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.

 

Question for 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists

page: 50
13
<< 47  48  49   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 01:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

There's being independent and just plain stupid lets look at the truther side

No planes
Painted on explosives
Mini Nukes
Holograms (show one example of a daylight /airplane sized hologram)
Death rays from space.

Your way of posting use one of the above when shot down in flames change to another then repeat.

You people are as bad/mad as flat Earthers

edit on 7-2-2018 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 02:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008


You people are as bad/mad as flat Earthers



Kyrie Irving thinks it flat...

The Rabbit Hole is deep.




posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 03:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux


Some of us are capable of independent thinking. On this historical event--the attacks at WTC--links mean nothing anymore. Anybody that has been studying this event for more than 6 months understands that there is zero evidence to support the official story. It is such a pathetic story that even the heads of the government commission said in public the commission was set up to fail.

For independent thinkers with curious minds, that means something. This commission served the same purpose as, for example, the Warren Commission. Its purpose was to protect the guilty parties and deceive the public.

Clearly that goal was achieved, as demonstrated by your many posts here.


Really? Like to state the evidence of your pet WTC theory. Nukes brought down the buildings. All you ever had is pseudoscience and innuendo.

Please try to discredit inward bowing and buckling leading to collapse brought on by deficient fire insulation, knocked of fire insulation, impact damage, fire damage and thermal stress. The inward bowing and buckling as seen in the video in this linked to thread, and as discussed in the linked to thread.

the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/


www.metabunk.org...

Funny you don’t use or want to talk about the actual video evidence? Funny you don’t talk about the actual physical evidenced?

You just play he said she said?
edit on 7-2-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 07:59 AM
link   
All the actual evidence proved otherwise.

Evidence is what matters here.

You have no idea what happened with any of the fireproofing. Show proof of your claims, or stop claiming it.

Any 'inward bowing' is an indication of the demolition itself.


Steel doesn't show any weakening, as I said.

Nothing supports your argument.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 08:02 AM
link   
Every steel sample proved it wasn't caused by fires.

You don't care about the real evidence, obviously.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Again, what damage are you looking for? The steel buckled. Show any evidence from metallurgical analysis the steel was worked on by explosives? If there is no evidence of Your steel damaged by fire, then there sure in the heck is no evidence of being worked on by explosives. You don’t even get you proved yourself wrong.....



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Again, what damage are you looking for? The steel buckled. Show any evidence from metallurgical analysis the steel was worked on by explosives? If there is no evidence of Your steel damaged by fire, then there sure in the heck is no evidence of being worked on by explosives. You don’t even get you proved yourself wrong.....


The evidence shows it was NOT caused by fires, that's the first point here.

And that means it was caused by something else, obviously.

So we have to look for the true cause(s) of collapses, right?


They did NOT look for the actual cause(s) of collapse, which is outrageous, and criminal, and seems quite intentional, to not look for the true cause(s) of collapse.


They had no intent to find the true cause(s) of collapse, from that alone.

Anyone that is actually looking for the cause of collapse will NOT avoid further investigation into the Crime of the Century. Only if they don't want to find it, being involved in part of the crime, itself.

No explosives were looked for, at all. Evidence needs to be collected for explosives, because it's hard to find evidence of something when you don't even look for it, or collect it, as possible evidence of something!!

Terrorists had bombed the towers a few years earlier, supposedly.

And terrorists attack the towers again, but there's no way explosives were used!!


Even if you believe both attacks were by terrorists, you damn well know that explosives were used already. That means explosives COULD be used again, no matter if it is, or is not, used, we have to investigate for explosives. More so, because we know that fires never caused it.


Why would they stop looking for the true cause(s)Z? That is what you need to think about here.



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

You never have debunked inward bowing leading to collapse.

It’s clear as daylight. The video in this linked to thread below clearly shows the bowing leading to buckling resulting in collapse.

www.metabunk.org...

the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/

Is this false?

If fire induced bowing was not the cause seen in the referenced video, you explain what induced bowing causing buckling leading to collapse.

You?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
“None of the actual steel weakened to the point of failure. ”

If none of the steel was weaken to the point of failure, then why would any one look for demolitions.

Usually, bomb fragments are what are analyzed for explosive composition. The hand sorting of WTC recovered about 19,000 fragments of human remains. 6000 that could fit in test tubes. No demolitions shrapnel found. No blasting cap fragments found. No detonation device fragments found. No remains of thousands of feet of ignition wiring found. No metallurgical evidence steel worked on by demolitions. You yourself claim the steel was not damaged or weakened. What did you want them to analyze? Randomly sample over a million tons of building. How would that be meaningful?

You are the one that cannot explain how a complex first every sophisticated split timed high rise top down CD system would have survive jet impacts that took out core columns and wide spread fires?

You are the one saying the steel was not damaged or weakened.

You are the one that cannot explain the closeup video of WTC 2 columns bowing leading to buckling and resulting in collapse.

You are the one that claimed the perimeter tower steel columns were not an import part of the load bearing steel structure.

You are the one ignorant of the efforts to recover human remains, personal effects, and evidence from WTC ruble.

You try to say the steel was not studied and shipped off as fast as possible. There are steel columns from the WTC on public display. The body of logged WTC steel collection show columns were identified by there numbers, important columns saved, and steel samples taken for evidence. I have cited the research of the WTC steel. Several examples how Your are wrong. Remember, you claim zero analysis of the WTC steel. You are dead wrong.

You tried to state there was no recognizable engine parts from the jets that hit the towers. You were wrong again.

You create a false narrative by ignoring video evidence and citing debunked false arguments concerning the WTC recovery.

You are part of the problem! Enabling the con artists of the truth movement by ignoring reality, video evidence, and science.




edit on 24-2-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 02:29 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Your track record shows you research nothing!

Sad you are conduit for truth movement lies and pseudoscience.



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 03:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1
All the actual evidence proved otherwise.

Evidence is what matters here.

You have no idea what happened with any of the fireproofing. Show proof of your claims, or stop claiming it.

Any 'inward bowing' is an indication of the demolition itself.


Steel doesn't show any weakening, as I said.

Nothing supports your argument.



It was a combination of events damage,fires and thermal loading something that wasn't calculated when the Towers were built assumptions were made on the effects of fire that has now changed



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

What did you expect from a moon hoaxer/flat earther ....???



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 09:45 PM
link   
The best WTC theories after 15 years plus since 9/11?




9/11 - World Trade Center: dismantled and hollow vs "micro nukes"
m.youtube.com...

Published on Feb 19, 2018Don Fox, Joe Olson and Jim Fetzer are big nuke advocates, and they square off against Steve De'ak in this long (2-hour) discussion that eventually gets a little heated. I refer to the viscoelastiic dampers as plastic, but that was a flippant thing to say;. they were actually steel with a viscoelastic material included.


The truth movement is a farce! And what is a micro nuke? They don’t go bang? Don't make an EMP? Don’t cause a shockwave or over pressure event? Nor make radiation? All items that are part of a thermal nuclear explosion with enough energy to cut steel columns. Never mind there has to be enough nuclear material to cause a thermal nuclear explosion. Anything less is just a dirty bomb.
edit on 24-2-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Feb, 25 2018 @ 03:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

You never have debunked inward bowing leading to collapse.

It’s clear as daylight. The video in this linked to thread below clearly shows the bowing leading to buckling resulting in collapse.

www.metabunk.org...

the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/

Is this false?

If fire induced bowing was not the cause seen in the referenced video, you explain what induced bowing causing buckling leading to collapse.

You?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
“None of the actual steel weakened to the point of failure. ”

If none of the steel was weaken to the point of failure, then why would any one look for demolitions.

Usually, bomb fragments are what are analyzed for explosive composition. The hand sorting of WTC recovered about 19,000 fragments of human remains. 6000 that could fit in test tubes. No demolitions shrapnel found. No blasting cap fragments found. No detonation device fragments found. No remains of thousands of feet of ignition wiring found. No metallurgical evidence steel worked on by demolitions. You yourself claim the steel was not damaged or weakened. What did you want them to analyze? Randomly sample over a million tons of building. How would that be meaningful?

You are the one that cannot explain how a complex first every sophisticated split timed high rise top down CD system would have survive jet impacts that took out core columns and wide spread fires?

You are the one saying the steel was not damaged or weakened.

You are the one that cannot explain the closeup video of WTC 2 columns bowing leading to buckling and resulting in collapse.

You are the one that claimed the perimeter tower steel columns were not an import part of the load bearing steel structure.

You are the one ignorant of the efforts to recover human remains, personal effects, and evidence from WTC ruble.

You try to say the steel was not studied and shipped off as fast as possible. There are steel columns from the WTC on public display. The body of logged WTC steel collection show columns were identified by there numbers, important columns saved, and steel samples taken for evidence. I have cited the research of the WTC steel. Several examples how Your are wrong. Remember, you claim zero analysis of the WTC steel. You are dead wrong.

You tried to state there was no recognizable engine parts from the jets that hit the towers. You were wrong again.

You create a false narrative by ignoring video evidence and citing debunked false arguments concerning the WTC recovery.

You are part of the problem! Enabling the con artists of the truth movement by ignoring reality, video evidence, and science.





Don't try twisting my words around, it won't work.

As you already know, because I've told you over and over, that steel did not weaken to point of collapse FROM THE FIRES!

Steel failed to support the towers, obviously. So what caused the steel to lose all support, when it held up to plane impacts, when it didn't fail from the fires?

Any 'bowing' or 'buckling' is caused by something, obviously. But for some odd reason, they do not care to find out what caused the collapses. Not that they are involved in it, or have someone tell them to stay away, though. Sure!

We know fires didn't cause the collapses. We know the impacts didn't cause the collapses, either. So why do you ignore the fact that the cause(s) of collapse are not known?

What could possibly have caused the tower to bow and buckle, at one corner, a split second before the entire building started to collapse? No idea, right?

So they have destroyed all evidence of the crime of the Century.

So they first tried to find any evidence of fires causing it.

It wasn't caused by fires, they discovered later on.

That's proven by the actual evidence - which is all the steel they sought out specifically to prove fires caused it.

All the steel evidence did not show fires caused it.

Being evidence didn't show fires caused it, did not deter them from making up evidence, so fires COULD HAVE caused it!!


Any steel they didn't collect was now their 'evidence' of fires causing it. They just didn't collect it, that's all!



You say I'm part of the problem?

While you keep on defendingthese criminals, who have murdered innocent people, shipped evidence of their crime to China, tried to find evidence of fires, then simply made up evidence of fires.


anyone who supports these filthy scumbags, and don't care about finding the ACTUAL cause(s) - are part of the ACTUAL problem.



posted on Feb, 25 2018 @ 06:42 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Asked you to give a reason? You cannot.

And your allegations of no investigation into the WTC steel has been repeatedly debunked.

Mechanical and Metallurgical Analysis of WTC Steel. ws680.nist.gov...

The Role of Metallurgy in the NIST Investigation
of the World Trade Center Towers Collapse
www.tms.org...

Failure of Welded Floor Truss Connections from the Exterior Wall during Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers
app.aws.org...

Fire induced bowing and buckling has withstood the test of time. You rant about no evidence is false. Do you have a theory you can cite to supersede fire induced bowing and buckling?


You are the one saying there is no proof the WTC steel was weakened to the point of failure. Where is the proof it was weakened by CD?



www.abovetopsecret.com...
You keep arguing about fires weakening steel to the point of failure, and collapse, while you obviously should know there is NOT ONE PIECE OF STEEL THAT WEAKENED TO THE POINT OF FAILURE.


You are the arguing not one piece of steel weakened to the point of failure. So where is your proof it was weakened by any other means?

edit on 25-2-2018 by neutronflux because: Added lots

edit on 25-2-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Feb, 25 2018 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Metabunk threads that might interest you...

how-buckling-led-to-free-fall-acceleration-for-part-of-wtc7s-collapse.t8270/
www.metabunk.org...

making-iron-microspheres-grinding-welding-burning.t9533/
www.metabunk.org...

how-much-iron-microspheres-were-at-wtc-ground-zero-after-9-11.t9540/
www.metabunk.org...

debunked-the-wtc-9-11-angle-cut-column-not-thermite-cut-later.t9469/
www.metabunk.org...

debunked-wtc-multi-ton-steel-sections-ejected-laterally.t1739/
www.metabunk.org...

debunked-thermite-slag-on-wtc-beams-oxy-cutting-slag.t9479/
www.metabunk.org...

explaining-the-9-11-murray-st-engine-from-flight-175-n612ua-that-hit-wtc2.t9022/
www.metabunk.org...

debunked-ae911truths-analysis-of-slag-residue-from-wtc-debris.t9468/
www.metabunk.org...

why-didnt-the-wtc-fires-ignite-ae911s-supposed-nanothermite.t8644/
www.metabunk.org...



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 47  48  49   >>

log in

join