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 myths debunked . . .

page: 9
2
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
According to the law of Falling Bodies:
The total distance traveled at the end of any specific time in a total vacuum.

Which mean we set the problem up like so..

distance (D) = (32.16/2) x time in seconds squared.

Now going from this.. we find the answer to your question..

Now we know the towers were at least 1350 ft tall so we take this here and go like this..

1350 = (32.16/2) x time in seconds squared

It would come out to how fast the building falls which should be
9.1267 seconds it should have taken for both towers to fall..

But in reality it took The North Tower 8.1 seconds to fall, and South Tower came down in 10.4 seconds.


[edit on 27-2-2005 by ThichHeaded]


Wow. You measured it and found out that it was 8.1 seconds and not 8.11 or 8.09 seconds, Huh?


That must have been really tough to do with all of those dust clouds billowing about. How did you manage to determine it so precisely?

Did you

Oh, and BTW, the acceleration due to gravity in New York is 32.178 ft/s2, not 32.16 (as long as you are being that precise, you might as well use the correct values.)


Also did you measure the time it took for the top of the building to reach the plaza level or ground level? How did you determine the exact start of the collapse?

You should be prepared to answer all of these questions when you present this sort of evidence.





posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
An idiot savant, whom is retarded in most aspects of life can recall amazing calculations, but cannot think in the abstract of even use common sense. Can you think outside the box? Or are you like the idiot savant spewing figures?


I dont understand your question...

How i got those facts are from something i saw a while ago and the guy asked how fast the towers should have fell..

so in other words I provided him with the most simplest way on earth to figure out how fast the towers should have fell.. without killing myself with kindergarden crap... which basically is if you come to think about it...

Idiot Savant??? I am who I am, if it seems I am it then let it be. However maybe you should do research on someone before you ask that question...



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Well Mr. ThichHeaded if you want to wear that cloak go ahead, it was not directed at you!! Kindergarten crap? You must still be in high school or you wouldnt have made that statement, its not axactly a phrase adults use...

Why I debate on a forum is really beyond my reasoning though, and I dont know why I did. You present an iron clad arguement ( the one about resitance to the falling object AKA the top third of WTC) and people go off in the wrong direction.

We are all toast, I'm gonna go hide in the country and wait for the smoke to clear. Hopefully the Police State of our nation will be to busy in the cities and leave us country folk alone long enough for me to live the rest of my life in peace.

If you dont think we are headed in that direction and are really almost there, go look up who has the biggest prison population. Hint: its not the former USSR, the current Russian union, or the Chinese.


P.S. Its kind of feeling like a waste of time, the point has been made.

[edit on 27-2-2005 by LoneGunMan]

[edit on 27-2-2005 by LoneGunMan]



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by nukunuku
i just want to ask two questions:

A) why did the terrorists fly half way across the USA only to turn around, do the whole trip again and crash into WTC? Surely they couldve make their job a lot easier.


What are you talking about?
Once the hijackers took controll of the planes, they pretty much proceeded to thier targets. Ok, maybe the one that crashed in Pensylvania did get screwed up, but still. . .


B) what was US air defense doing for the whole two hours the planes were hijacked prior to the crashing? Surely not their jobs?


Maybe because it isn't their job to oversee the FAA and domestic airlines.

[edit on 27-2-2005 by HowardRoark]



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
Well Mr. ThichHeaded

and so on...


I didnt mean my post to be insulting, I just didnt want to show how stupid/smart i really am.. I have posted a few times in some interesting threads, however I guess its what you make of what I contributed to this site for whatever it is worth...

I dont consider myself to be a brain surgeon in a place that no matter what all proof seems to change more than the season of the planet. I just think one way and others think another way.

as for that post i did earlier I seen it a while ago and that guy was asking how fast the building should have fell, I figured that was the most respectable answer to give instead of someone saying something completely not on topic...

As for me it does make sense if you look at sismec reports, unfortunately those are tainted with little explosions so we cant possibley go with that now can we Howard ehh??

anyway I just threw it up to help that other guy out.. I got the info from a movie.. cant remember what its called, if I remember it I will get back to you on it.



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThichHeaded

As for me it does make sense if you look at sismec reports, unfortunately those are tainted with little explosions so we cant possibley go with that now can we Howard ehh??



WTF are you talking about?



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by ThichHeaded

As for me it does make sense if you look at sismec reports, unfortunately those are tainted with little explosions so we cant possibley go with that now can we Howard ehh??



WTF are you talking about?



You asked how that forumla can possibely be right...

We take every possible way TV sismec reports and so on... as i stated We cant possibly go with those considering there are some odd wierd little exsplosions on that same area before the collapses.. so we need to go with the TV reports on it.. cause there is no way the sismec reports can have any good value in this what so ever.. you know since they are tainted..



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 11:16 PM
link   
I'm sorry, TH, but you lost me completely on that last post.



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 11:17 PM
link   
Ok i will be quiet now.. sorry dude...

[edit on 27-2-2005 by ThichHeaded]



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
Ok i will be quiet now.. sorry dude...

[edit on 27-2-2005 by ThichHeaded]


Hey man don't let the debunkers silence your free speach!

AP&F...



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 05:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark
No, They said it sounded "like" explosions. Exactly what I would expect it to sound like as the floors slammed into each other.

If you have ever heard a building implosion, you would know that the sound of the charges is quite loud and carries for a long distance.
[edit on 26-2-2005 by HowardRoark]


This witness report is from BBC Online.



On Tuesday morning at 8:46 PM, I was in 2 World Trade Center on the 64th floor, where I used to report to work for Morgan Stanley.

We had reached either the 51st or the 50th floor when we heard a huge explosion, which shook the building like crazy! I grabbed hold of the stairwell to steady myself when a women who had fallen from a flight up hit me in the back and sent me down a flight of stairs with her on my back.

I then tried to stand up but the building was still shaking and the lights were flickering on and off. It was terrifying! Then the building began to sink. That’s the only way I can describe it. The floor began to lower under my feet and all I could think about was that it would crack open and I would fall hundreds of feet to my death!



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 05:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by nukunuku
i just want to ask two questions:

A) why did the terrorists fly half way across the USA only to turn around, do the whole trip again and crash into WTC? Surely they couldve make their job a lot easier.


What are you talking about?
Once the hijackers took controll of the planes, they pretty much proceeded to thier targets. Ok, maybe the one that crashed in Pensylvania did get screwed up, but still. . .


B) what was US air defense doing for the whole two hours the planes were hijacked prior to the crashing? Surely not their jobs?


Maybe because it isn't their job to oversee the FAA and domestic airlines.

[edit on 27-2-2005 by HowardRoark]



Well check the routes of the airplanes that crashed into WTC...they flew half way across USA away from NY only to turn around make the whole trip back to NY and crash. Not to clever for people that can fly airplanes.

And it isnt their job? You can be pretty sure they know everything going on in US airspace and anywhere else around the world. Their job is to oversee everything flying in the air, especially if its not on route.
If an airplane sways away from its route they know it, every control tower in the USA knows it. NORAD just said nobody told them???....suspicious to say the least. Well at least for me.



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by nukunuku

B) what was US air defense doing for the whole two hours the planes were hijacked prior to the crashing? Surely not their jobs?


Maybe because it isn't their job to oversee the FAA and domestic airlines.

[edit on 27-2-2005 by HowardRoark]


Why do people consistently and conveniently forget the well traversed evidence of several military wargames taking place that morning?

Multiple inserted blips on FAA radar screens is one reason normal procedures were hampered.



Northeast Air Defense Sector: Is this real world or exercise?


[edit on 28-2-2005 by uknumpty]

[edit on 28-2-2005 by uknumpty]



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 07:42 AM
link   


Well check the routes of the airplanes that crashed into WTC...they flew half way across USA away from NY only to turn around make the whole trip back to NY and crash. Not to clever for people that can fly airplanes.


Could the explanation be that the planes weren't in control of the hijackers yet, and they were being flown on the normal route that they were supposed to be flying? I mean they were after all headed for L.A. I believe.
So they were headed in the right direction until the hijackers took over.



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 08:25 AM
link   


Well check the routes of the airplanes that crashed into WTC...they flew half way across USA away from NY only to turn around make the whole trip back to NY and crash.


But lets just point out how eager you are to misconstrue facts to support your crackpot theory shall we.

Flight 11

takes off at Logan airport at 7:59 am
believed to have been hijacked at 8:13 am
changes course at 8:20 am
8:46:26 a.m. Flight 11 hits the WTC North Tower

So in the seven minutes between hijack and course change they flew halfway across the county?


Flight 93

8:42 am takes off from Newark International Airport.

Around 9:30 am flight 93 is hihacked and changes course shortly after ward.

10:06 am Flight 93 crashes just north of the Somerset County Airport, about 80 miles southeast of Pittsburgh, 124 miles or 15 minutes from Washington DC.


Flight 175

8:14 am Flight 175 takes off from Boston's Logan Airport

8:41- 8:43am Flight 175 is hijacked.

8:50 am Flight 175, already off course, makes a near complete U-turn and starts heading north towards New York City.

9:02 am Flight 175 hits the south tower, 2 World Trade Center.


Flight 77

8:20 am Flight 77 departs Dulles International Airport near Washington

8:50 am The last radio contact with Flight 77 is made when a pilot asks for clearance to fly higher. But then, six minutes later, the plane fails to respond to a routine instruction. Presumably it is hijacked during that time.

8:54 am Flight 77 from Washington begins to go off course over southern Ohio. It turns to the southwest.

9:43 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon



Halfway across the US? I think not. None of the flights made it anywhere near halfway. And they were all diverted towards their targets shortly after hijack.



[edit on 28/2/05 by Skibum]



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 08:29 AM
link   
ok thats the info ive been looking for



and here is flight 77 in pictures





this one waited too long to hijack it




and this one thought NY was in Canada




[edit on 28-2-2005 by nukunuku]



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by uknumpty

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by nukunuku

B) what was US air defense doing for the whole two hours the planes were hijacked prior to the crashing? Surely not their jobs?


Maybe because it isn't their job to oversee the FAA and domestic airlines.

[edit on 27-2-2005 by HowardRoark]


Why do people consistently and conveniently forget the well traversed evidence of several military wargames taking place that morning?

Multiple inserted blips on FAA radar screens is one reason normal procedures were hampered.



Northeast Air Defense Sector: Is this real world or exercise?


[edit on 28-2-2005 by uknumpty]

[edit on 28-2-2005 by uknumpty]



How convinient! Im sure terrorists were aware of the exercises



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 08:41 AM
link   
"debunk" all you want. its what 'they' want. the more we fight over it the farther from the truth we get. if you dont believe that there is a conspiracy or cover up thats fine. I grew up thinking that pearl harbor was a suprise attack by the japanese from the time i learned about it in school till the time my professor (phd. in military history) told me the bloody truth. almost every american believed the official story and most still do. the people that believed it included many well educated intelligent americans.

oj simpson murdered 2 people and got off becasue he had millions of dollars to spend on cover up/defense.

i dont see why its so unimaginable to people that if you had 2000x as much money you couldnt get away with it on 2000x times a grand scale.

the official story is bs. cell phones dont work at that elevation, and every video from flight 77 is missing except the one that was doctored. the fact that there are missing pieces (confiscated) pieces of evidence means that the IS at least a small cover up, like it or not. that point is inarguable.

since there is at least some amount of cover up, the official story is not 100% untill we find out what REALLY happened. also, since there is missing evidence, that means that NONE OF US have 100% of the story.

if we pull in different directions we will never find out.

its a perfect circle. (sic)



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 08:45 AM
link   
Ok have any of you who buy into the "cell phones dont work at that alttude" theory actually tried it?
No I know you haven't know why? Becuase if you had you would know its bull#.
I regularly make cell phone calls from cruising altitutde, all I do is walk into the bathroom and hit send. The only tmes I have problems is when we are passing over the border between two countries, otherwise the reception is exactly the same.
Try it for yourself, cell phones do work at altitude.

[edit on 28-2-2005 by mwm1331]



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 09:01 AM
link   
it didnt work in pittsburgh in summer 2001 (tried it), and flight 93 was in the middle of nowhere virginia.

not to mention the fact that the 'official' tragectory of the planes would have put some of the cell phone calls under a 5 g force, so im highly doubting it.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join