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.
originally posted by: wmd_2008
originally posted by: turbonium1
originally posted by: madenusa
I only believe what I see ,I don't fallow the media.
I was driving a truck that day my dispatcher sent me a message don't get off the road forget about hours of service.
When I saw the towers go down that day I said wow looks like controlled demolition.
so don't blame everybody for believing what they read.
I only believe what I see with my own two eyes I could careless about science.
I agree. To see these buildings pulverize to dust, from a plane hit, and fires, on a few floors, in a 110 floor skyscraper, is laughable. To see it twice, is beyond absurd.
The media wants us to NOT believe our own eyes, do NOT think for yourself.
Wile E. Coyote runs off a cliff, and levitates in mid-air. Until he looks down, and sees where he is...and then he plummets to ground.
A building 110 stories high, with the strongest, most massive, support structure ever known, is hit by a plane, which had
about the same effect as a flea hitting an elephant's ass.
Nobody actually thought the towers would collapse to the ground, and certainly nobody had ever seen a building pulverize into dust, either.
Nobody would think it would happen, because everybody knows it does NOT happen. Unless it's a CD.
And that's what we see, and we know, and the media swine is a pack of liars, telling us it was perfectly normal, and let's go kill those Muslim terrorists, in Iraq, okay?
They were NOT pulverized into dust what could be crushed into dust was so we have thousands of sq mtrs of sheetrock, hundreds of cubic mtrs of sprayed on fire protection, vermiculite from behind the aluminium cladding and of course concrete dust from the thin concrete floor slabs.
You people know nothing about construction
Use this link to see some real hi res images of the debris at the towers you can left click on the images twice to see the highest res now please show how everything was turned to dust I see plenty of steel and other building components
originally posted by: Salander
As Kean & Hamilton suggested, the goal was for the commission to fail in its search for truth and justice. The goal was to protect the guilty parties and deceive the public.
originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: turbonium1
Yet again you talk total BS do you want to try the red neck challenge if you think was was not a problem lets give you a little example.
You hold both your arms rigid above you head from approx 3.6 mtrs the height of a WTC Tower floor would you let anyone drop a 5kg mass onto them, I wouldn't advise it, to let YOU know because you don't have a clue if your arms slowed that mass over 0.1 mtr ie 100mm or 4 inches the force would be around 1764 newtons or 179.88 kg.
A floor slab in the towers alone is 1000 tons or 1 MILLION KGS.
The structure was designed to support the static mass but NOT a dynamic load the floors were supported at either end of the trusses they could drop internally now like I say it you think the structure could absorb an impact I would be interested to see if someone built a replica tower if the truth community would be willing to be locked in while like the North Tower the top 15 floors collapsed just to help you decide.
Just the top floor slab failed
Collapse finished ground level 14 men killed
You DON'T have a clue about physics.
12. Was there enough gravitational energy present in the WTC towers to cause the collapse of the intact floors below the impact floors? Why weren't the collapses of WTC 1 and WTC 2 arrested by the intact structure below the floors where columns first began to buckle?
Yes, there was more than enough gravitational load to cause the collapse of the floors below the level of collapse initiation in both WTC towers. The vertical capacity of the connections supporting an intact floor below the level of collapse was adequate to carry the load of 11 additional floors if the load was applied gradually and 6 additional floors if the load was applied suddenly (as was the case). Since the number of floors above the approximate floor of collapse initiation exceeded six in each WTC tower (12 floors in WTC 1 and 29 floors in WTC 2), the floors below the level of collapse initiation were unable to resist the suddenly applied gravitational load from the upper floors of the buildings.
Consider a typical floor immediately below the level of collapse initiation and conservatively assume that the floor is still supported on all columns (i.e., the columns below the intact floor did not buckle or peel off due to the failure of the columns above). Consider further the truss seat connections between the primary floor trusses and the exterior wall columns or core columns. The individual connection capacities ranged from 94,000 pounds to 395,000 pounds, with a total vertical load capacity for the connections on a typical floor of 29,000,000 pounds (see Section 5.2.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1-6C). The total floor area outside the core was approximately 31,000 square feet, and the average load on a floor under service conditions on Sept. 11, 2001, was 80 pounds per square foot. Thus, the total vertical load on a floor outside the core can be estimated by multiplying the floor area (31,000 square feet) by the gravitational load (80 pounds per square foot), which yields 2,500,000 pounds (this is a conservative load estimate since it ignores the weight contribution of the heavier mechanical floors at the top of each WTC tower). By dividing the total vertical connection capacity (29,000,000 pounds) of a floor by the total vertical load applied to the connections (2,500,000 pounds), the number of floors that can be supported by an intact floor is calculated to be a total of 12 floors or 11 additional floors.
This simplified and conservative analysis indicates that the floor connections could have carried only a maximum of about 11 additional floors if the load from these floors were applied statically. Even this number is (conservatively) high, since the load from above the collapsing floor is being applied suddenly. Since the dynamic amplification factor for a suddenly applied load is 2, an intact floor below the level of collapse initiation could not have supported more than six floors. Since the number of floors above the level where the collapse initiated exceeded six for both towers (12 for WTC 1 and 29 for WTC 2), neither tower could have arrested the progression of collapse once collapse initiated. In reality, the highest intact floor was about three (WTC 2) to six (WTC 1) floors below the level of collapse initiation. Thus, more than the 12 to 29 floors reported above actually loaded the intact floor suddenly.
Each of the the NIST, Arup, and WAI studies were conducted by multiple PhDs with expertise in forensic engineering, tall building engineering or fire science, and the NIST WTC7 report was also independently peer reviewed by the Journal of Structural Engineering (whose editors and peer reviewers have similar levels of expertise), while not a single expert on forensic engineering, tall building engineering or fire science worked on Hulsey's study.
Bringing Closure to the 9/11 Pentagon Debate
Pentagon Security Videos: Recent work on the video from two Pentagon security cameras shows that they captured images of the approaching, low-flying plane. In his paper “The 85 Pentagon Area Surveillance Cameras,” Ken Jenkins explains the images, how the date error came about, and the likely origins for the trailing white smoke. There is no evidence at this time that the government is withholding other images of the event captured by the surveillance cameras.
Ken Jenkins and David Chandler also recently took pairs of sequential images from the Pentagon surveillance video cameras, putting them together as you would see them in what is called a blink comparator. In this way, the image of the plane “pops out.” If you watch the image cycle a few times, the details of the plane are clearly visible. You can find the blink comparisons on David Chandler’s website, 911SpeakOut.org.
The 85 Pentagon Area Surveillance Cameras
From that starting point, the numbers of useful recordings regarding the Pentagon event begin to fall dramatically:
Very nearly 2/3rds of the 85 recordings, specifically 56 “of these video recordings did not show either the Pentagon building, the Pentagon crash site, or the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11.”
Of the remaining 29 video recordings, 16 did show some part of the Pentagon, but “did not show the Pentagon crash site and did not show the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon.”
Of the 13 remaining recordings, 11 “only showed the Pentagon after the impact of Flight 77.” An example is the video that was released from the Doubletree Hotel. That camera was initially pointed away from the Pentagon, then repositioned minutes after the crash to point towards the smoke cloud rising from the Pentagon crash site.
The two remaining recordings, from the Pentagon’s two security cameras both clearly showed the Pentagon impact fireball. One of those two recordings seems to show only the fin of the plane, due to a foreground obstruction. The other recording seems to show the entire plane, but also at low resolution.
Judicial Watch v. Federal Bureau of Investigation (No.06-1135)
November 01, 2011
Judicial Watch lawsuit to obtain previously unseen footage of Flight 77 striking the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request on December 15, 2004, seeking all records pertaining to camera recordings from the Sheraton National Hotel, the Nexcomm/Citgo gas station, Pentagon security cameras and the Virginia Department of Transportation.On May 16, 2006, Judicial Watch forced the Department of Defense to release video footage of American Airlines flight 77 crashing into the Pentagon on 9/11. The videos had been kept secret by the DoD until Judicial Watch filed the FOIA request and, eventually, a lawsuit stating that the DoD had “no legal basis” to refuse release of the footage. On September 15, 2006, Judicial Watch released videos from the CITGO gas station near the Pentagon, which was released by the FBI in response to the FOIA request.Judicial Watch is committed to completing the public record of the 9/11 attacks.
The very fact that there is no picture at all, not a still shot from any of the thousands of cameras in that area, public and private, not one, is evidence in and of itself.