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.

 

Proving Spontaneity of Post-Impact WTC Towers Collapse

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 05:59 AM
link   
a reply to: liejunkie01

The individual you are addressing has repeatedly tried to push nuclear devices are what caused the buildings to collapse at the WTC. A narrative not supported by the video, audio, not by radiation surveys, not by evidence, and not supported by science.

Conspiracists only can choose from the laughable and pseudoscience of fizzle no flash bombs, thermite pushed by a fraudulent paper, or Dr Woods Dustification.

But the same individuals push that knocked of fire insulation, impacts that knocked out vertical and core columns, fires, and thermal stress could not lead to the witnessesed localized inward bowing and buckling of the vertical columns.

You will not even get an honest answer from conspiracists where and how the collapse initiation began. An evenly clearly caught on video. Funny conspiracists never reference the video of inward bowing and buckling?




posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 08:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: MrBig2430
a reply to: Salander


It’s proven.

You apparently don’t have the mental capacity to understand why.

And instead have decided that nukes and no planes make sense.

That’s nuts. These two factors go hand in hand.

1- inability/unwillingness to understand reality

2- reliance on fantasy to explain things you fail to assimilate.


So, Like I’ve said before, and like all truthers, you’re either:

1- mentally impaired and can’t assimilate reality
2- trolling
3- an activist and knowingly telling lies and being outrageous in order to draw attention to your “cause”

So which is it?


Did you just insinuate that the US governments conspiracy theory about who attacked the towers and how they collapsed is "proven"


I didn’t insinuate anything, sport.

It’s a fact that all you’ve stated above has been proven.

If you disagree then tell us which of the three slots you fit into.


listening to you psychoanalyze those that do not agree to you and your conspiracy theories puts you on a whole new level of bat # crazy.


No, I’m just telling the truth.

The info has been out there long enough.

If you can’t accept it, then you may unknowingly belong in choice number one. That’s your problem, not mine.

I know it may be difficult to accept that, for everyone wants to believe in themselves and their abilities, but sometimes you just need to realize that you’re more than likely NOT smarter than most


I'm in awe with your belief in delusional conspiracy theories.



That would be truthers.

However, I’m not in awe.

I’m saddened to think that education has failed all of you.


This is classic tortured thinking and sophistry. In your fourth sentence you claim to be telling the truth, and then in your eighth sentence you use the term 'truthers' in a derogatory fas



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 08:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

By the way, what is the most credible conspiracy theory to supersede impact damage/fire/thermal stress leading to inward bowing and buckling initiating collapse of the Twin towers?

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

www.metabunk.org...



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 08:35 AM
link   
a reply to: liejunkie01


You have not read the NIST report yet you seem to claim some sort of expert status by way of your training and experience, and you claim to have seen all the pictures and you know how to do research yourself.

I use the NIST report because it is, in fact, the official government explanation for the strange collapse of those towers, and effectively the government explanation for what we observed at WTC.

Considering your knowledge and experience, how do YOU explain the picture of the American Express Building that day? What forces, within the context of the NIST report which you have not read, caused that to happen?



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

OK Gruber......

American Express Building (as it was known then), also World Financial Center 3

Today known 200 Vessey Street

WFC3 lies about 600 ft (180 m) west of WTC 1 (North Tower). WTC 1 was 1362 ft

Now do the math ......

Don't think debris from a building over 1300 ft can reach 600 feet ?

Here is description of damage suffered by WFC 3

911research.wtc7.net...

Play attention to the map showing location and distance of the 2 respective buildings

Of course I can ask some of my FF friends

They were in the building inspecting damage and putting out some fires started by the debris

in fact I was listening to them (they were from New Jersey called into assist FDNY that day ) - we were covering their city
as the entire day shift was in New York






edit on 18-12-2017 by firerescue because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: firerescue




Of course I can ask some of my FF friends

They were in the building inspecting damage and putting out some fires started by the debris

You are attempting to argue facts against a religion.
His faith will supersede your facts.



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: firerescue

Remember, conspiracists only act like they know everything and ask questions. They never answer questions. To embarrassed that Steve Jones is a fraud, and the best explanation AE 9/11 Truth could come with is fizzle no flash flash explosives.

All evidence points to collapse initiation from impact / fire / thermal stress for the WTC.

You can cite all the physical evidence, and conspiracists will say it’s not true because someone said boo.



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: MrBig2430

You have been offended. I can tell.

It's ok. Just take a deep breath and count to ten.


Offended on an Internet forum by somebody I don’t know nor have any respect for?

Ain’t ever gonna happen.

So instead of me counting to 10, why don’t you tell us all just which of the 5 choices describes you.



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: MrBig2430
a reply to: Salander


It’s proven.

You apparently don’t have the mental capacity to understand why.

And instead have decided that nukes and no planes make sense.

That’s nuts. These two factors go hand in hand.

1- inability/unwillingness to understand reality

2- reliance on fantasy to explain things you fail to assimilate.


So, Like I’ve said before, and like all truthers, you’re either:

1- mentally impaired and can’t assimilate reality
2- trolling
3- an activist and knowingly telling lies and being outrageous in order to draw attention to your “cause”

So which is it?


Did you just insinuate that the US governments conspiracy theory about who attacked the towers and how they collapsed is "proven"


I didn’t insinuate anything, sport.

It’s a fact that all you’ve stated above has been proven.

If you disagree then tell us which of the three slots you fit into.


listening to you psychoanalyze those that do not agree to you and your conspiracy theories puts you on a whole new level of bat # crazy.


No, I’m just telling the truth.

The info has been out there long enough.

If you can’t accept it, then you may unknowingly belong in choice number one. That’s your problem, not mine.

I know it may be difficult to accept that, for everyone wants to believe in themselves and their abilities, but sometimes you just need to realize that you’re more than likely NOT smarter than most


I'm in awe with your belief in delusional conspiracy theories.



That would be truthers.

However, I’m not in awe.

I’m saddened to think that education has failed all of you.


. In your fourth sentence you claim to be telling the truth, and then in your eighth sentence you use the term 'truthers' in a derogatory fas


Sorry, but it’s not meant to be derogatory.

It’s merely shorthand that keeps me from typing out a whole other string of words on my phone.

So you’re choice number 5, right?

A Poe?



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 08:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: MrBig2430

You have been offended. I can tell.

It's ok. Just take a deep breath and count to ten.


Offended on an Internet forum by somebody I don’t know nor have any respect for?

Ain’t ever gonna happen.

So instead of me counting to 10, why don’t you tell us all just which of the 5 choices describes you.



Funny you should say that. A decade or so ago, there were some real top notch 9/11 theory debunkers on this site. Rourke, I miss that guy. Top shelf. I think he would be very embarrassed to see the bottom of the barrel that prey on this site today. In case you didn't get it, I meant you, when I said bottom of the barrel. You seem slow so I just wanted to make sure you got that.

Have a good night.




posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 10:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: MrBig2430

You have been offended. I can tell.

It's ok. Just take a deep breath and count to ten.


Offended on an Internet forum by somebody I don’t know nor have any respect for?

Ain’t ever gonna happen.

So instead of me counting to 10, why don’t you tell us all just which of the 5 choices describes you.



Funny you should say that. A decade or so ago, there were some real top notch 9/11 theory debunkers on this site. Rourke, I miss that guy. Top shelf. I think he would be very embarrassed to see the bottom of the barrel that prey on this site today. In case you didn't get it, I meant you, when I said bottom of the barrel. You seem slow so I just wanted to make sure you got that.

Have a good night.



There’s nothing left to debunk. The debate is over.

If you’re still claiming that 9/11 was an inside job, or something along those lines, then you belong in one of those 5 categories.

Sorry if this bruises your ego, but that’s simply the way it is. And if you’re truly offended, which your lame insults point to, then you belong in category 1



posted on Dec, 19 2017 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: MrBig2430

You have been offended. I can tell.

It's ok. Just take a deep breath and count to ten.


Offended on an Internet forum by somebody I don’t know nor have any respect for?

Ain’t ever gonna happen.

So instead of me counting to 10, why don’t you tell us all just which of the 5 choices describes you.



Funny you should say that. A decade or so ago, there were some real top notch 9/11 theory debunkers on this site. Rourke, I miss that guy. Top shelf. I think he would be very embarrassed to see the bottom of the barrel that prey on this site today. In case you didn't get it, I meant you, when I said bottom of the barrel. You seem slow so I just wanted to make sure you got that.

Have a good night.



There’s nothing left to debunk. The debate is over.

If you’re still claiming that 9/11 was an inside job, or something along those lines, then you belong in one of those 5 categories.

Sorry if this bruises your ego, but that’s simply the way it is. And if you’re truly offended, which your lame insults point to, then you belong in category 1


And yet, here you are. The only thing you post here is in 9/11 topics. You admit there is nothing to debunk so I guess you just come here to label and insult other members.

You fit the profile of a very insecure and lonely individual who is ripe for radical influences.

Do people that oppose your views make you angry?

I'm here for you if you need someone to talk to.



posted on Dec, 19 2017 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

The individual is lonely because they choose to occasionally fight ignorance? If the individual was lonely, they would repeate the false conspiracy narratives to get hollow accolades from fellow conspiracists.

I think you were after a cheap shot with no foundation in reality.

And like to state a credible theory conspiracists have to supersede impact / fire related inward bowing and buckling for the towers collapse?

Like to provide actual quotes to create an actual case?



posted on Dec, 19 2017 @ 07:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: MrBig2430

You have been offended. I can tell.

It's ok. Just take a deep breath and count to ten.


Offended on an Internet forum by somebody I don’t know nor have any respect for?

Ain’t ever gonna happen.

So instead of me counting to 10, why don’t you tell us all just which of the 5 choices describes you.



Funny you should say that. A decade or so ago, there were some real top notch 9/11 theory debunkers on this site. Rourke, I miss that guy. Top shelf. I think he would be very embarrassed to see the bottom of the barrel that prey on this site today. In case you didn't get it, I meant you, when I said bottom of the barrel. You seem slow so I just wanted to make sure you got that.

Have a good night.



There’s nothing left to debunk. The debate is over.

If you’re still claiming that 9/11 was an inside job, or something along those lines, then you belong in one of those 5 categories.

Sorry if this bruises your ego, but that’s simply the way it is. And if you’re truly offended, which your lame insults point to, then you belong in category 1


And yet, here you are.


Yeah, sometimes I’ll attempt to bring some facts to light, if it seems as if the other person is woefully misinformed.

But like I’ve said, the facts have been out there to be discovered for quite a while now. And if you’re well adjusted and intelligent enough, then you can’t have these 9/11 was an inside job thoughts. That’s just how I see it.


so I guess you just come here to label and insult other members.


I’m sincerely not trying to do that.

I’m merely trying to point out the way things are, and to hopefully give those that are having doubts about their nonsensical beliefs in an inside job something to think about.

Maybe it helps, maybe it doesn’t.


Do people that oppose your views make you angry?


Not the least little bit. Especially since I don’t personally know any of you, and thus have zero respect for your opinions.

Ya see, it’s quite the pickle : I personally believe that very few of “you” that say you believe in some sort of inside job ACTUALLY believe that. I think there’s a few that do, and that’s just sad. There’s a few obvious trolls that don’t really have a side. There’s a few what is commonly called “Poe’s” cuz what they say is so outrageously stupid that they HAVE to be debunkers who have given up trying to bring sanity to the discussion. And so they act stupid and champion lunacy like nukes and no planes and Dustification.

But I believe - much like Bill (Skeptic Overlord) - that most are activists. Willing to lie about whatever it takes cuz they have a cause and want to keep the discussion going. Their cause is presumably illegal wars, Iraqi civilian casualties, war profiteering, etc. noble causes indeed, but not exactly the best way to go about it, in my mind.

Anyways, just my thoughts on the subject.

Back on topic - do you have any objections to the guv story? Be specific.
edit on 19-12-2017 by MrBig2430 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2017 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: MrBig2430




I personally believe that very few of “you” that say you believe in some sort of inside job ACTUALLY believe that. I think there’s a few that do, and that’s just sad.


Your personal beliefs only apply to yourself.

A few huh?.. How about 54.3% of the US (about 160 million people) think it's an inside job, and that's just in the US.

Why is it "just sad"?..

An uncountable number of events unfolded in one day on 9/11. Most will never come close to exposing the actual truth.

This is why individual gut instincts will always prevail.

Not agreeing with people is 100% natural, this is one of many flaws we have.... individual perception of reality, (it will never, ever be true reality).



posted on Dec, 19 2017 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: MrBig2430


Yeah, sometimes I’ll attempt to bring some facts to light, if it seems as if the other person is woefully misinformed. 

But like I’ve said, the facts have been out there to be discovered for quite a while now. And if you’re well adjusted and intelligent enough, then you can’t have these 9/11 was an inside job thoughts. That’s just how I see it. 


That's double speak.

Inform people about info you admit has been out for a long time and then harass them into choosing a category you have decided they must fit into.


Not the least little bit. Especially since I don’t personally know any of you, and thus have zero respect for your opinions. 


You knew the NIST employees, Bush admin officials and
and MSM talking heads that peddled the OS? You seem to have respect for their opinion.

That is after all what the OS is, an opinion by those that had the most influence at the time



Ya see, it’s quite the pickle : I personally believe that very few of “you” that say you believe in some sort of inside job ACTUALLY believe that. I think there’s a few that do, and that’s just sad. There’s a few obvious trolls that don’t really have a side. There’s a few what is commonly called “Poe’s” cuz what they say is so outrageously stupid that they HAVE to be debunkers who have given up trying to bring sanity to the discussion. And so they act stupid and champion lunacy like nukes and no planes and Dustification. 


Ya but who gives a snip what you think of them? When these members come here to express their beliefs or ideas, rarely or never are they beliefs about what they think about members that defend the OS and they have been belittled and insulted by them.

Anyone that says they believe nukes were used is a retard in my books but this isn't my book so I would never tell them that. It would be a waste of my time.

You and others here don't seem as interested in spreading your "truth" than you are in making people feel stupid for not believing the OS word for word.

Bad form. Unless that is what you are trying to do.


But I believe - much like Bill (Skeptic Overlord) - that most are activists. Willing to lie about whatever it takes cuz they have a cause and want to keep the discussion going. Their cause is presumably illegal wars, Iraqi civilian casualties, war profiteering, etc. noble causes indeed, but not exactly the best way to go about it, in my mind. 


Ya well, Bill also believes that 9/11 may have been covered up to hide the fact the mafia was stealing rivots. I'm not here for the popular vote.


Back on topic - do you have any objections to the guv story? Be specific. 


Son, I have been watching 9/11 threads on this board for more than 15years. Nothing I ask for is found in your cue cards.

But I have 1 request.

Show me a computer generated visual dramatization of the towers collapsing. It was a popular event. Surely a hobbiest or college student must have put something together by now.

I'll wait.



posted on Dec, 19 2017 @ 08:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

The individual is lonely because they choose to occasionally fight ignorance? If the individual was lonely, they would repeate the false conspiracy narratives to get hollow accolades from fellow conspiracists.

I think you were after a cheap shot with no foundation in reality.

And like to state a credible theory conspiracists have to supersede impact / fire related inward bowing and buckling for the towers collapse?

Like to provide actual quotes to create an actual case?


A case for what?

What are you on about.

Did you just peddle the site modo to defend you swallowing every word of the OS as truth?

That works on people?

You should just ignore me.
edit on pTue, 19 Dec 2017 20:24:00 -06002017 000Tue, 19 Dec 2017 20:24:00 -0600pmAmerica/ChicagoTuesday by MALBOSIA because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: kyleplatinum




A few huh?.. How about 54.3% of the US (about 160 million people) think it's an inside job, and that's just in the US.

And 69% of Americans have from zero to several hundred dollars in savings.
Link
That just goes to show that over 50% have IQ's just above cucumbers.
So when they claim 911 was an inside job just put them in the pickle jar with the rest.
Just because the majority believe in something it doesn't mean they are correct.



posted on Dec, 19 2017 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: kyleplatinum




A few huh?.. How about 54.3% of the US (about 160 million people) think it's an inside job, and that's just in the US.

And 69% of Americans have from zero to several hundred dollars in savings.
Link
That just goes to show that over 50% have IQ's just above cucumbers.
So when they claim 911 was an inside job just put them in the pickle jar with the rest.
Just because the majority believe in something it doesn't mean they are correct.


The only thing that is correct is what the public believes is correct.

And in regards to your article.... Yolo



posted on Dec, 19 2017 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: kyleplatinum
a reply to: MrBig2430




I personally believe that very few of “you” that say you believe in some sort of inside job ACTUALLY believe that. I think there’s a few that do, and that’s just sad.


Your personal beliefs only apply to yourself.


True


Why is it "just sad"?..


Cuz it’s pretty obvious that they have diminished mental capabilities, but are totally ignorant of that fact.


This is why individual gut instincts will always prevail).


I agree with this cuz most people are not very introspective and don’t realize when their gut instinct is based on absolutely nothing



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join