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.

 

✔ The red pill video watch if you want to wake up quickly.(911)

page: 7
57
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 07:08 PM
link   
THERE WILL BE NO MORE WARNINGS!

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS POST OR ABOUT THIS POST!




posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958






And you call me "deluded" Did I call you any condescending names? Why the ad hominem attacks?


No I didn't, maybe this might make you see that you actually are when you start claiming people have called such when in fact they haven't.

You made a claim which is basically delusional to call it a fact, I asked you 2 questions about that, I didn't call you anything.

Can you explain how its a fact that you know the intentions of 1000s of engineers and architects and what they may or may not do?




A few rivets and a plane flying into the WTC would not cause the entire building to fall in 10 seconds.




you seem to doing quite well at indicating your mind operates or rationalizes on a deluded level with comments like these.

so a few rivets loose a plane hits and the building went down and they couldn't put humpty together again huh.

Its not like there were things involved, like the plane hitting and burning in the building for an hour.

weakening the structure until it failed, it went down due to the energy released at the point of failure.




A fact that you do not understand, only a part of the WTC would have falling the lower bottom half of the WTC would still be standing.


What fact?

How much energy was released at the point of failure and why would that ammount energy not be enough pulverize everything in its path?

Hey, I don't understand so please edumucate me .




Can you explain to me how a plan flying into the WTC, would cause every floor Joist on a hundred and ten floors to break away simultaneously?


It wouldn't,

If one understood the energy released and what such levels energy could do to materials we take as being strong and durable then they might understand what they saw that day and not ask questions that require an absence of critical thinking to ask.





Demolition is the only scientific thing that can explain what happened to the WTC.


Find 1, just 1 demolition of building where it began over half way up the building.

Here's a hint you wont find 1, demolition is not done in such insane, dangerous and unpredictable way.

Facts, facts, facts that we all don't understand.


You didn't address my points about how special you think it is that this video has enlightened the community with the
astonishing comparisons with other building on fire.

Please explain how comparisons can be made with other buildings with so many different factors involved, the main one being a plane hitting the building before being on fire.



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: pteridine


What expertise do you have in structural engineering?


I was not aware, you have to be an expert to join in a discussion?


Who ever said you have to be?


You keep saying others don't understand facts, you are indicating you know what you talking about be it on a professional level or not.

You said it was fact that I didn't understand why such and such happened.

So please explain why the building would have just tipped over or whatever you have in mind.




I'll make it easy for everyone. People can go to the above sources and view the information for themselves and form their "own" opinions.


typical, I guess you cant explain the facts everyone doesnt understand and just link us to something to make our minds up.

So we didn't have our minds up until we interacted with you, our thoughts and beliefs are not our own, we are somehow manipulated?




No sir, you do not understand because you support the OS narratives.



Ahhhh

gotcha so its not really about facts and understanding



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958




That is a lie.


This above is your reply to someone saying you get your opinions confused with your facts, which what I and others have also seen and pointed out, something you actually do yourself as well.

How is it a lie.

so this really is a fact and not your opinion when you said this




Fact is, thousand of Architects, Engineers that have government contracts working in many corporation, will never give their personal "opinions" about the NIST Report, due to the fact they do not want to risk "career suicide" and their reputations.


Facts are verifiable

please verify this fact.

Like I said previously, to say this is fact in my eyes is deluded, its on the same lines as saying all Muslims are terrorists.

No one in their right minds could even for a second except this as a fact.

Even with some sort of verification there is no way, unless you list, name and have the 1000s of engineers and architects themselves say they will not give their own personal opinions due to a list of possible consequences.

Is mind boggling some of the stuff you post.

But after a few years I think I see a pattern.

enjoy feeding



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 09:09 AM
link   
a reply to: InhaleExhale

Informer cannot even get past each floor of the towers had a maximum weight capacity. The weight of the upper portion of the tower falling into the first static floor struck with enough force to overload the weight capacity of that static floor. Stripping and breaking floor connections from the vertical columns. It's only been explained over and over again.


The falling mass grew greater in weight and force as it consumed each floor.

Ask a conspiracist if they would rather get hit by 50 tons of feathers vs 50 tons of falling steel. The cannot get past it's all 50 tons, and hits with essential the same force.

edit on 19-6-2017 by neutronflux because: Added last sentence

edit on 19-6-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed wording



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958




A fact that you do not understand, only a part of the WTC would have falling the lower bottom half of the WTC would still be standing.
How is this a fact?




The fact is I do not believe terrorist from middle Eastern countries pulled off 911, my reached leads me to insiders in our government and yes Banking Cartels who really funded 9
How is this a fact?




Another fact is, there is nothing to argue about Aegis lawsuit, it was all a dog and pony show going along with the OS narratives.
How is this a fact?




The fact is, TPTB would "never" allow any arguments, or science in "any" court of law.
How is this a fact?



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 06:13 PM
link   
Tried to watch the video, the first question was pretty ignorant and contradictory. Why didn't they get the president out of there immediately because the school visit was made public?

Well, just maybe they wanted to secure the route to the president's jet.

Maybe they wanted to ensure the president's jet wasn't a sitting target.

Maybe radar revealed no imminent threat.

Being made public is very different that being informed.

Stupid one sided argument based only on innuendo.



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   
The guy claims NIST said melt steel lead to collapse? Where?

Then the claim of weakened steel? It is a scientific fact heat weakens steel. But I thought the NIST conclusions were more based on thermal expansion and contraction leading to buckling. Not soley basing WTC collapse on weakened steel?

False arguments...



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Not even 15 minutes into the video, only accusations by innuendo and false arguments.



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 06:45 PM
link   
Another failed video full of easily debunked lies.
edit on 19-6-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: lordcomac




Molten aluminum will eat hot steel.
Didn't know of this, can you provide proof of your claim?



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

For Dave, looking into 9/11 brought on a spiritual awakening? What? A video that should be based on science, logic, and rational reasoning concerning a physical worldly event is going to throw spirituality at you in the first few minutes?

And the real life and death situations of 9/11 didn't do it? But the pied piper calls from the cons in the truth movement created a spiritual rebirth?

And why is Dave not ordinary now? Because his first few comments concerning NIST are repeated myths, and not actually anything NIST published relating to the WTC. Intellectual dishonesty from the start. But Dave does tell the conspiracists what they want to hear to push a consumer product.
edit on 19-6-2017 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 03:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: secretagent77

Judy Wood hypothesis was proven a hoax many years ago.

Judy Wood was part of the disinformation program that helped to destroy the Truth Movement .

Wood hypothesis was debunked many years ago...

Your facts are wrong. I believe you know that. Airplanes were used on 911.



Judy Wood never claimed planes were not used to my knowledge.

What part of her hypothesis has been disproven?

She has many valid points as to odd behavior.



posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: ParasuvO

Do you understand the magnitude of the energy source to make woods theory even possible?

blogs.scientificamerican.com...


To turn the water content of an average person into gas—leaving the bones behind for allies to find of course—the successful mad scientist’s death ray would have to output enough energy to first boil the person’s water and then turn it into steam. That is to say, you can add heat until water boils, but you have to add an extra boost to get vaporization. This "heat of vaporization" energy is known for many materials, but for a person we can focus directly on their water. If a person of average mass is around 70% water, then that person has around 56 kilograms of water to boil. To bring that water from body temperature (37 degrees Celsius) to its boiling point (100 degrees Celsius), it would require nearly 15 million Joules. To vaporize that boiling body, it needs an additional 127 million Joules. This all brings the grand total to 142 million Joules.. snippet removed...
As it would take more than 70 of the world's most powerful lasers combined to vaporize the water of just one person, death ray energy conservation is paramount. Remember: A successful mad scientist is as efficient as she is devious.




posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 03:43 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: ParasuvO




Judy Wood never claimed planes were not used to my knowledge.

What part of her hypothesis has been disproven?

Vaporizing thousands of tons of steel for one.
Using an Atlantic hurricane as the power source secondly.

Any first year physics class and a calculator shows the power needed to do that exceeds total US electricity production by orders of magnitude.



posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 07:05 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Hijacked planes vs Death Star raygun... occam's razor anyone?



posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 03:23 PM
link   
It seems the message is not getting through. Stay on topic and the topic is not other members, opinions of them or anything other than what's in the OP.

Do not reply to this post.



new topics

top topics



 
57
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join