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.

 

How people respond to 9/11 evidence counter to the official conspiracy theory

page: 11
26
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 11:42 AM
link   

edit on 15-6-2018 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Going to answer the question:

“Please cite what evidence should have been present if there is no indication of charges cutting steel, no audio indication of charges powerful enough to cut steel, and there was no steel worked on by explosives?


Your opportunity to make the best case for planted explosives at the WTC by using WTC video, WTC photos, WTC audio, WTC seismic data, and explain what alternate explanation should supersede the root cause of the towers collapse was impact/fire/thermal stress damage?

Not even willing to take a stance?

edit on 15-6-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

You going to go with the classic trillions stolen from the pentagon?



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux


explain what alternate explanation should supersede the root cause of the towers collapse was impact/fire/thermal stress damage?


Says who? You and bunch of other amatuer nobodys?

Or are you talking about NIST again?



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Quote where I quoted NIST in this thread?

Now...

Your opportunity to make the best case for planted explosives at the WTC by using WTC video, WTC photos, WTC audio, WTC seismic data, and explain what alternate explanation should supersede the root cause of the towers collapse was impact/fire/thermal stress damage?

Not even willing to take a stance on the best the professional AE, architectures and engineers, have to offer from the last 16 years plus?



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

It is clear the energy far exceeded the gravitational potential energy of the building.

It is utterly impossible for a "gravitational collapse" to proceed so destructively through a path of such great resistance in anywhere near free-fall times.

So while gravity is nearly strong enough to cause some things to fall that far, through air, in the observed interval, and while gravity is probably not strong enough to have so thoroughly disintegrated the towers under their own weight, gravity is certainly not strong enough to have done both at once.

On 9/11, gravity was much stronger than gravity.



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA




Says who? You and bunch of other amatuer nobodys?

That's the best description of the truth movement I have ever heard of.



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: kyleplatinum




It is clear the energy far exceeded the gravitational potential energy of the building.

That's a classic hand waving statement.
Show us the math to prove it.



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: kyleplatinum

False argument by you....



It is utterly impossible for a "gravitational collapse" to proceed so destructively through a path of such great resistance in anywhere near free-fall times.



The towers did not fall at the rate of free fall. The interior of WTC 7 was undergoing an interior collapse before the north face of WTC 7 fell for a duration at the rate of free fall in the middle of its collapse.

The towers did not fall through the path of greatest resistance. Long lengths of core columns stood after the complete collapse of the floor systems.

The truth movement is based on false notions. Are you just trying to make conspiracists look biased and too lazy to do research?




www.skeptic.com...

3WHAT ABOUT THE ALMOST FREE-FALL COLLAPSE OF THE TWIN TOWERS? The key is the “almost” modifier. If I told you I was making almost $100,000 and you found out I was making only $67,000, you’d say I was exaggerating. So stop exaggerating the collapse speed of the WTC Towers! The 80,000 tons of structural steel slowed down the collapses of the Twin Towers to about ⅔ (two-thirds) of free-fall.3 And the core collapsed at about 40% of free-fall speed, coming down last.4 According to Richard Gage: “To bring a building symmetrically down, what we have to do is remove the core columns.” But on 9/11 the stronger core columns came down last, which violates this supposed most fundamental rule of controlled demolition.





edit on 15-6-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fix



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: kyleplatinum

The falling upper 29 or 11 stores only had to fall through one floor at a time? And after each floor failed, the falling mass became more massive. What was the load capacity of the floor connections to the vertical columns for each floor?



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 09:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: kyleplatinum

The falling upper 29 or 11 stores only had to fall through one floor at a time? And after each floor failed, the falling mass became more massive. What was the load capacity of the floor connections to the vertical columns for each floor?


So all the rubble from all the floors that added to the mass were directly on top of the footprint of the tower foundation?

Thats not what I saw or what you said happened with all the lateral ejection.

How about you and your nobody friends go away and come back with a unified theory.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 08:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: kyleplatinum

The falling upper 29 or 11 stores only had to fall through one floor at a time? And after each floor failed, the falling mass became more massive. What was the load capacity of the floor connections to the vertical columns for each floor?


So all the rubble from all the floors that added to the mass were directly on top of the footprint of the tower foundation?

Thats not what I saw or what you said happened with all the lateral ejection.

How about you and your nobody friends go away and come back with a unified theory.


Why don’t you quote what was actually posted instead of playing word games. The old conspiracists create a false argument by suggesting vague innuendo and ignoring what was actually posted. I think all I ever posted was the portion of the building above the buckling fell into the static structure below. And you forgot the back and forth argument the video that show WTC 2 titling upon collapse initiating?

The claim the towers fell straight down into their foot prints is a truth movement talking point for CD. Is that false?

And still waiting on you to cite who you claim is defending the official account said there was/couldn’t be any lateral ejection.

And still waiting on you to post what you think should supersede impact / fire / thermal stress cause the floor trusses to droop. Upon cooling, the floor trusses pulled in an the remaining vertical columns in areas relative to the jet impacts. The pulling caused the vertical columns to bow to the point they buckled that initiated the collapse.

Video evidence of the inward buckling is seen in the linked to thread below.



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

www.metabunk.org...



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Sad to to conspiracists destroy their credibility by playing word games to try to create false arguments.

Sad to see conspiracists gloat in their false authority, false arguments, and pseudoscience.



posted on Jun, 17 2018 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain




No steel framed building had collapsed because of fire in the history of steel buildings................until three buildings did on the day of 911. Do you believe in miracles?


Right on que.

BRAVO.


Are you deaf and blind by any chance?


These have to be the only reasons you don't know planes also hit the towers.



posted on Jun, 17 2018 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: kyleplatinum




So while gravity is nearly strong enough to cause some things to fall that far, through air, in the observed interval, and while gravity is probably not strong enough to have so thoroughly disintegrated the towers under their own weight, gravity is certainly not strong enough to have done both at once.


gravity combined with the kinetic energy created by all the tonnes of building that was above coming down.

Its funny how its said by conspiracy theorists that only fire brought down the buildings,

and

when they fell, they fell into their own footprint,

I don't understand how anyone rational that isn't being paid to push 9/11 conspiracies for some fools youtube site or for some other nefarious reason can say such nonsense.

I guess we do live in a world where things need to be simplified for more and more because tech is evolving but the human mind using that tech seems to be de-volving,

It seems like thinking is an option some have left behind when the had their awakening.



posted on Jun, 17 2018 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: kyleplatinum




So while gravity is nearly strong enough to cause some things to fall that far, through air, in the observed interval, and while gravity is probably not strong enough to have so thoroughly disintegrated the towers under their own weight, gravity is certainly not strong enough to have done both at once.


gravity combined with the kinetic energy created by all the tonnes of building that was above coming down.

Its funny how its said by conspiracy theorists that only fire brought down the buildings,

and

when they fell, they fell into their own footprint,

I don't understand how anyone rational that isn't being paid to push 9/11 conspiracies for some fools youtube site or for some other nefarious reason can say such nonsense.

I guess we do live in a world where things need to be simplified for more and more because tech is evolving but the human mind using that tech seems to be de-volving,

It seems like thinking is an option some have left behind when the had their awakening.


So, people that dont believe your silly 9/11 conspiracy theories are de-evolved?



posted on Jun, 17 2018 @ 02:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Sad to to conspiracists destroy their credibility by playing word games to try to create false arguments.

Sad to see conspiracists gloat in their false authority, false arguments, and pseudoscience.


Maybe you should take your theories to the gray area and start again.



posted on Jun, 17 2018 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

And what was that theory you posted that should supersede impact / fire / thermal stress was the root cause of the inward bowing and buckling of vertical columns initiating collapse as caught in the video record?

What was your riveting and inspiring thread that listed the evidence off clues that should have trigger the forensic teams investigating to look for explosives? Was It there being no video / audio evidence of pressure waves with the energy to cut steel columns. No demolitions shrapnel and bomb fragments recovered with the victims of 9/11? No steel worked on by planted charges? Or no evidence steel columns were cut by a floor to floor system of planted explosives that would have never survived the impacts and fires?

And if there was no investigation into the WTC steel / rubble, how was 19,000 pieces of human remains recovered by forensic teams of cops, firefighters, and FBI? Why was the WTC steel identified and taken for examination at fresh kills? Why are there recorded tests of the steel? Remember, you argument is the WTC pile was not treated as a crime scene at all? The WTC steel / rubble was not examined at all. No effort what so ever? Why the total false argument there was no investigation into the WTC rubble / steel? Why hide the truth. Afraid it of opening Pandora’s Box that reveals the total fraud centering around pushing planted explosives at the WTC? And you what to point to people in this thread and make false accusations?
edit on 17-6-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Jun, 17 2018 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

And what was that theory you posted that should supersede impact / fire / thermal stress was the root cause of the inward bowing and buckling of vertical columns initiating collapse as caught in the video record?

What was your riveting and inspiring thread that listed the evidence off clues that should have trigger the forensic teams investigating to look for explosives? Was It there being no video / audio evidence of pressure waves with the energy to cut steel columns. No demolitions shrapnel and bomb fragments recovered with the victims of 9/11? No steel worked on by planted charges? Or no evidence steel columns were cut by a floor to floor system of planted explosives that would have never survived the impacts and fires?

And if there was no investigation into the WTC steel / rubble, how was 19,000 pieces of human remains recovered by forensic teams of cops, firefighters, and FBI? Why was the WTC steel identified and taken for examination at fresh kills? Why are there recorded tests of the steel? Remember, you argument is the WTC pile was not treated as a crime scene at all? The WTC steel / rubble was not examined at all. No effort what so ever? Why the total false argument there was no investigation into the WTC rubble / steel? Why hide the truth. Afraid it of opening Pandora’s Box that reveals the total fraud centering around pushing planted explosives at the WTC? And you what to point to people in this thread and make false accusations?


I think you have a good theory.

Take it too the gray area. It needs some polishing buy keeo at it and you can come back to the grown-ups forum soon enough.

Keep at it tiger!



posted on Jun, 17 2018 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

If you cannot state a more credible cause than impact damag/fire/thermal stress as the root cause of the towers collapse, it doesn’t make any difference. There is zero evidence of any other root cause. And the only thing you have are word games, and false accusation against individuals in this thread. The only things you provided are based on innuendo, based on hiding of facts, ignoring questions, and misquotes. If the root cause of the towers collapse was something other then impact/fire/thermal stress damage, conspiracists could use the video / audio / photographic / seismic record? But conspiracists only can hide facts, misquote, and create false arguments. Conspiracists use false arguments like posting pictures of columns cut by cleanup crews as cut by thermite. The truth movement killed its credibility with its inability to police itself, and its desperation to grasp at any claim of a smoking gun. And conspiracists willingly choose to be part of that? You have no desire to root out any lie? Just to keep the fantasy of planted explosives at the towers alive. The 9/11 truth movement is a classic example of how a movement is taken over by charlatans for self promotion by targeting a specific audience.
edit on 17-6-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed

edit on 17-6-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed







 
26
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join