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.

 

16th anniversary of the biggest conspiracy to date

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Iconic


A good series of questions and observations, particularly so given your age. The process of writing history began shortly after the events, and most young people are mere victims of the propaganda.

Yes, the events at Shanksville PA were my first inkling that the official story had serious structural problems.




posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: MeNotSmart




That one just strikes me as completely abnormal.

Yes because most crashes are glancing blows with the ground at a reduced speed.

But if you look at the Reno air show disaster all you see is bits.
The Germanwings crash had mostly small pieces.
Look at the F4 phantom test crash into concrete. All you see are bits.
Even Mythbusters did a high speed crash test and only had bits leftover.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: kurthall

I can see the allowed to happen theories.

However THERE IS NO EVIDENCE the buildings at the WTC were brought down by CD.

There is no evidence the USA government was the mastermind of 9/11.

The cry the towers fell at free fall speed is a lie.
The cry the towers fell through the path of greatest resistance is a lie. The truth movement is founded on lie.



Have you not heard all of the Firefighters, police and people who were there and in the buildings state there were explosions before the planes hit? Not just one or two but allot of people. There are quite a few Firefighters who were there who are truthers. Also you have the PULL IT.



edit on 2-9-2017 by kurthall because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flatcoat

originally posted by: neutronflux
Hey, let's starts with the lies of the truth movement.

False claims of thermite with experiments never performed in an inert atmosphere. Experiments who's results were never reproduce.

Results improperly published and peer reviewed in a pay for pay magazine


You know that's been explained many times. They didn't perform the tests in an inert atmosphere because LLNL didn't perform their tests in an inert atmosphere. They wanted to compare the results.


Showing "thermite" burned in dust samples collected by mail years after 9/11 in an inert atmosphere would prove the presence of thermite, Funny jones never conducted the experiment. Didn't individuals that were pushing the thermite claim they would conduct the experiments in an inert atmosphere. Where are those results published?
edit on 2-9-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed this and that



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: kurthall

originally posted by: neutronflux
Hey, let's starts with the lies of the truth movement.

False claims of thermite with experiments never performed in an inert atmosphere. Experiments who's results were never reproduce.

Results improperly published and peer reviewed in a pay for pay magazine



Uh, if you have read the 911 report, you would realize the U.S. Intel had known and been warning about these attacks. That was our own government.





Good to know that you agree that the attacks were real and not an inside job.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: kurthall

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: kurthall

I can see the allowed to happen theories.

However THERE IS NO EVIDENCE the buildings at the WTC were brought down by CD.

There is no evidence the USA government was the mastermind of 9/11.

The cry the towers fell at free fall speed is a lie.
The cry the towers fell through the path of greatest resistance is a lie. The truth movement is founded on lie.



Have you not heard all of the Firefighters, police and people who were there and in the buildings state there were explosions before the planes hit? Not just one or two but allot of people. There are quite a few Firefighters who were there who are truthers.


ummmm there were no firefighters nor police there before the planes hit.

You do not understand what others are saying or are lying.

Which is it?



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:27 AM
link   
I do not support Scientists for 9/11 Truth an their theories on the WTC CD.

But they do clearly state how the lies of the truth movement on the pentagon are killing the truth movement.



Bringing Closure to the 9/11 Pentagon Debate

www.911truth.org...

Conclusion
Despite the clear evidence and its analysis using the scientific method of large plane impact, a substantial portion of the 9/11 truth movement, including accepted leaders and those involved in major organizations, continues to publicly endorse, adhere to, or promulgate talks, writings and films on false Pentagon hypotheses. Some simply offer criticisms and reject or ignore evidence that would bring closure to the argument. There is clear evidence by way of disintegrating truth groups that these endorsements and communications are injurious to the movement. Public feedback shows that the false Pentagon hypotheses undermine public acceptance of other highly credible scientific findings, such as the demolitions of the Twin Towers and Building 7 (WTC7) in New York City.

Most rank and file members of the 9/11 truth movement take their cues on the Pentagon from well-known speakers, writers, and acknowledged leaders of the movement. The quickest way to end the ongoing damage to the movement’s credibility and bring closure would be for these prominent individuals to publicly repudiate their former endorsements, views, and statements on the Pentagon event and acknowledge the scientific method and its conclusion of large plane impact. In the absence of public repudiations, the damage caused by false Pentagon hypotheses is likely to continue indefinitely, even if those who fueled their spread cease to promote them. Consequently, the surest way to end the debate and enhance the credibility of the movement is for each individual to study, without bias or prejudice, the evidence for themselves.

The recent papers by scientists, engineers and others showing large plane impact at the Pentagon have been collected together on a website that invites feedback and discussion. Comments can be sent to the Scientific Method 9/11 website which specifically invites feedback on many of the papers listed below.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Flatcoat

originally posted by: neutronflux
Hey, let's starts with the lies of the truth movement.

False claims of thermite with experiments never performed in an inert atmosphere. Experiments who's results were never reproduce.

Results improperly published and peer reviewed in a pay for pay magazine


You know that's been explained many times. They didn't perform the tests in an inert atmosphere because LLNL didn't perform their tests in an inert atmosphere. They wanted to compare the results.


Showing "thermite" burned in dust samples collected by mail years after 9/11 in an inert atmosphere would prove the presence of thermite, Funny jones never conducted the experiment. Didn't individuals that were pushing the thermite claim they would conduct the experiments in an inert atmosphere. Where are those results published?


You've missed the point. LLNL conducted experiments with nanothermite igniting it in a normal atmosphere. Jones replicated the experiment to compare results.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:32 AM
link   
This is a subject on which I am conflicted. On the one hand, I am glad that the 9/11 conspiracists are still beating the drum and refusing to let go of their quarry. This means the controversy is unlikely to slip from the public's memory for decades (the JFK conspiracists achieved something similar). On the other hand, nearly every single bit of the argument for conspiracy that is being kept in play is obvious crap. The fixation on WTC 7 is particularly embarrassing.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flatcoat

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Flatcoat

originally posted by: neutronflux
Hey, let's starts with the lies of the truth movement.

False claims of thermite with experiments never performed in an inert atmosphere. Experiments who's results were never reproduce.

Results improperly published and peer reviewed in a pay for pay magazine


You know that's been explained many times. They didn't perform the tests in an inert atmosphere because LLNL didn't perform their tests in an inert atmosphere. They wanted to compare the results.


Showing "thermite" burned in dust samples collected by mail years after 9/11 in an inert atmosphere would prove the presence of thermite, Funny jones never conducted the experiment. Didn't individuals that were pushing the thermite claim they would conduct the experiments in an inert atmosphere. Where are those results published?


You've missed the point. LLNL conducted experiments with nanothermite igniting it in a normal atmosphere. Jones replicated the experiment to compare results.


Can you link and show the WTC dust burden in an inert atmosphere? Thus showing thermite in the dust?
edit on 2-9-2017 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatcoat

I tried to google that Jones proved the existence of thermite by burning WTC dust in an inert atmosphere?

This is the closest thing I found. It's from 2016. One of the weaknesses is Jone has never published his results for trying to burn WTC dust in an inert atmosphere?





Scott Creighton's conventional (PETN/RDX) Trade Center demolition hypothesis, + Steven Jones' "Thermite Fraud".
u/mmfb16Mar 10, 2016, 11:12 PM

However, criticisms and weaknesses have been pointed out:

It hasn't shown in the "Active Thermitic Material" paper, that "super nano-thermite" is a high-explosive. Please ignore the kook "directed energy weapons" website; the article itself is fine.
The paper has poor experimental design, and does not demonstrate what it claims to.
Harrit, the paper co-author, is a novice in using scanning electron measurement methods, the main method used in the paper.
Paper was not peer reviewed, and two journal editors resigned over it.
Dr. Jones has not performed the inert atmosphere ignition test for his alleged thermite chips. A successful test published in a credible, peer-reviewed journal -- and multiple independent replications -- would give a large boost to the thermite hypothesis.
It seems likely that Jones and Harrit were analysing LaClede primer paint, or even rust.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
In a reply to "Do some honest research" guy;

(why do we have to get to ad hominem when we disagree?)

The crash on the coast; as you said, they were able to find the gun, with the fingers still on it. An airsickness bag, and without looking it up, based on an admittedly rudimentary knowledge of physics, they probably were able to find the majority of the engines and a good portion in total of the fuselage or wings/tail section.

NONE of that was found for flight 93. Literally everything was destroyed instantaneously (except incidentally, the black box. one of 2 which was recovered)

The fire was initially so intense it melted instantly the two huge engines, but not the black box? Not sure, but that seems really fishy to me. Sure, if that heat did exist, it didnt have to destroy the black box, but it would have rendered it inoperable.

But point being;

as one witness pointed out: All of the debris there was small enough to be brought in by a shopping bag.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

If you want to ignore when I clearly tried to tell you that you were derailing my post,

Then go make your own thread about thermite.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:54 AM
link   
It was noted by H&K scientists, that there were tons of aluminum in the towers, adding of course, the aluminum in the airframes of the planes. Molten aluminum, which comes in contact with water with a high concentration of lime (sprinkler systems), as well as iron oxides and gypsum, can produce a thermite reaction.

Source: Aluminum in the WTC buildings.

As such, there could be a thermite residue in the dust that has no connection with any placed charges.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 10:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: audubon WTC 7 is particularly embarrassing.


wasn't it just?



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:01 AM
link   
So, the likes of AE 9/11 Truth and Jones fight the "lies" of NIST by.

1) pushing a false narrative on how fast the towers collapsed when the collapse speed was about 2/3rds the rate of freefall. For the core columns, 40 percent the speed of freefall.

2). The false narrative the towers collapsed through the path of greatest resistance, which is pronen wrong by the fact the core columns fell at a rate slower than the floor system. As proven wrong by videos that show vertical columns standing for whole seconds after the floor system completely collapsed.

3) pushing the narrative of thermite which is based on pseudoscience, fraud, and not publishing any results that would show conclusively the WTC dust burns in an inert atmosphere.

4) The most notably truth movement personalities not policing the movement and speaking out against those which deny in the face of overwhelming evidence a large jet hit the pentagon on 9/11. No evidence of bombs or missiles at the pentagon.
edit on 2-9-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed this and that

edit on 2-9-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed more



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:08 AM
link   
Sorry, but are you purposely being obtuse? I can't make it any clearer. Lawrence Livermore National Labs experimented with nanothermite. They conducted their tests in a normal atmosphere. Jones wanted to replicate their experiments to compare results with the material found in the dust. If you can't understand this then discussion is pointless.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Iconic
a reply to: neutronflux

If you want to ignore when I clearly tried to tell you that you were derailing my post,

Then go make your own thread about thermite.


I have painfully found out it is the place of staff to determine what is off topic, not individuals. So please report me to have off topic comments removed.

In the meantime, like to form rebuttals to try and discredit facts that that are contradictory to your opinions?
edit on 2-9-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed this and that



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Guys. Ffs.

This thread is not about the general 9/11 conspiracies, AE911, Alex Jones, or anyone else. It is not about tannerite, or freefall, or about the towers at all.

Any reference in the OP was part of the "story" of my interactions with that day, and my understandings.

This thread was about Shanksville.

So please, if you have nothing to add or discuss about Flight 93, please, go make your own thread and STOP DERAILING this one.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flatcoat
Sorry, but are you purposely being obtuse? I can't make it any clearer. Lawrence Livermore National Labs experimented with nanothermite. They conducted their tests in a normal atmosphere. Jones wanted to replicate their experiments to compare results with the material found in the dust. If you can't understand this then discussion is pointless.


I am asking you to link to anything that shows Jones WTC dust burns in an inert atmosphere. Thus proving thermite in the WTC Dust. There is no proof WTC dust burns in an inert atmosphere. Everone knows thermite burns in an inert atmosphere. That is long standing fact way before 9/11.
edit on 2-9-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed this and that



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join