklyn Bridge by cutting through cables with blowtorches, and a second group that would derail a train in Washington D.C. Faris' investigations into obtaining the necessary tools for the dual-operation involved asking a friend where he might purchase welding equipment, and researching the structure of the bridge on the internet. He concluded that the operation was unlikely, and allegedly sent a message back to Pakistan calling off the plot, stating that "The weather is too hot".


Plot was picked up and security increased



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 07:39 AM
link   
a reply to: firerescue

Hadn't heard about that one. Attacks on infrastructure would be devastating if they were coordinated and widespread. I do feel that the nation is in a better position to protect itself from that, but anything is possible with a determined enemy. Travel ban case will be going to SCOTUS soon.



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: firerescue

Thank you! Awesome!



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux


Leslie Robertson, one of the structural engineers responsible for the design of the WTC, describes fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 days after the attacks.

Context of 'September 12, 2001-February 2002: Witnesses See Molten Metal in the Remains at Ground Zero'

I really have to wonder... are you kids just innocent, but dumb as eff, or simply unwilling to do some basic research?



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 09:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: neutronflux


Leslie Robertson, one of the structural engineers responsible for the design of the WTC, describes fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 days after the attacks.

Context of 'September 12, 2001-February 2002: Witnesses See Molten Metal in the Remains at Ground Zero'

I really have to wonder... are you kids just innocent, but dumb as eff, or simply unwilling to do some basic research?


Leslie Robertson:

"I've no recollection of having made any such statements...nor was I in a position to have the required knowledge."

911myths.com...



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion

So, support your argument.

One, show the pile was ever hot enough to support molten steel.

Two, how would the pile at the WCT remain hot after 30 days if there wasn't a smoldering/combustion process similar how charcoal was made before the industrial revolution.

Three, prove what was witnessed wasn't a molten slag mix from lead, copper, tin, aluminum, gypsum, ash, cinders, plastic, smoldering dust.

Four, molten steel reacts violently when hit with water. Can you reference any accounts of an explosion while the WTC pile was being cooled with water.

Five, they used thermal lances that produce metal slag during cleanup. Just saying.

You cannot provide evidence to support you molten steel comment, so you want to distract with attacks on intellect based on your misconceptions of a smoldering debris pile.



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Misconceptions. Sure. Not.
That's a nice pile of hot air, Sky-TV!

 


a reply to: mrthumpy



911myths.com...




Debunked debunkery. I don't give 'em my clicks anymore, try another source.



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: neutronflux

Misconceptions. Sure. Not.
That's a nice pile of hot air, Sky-TV!

 


a reply to: mrthumpy



911myths.com...




Debunked debunkery. I don't give 'em my clicks anymore, try another source.




Rants and accusations on personality...

Can you construct a rational rebuttal or not?



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join