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: 17
26
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2018 @ 10:53 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

And I repeatedly asked from the video / audio / pictures / seismic record, no steel cut by explosives, and no demolitions shrapnel sprayed into the street, what would trigger an investigation to look for explosives. Especially when law enforcement trained as explosive experts/bomb squad saw no evidence of explosives as part of the WTC forensic teams.

Demolitions crews working the WTC cleanup with implosion experience noted no evidence of explosives.

Again, for your benefit.
www.implosionworld.com...

Would you like to cite the evidence of the physical detonations of planted explosives at the WTC?




posted on Jun, 18 2018 @ 10:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Quote where I ever posted a quote from Bazant?


Seriously?



I call it BS. For the record.



posted on Jun, 18 2018 @ 10:55 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

And you ignore the many statements of witnesses including law enforcement the towers stated to buckle before collapse. No note of columns being cut.



posted on Jun, 18 2018 @ 10:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

And I repeatedly asked from the video / audio / pictures / seismic record, no steel cut by explosives, and no demolitions shrapnel sprayed into the street, what would trigger an investigation to look for explosives. Especially when law enforcement trained as explosive experts/bomb squad saw no evidence of explosives as part of the WTC forensic teams.

Demolitions crews working the WTC cleanup with implosion experience noted no evidence of explosives.

Again, for your benefit.
www.implosionworld.com...

Would you like to cite the evidence of the physical detonations of planted explosives at the WTC?


Noted? Or made no note of?

There is a difference.

Which is it?



posted on Jun, 18 2018 @ 11:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

And you ignore the many statements of witnesses including law enforcement the towers stated to buckle before collapse. No note of columns being cut.


No I am not. Im ignoring your BS theory on how that caused the distruction of everything below the impact.

There too, is a difference.



posted on Jun, 18 2018 @ 11:00 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Which you can not create a logical counter argument. And you ignore that AIA, NFPA, ANSI, colleges, and universities widely expected fire / thermal stress as the root cause of the towers’ collapse. With your inability to cite a root cause accepted by the listed groups as a credible alternative root cause to replace fire / thermal stress initiated collapse?



posted on Jun, 18 2018 @ 11:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Which you can not create a logical counter argument. And you ignore that.


I am countering YOUR arguement that you keep posting over and over and over again.

Is it againat the terms and conditions for me to do that?

If your so set on this theory you post over and over, maybe you can learn to appreciate a little constructive critisism. GYST.



posted on Jun, 18 2018 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

What is BS? Each floor of the WTC was only rated to withstand the force equivalent to six falling floors. The 29 or the 11 falling stories had enough force to break the floor connections and break around the vertical columns. Is it false video shows the vertical columns standing in the wake of the collapse of the floor system.

No sign of cut core columns, but evidence of sheared and elongated floor connections. No evidence of being worked on by explosives.




Failure of Welded Floor Truss Connections from the Exterior Wall during Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers

app.aws.org...

Analysis of the connections supporting the composite floor system of the WTC towers showed that at and below the im- pact floors, the greater majority (above 90%) of the floor truss connections were either bent downward or completely re- moved from the exterior column. This was probably related to the overloading of the floors below the impact region after col- lapse initiation. Depending upon weld joint geometry, detachment of the main load-bearing seats was a result of either fracture in the heat affected zone of the base material (standoff plate detached from spandrel) or through the weld metal (seat angle detached from standoff plate). Failure in both cases was assumed to be a result of a shear mechanism as a result of overloading from floors above impacting those below. There did not appear to be a significant change in distribution of failure modes of the floor truss connections when comparing those connections inside vs. outside of the impact region or those ex- posed to pre-collapse fires and those that were not.


I guess added American Welding Society to the fire / thermal stress root cause list.



posted on Jun, 18 2018 @ 11:20 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

A root cause I found evidence for over and over again. And you cannot cite one other root cause found credible by law enforcement, firefighters, the American Welding Society, AIA, NFPA, ANSI, collages, and University.

Are you just trying to make the truth movement look bad?
edit on 18-6-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Jun, 18 2018 @ 11:20 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Good luck to ya.....



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 07:35 AM
link   
With most 911 conspiracy believers it has turned into a faith based belief.
No conspiracy evidence is needed.
No amount of fact based evidence will change their minds.

It reminds me of when I was a small child.
Many times I would ask "why" the answer came back as "Just because".
After 17 years the conspiracy believers only proof is "just because".



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 08:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
With most 911 conspiracy believers it has turned into a faith based belief.
No conspiracy evidence is needed.
No amount of fact based evidence will change their minds.

It reminds me of when I was a small child.
Many times I would ask "why" the answer came back as "Just because".
After 17 years the conspiracy believers only proof is "just because".



Itisnowagain: "It quite simply just happens!"



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 10:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: samkent
With most 911 conspiracy believers it has turned into a faith based belief.
No conspiracy evidence is needed.
No amount of fact based evidence will change their minds.

It reminds me of when I was a small child.
Many times I would ask "why" the answer came back as "Just because".
After 17 years the conspiracy believers only proof is "just because".



Itisnowagain: "It quite simply just happens!"

Ha ha you are so funny.
You told me the planes were destroyed and then said 'how'. I replied that if you stand in front of a fast moving car and you will find out how things get destroyed when fast things hit them.
If two things collide they are destroyed.
You went on to say 'magic'.

But if a plane hits a building the plane will be destroyed - why??? And how???
Well to me, if things hit together and things are destroyed then destruction (simply just) happens!!
You then said ''But you've never stopped to question what happens in an impact.' I then asked what happens on impact and your reply was not very helpful at all - ' A lot of energy has to go away very quickly'.

I was having a great deal of trouble understanding what you were getting at because of your extremely bad communication skills. To me you were just playing games - and now you are extracting the urine to make yourself appear clever.
edit on 19-6-2018 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 11:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
No amount of fact based evidence will change their minds.

Fact based evidence??



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: kyleplatinum




The floors above the impact zone were much lighter than the floors below the impact zone.


really?

please show the weights of all floors on that day or please stop making up rubbish you think sounds reasonable.




Gravity was not enough to destroy the buildings and accelerate a mass through them.



Who ever said it was gravity alone?


In my last post I explained and here you are again "gravity cant do this or that"


seriously if you have trouble reading them I have nothing to say about any of your thoughts concerning 9/11.




Strong evidence IS the acceleration.



so what was its rate?



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA




None of what you said above makes any sense.


why would it?


IT was obvious you cannot follow, now you just make sure its known you cannot.




So im de-evolved and need my hand held by to understand.


I held your hand not to understand but to be able to follow what was said that you keep focusing on that you misinterpreted.


You are quoting what I said and then trying to change what was said in your replies.




WTF does "tech" have to do with anything in this thread.









Do you have another half-baked theory you want to share?



Yes, please quote my first one so I don't get confused when posting the second.

Oh wait, for the 50th time

I haven't posted any theories.


Its no wonder things don't make any sense to you, you see things that are not there, hence why I asked if you are hallucinating.




You dont believe what Neufuk is pushing either?


What is Neufuk?


seriously I think you need to have head examined.

Everything posted you seem to purposely misinterpret and troll for responses.


Good day



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA




I am countering YOUR arguement that you keep posting over and over and over again.



repeating over and over that you don't believe their theory or my theory which doesn't even exist is not countering/refuting anything

its just exposing something



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: samkent
With most 911 conspiracy believers it has turned into a faith based belief.
No conspiracy evidence is needed.
No amount of fact based evidence will change their minds.

It reminds me of when I was a small child.
Many times I would ask "why" the answer came back as "Just because".
After 17 years the conspiracy believers only proof is "just because".



Itisnowagain: "It quite simply just happens!"


If two things collide they are destroyed.


Excellent. You're making progress



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain




If two things collide they are destroyed.


yes and no.

because its such a simple statement then its both correct and wrong.

not sure you understand that it depends on the material, density and mass of objects that will conclude whether an object gets destroyed when it impacts with another.




You then said ''But you've never stopped to question what happens in an impact.' I then asked what happens on impact and your reply was not very helpful at all - ' A lot of energy has to go away very quickly'.


That reply is the answer.

If you cannot understand it or even attempt to then you shouldn't be arguing why and how the buildings fell.



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: InhaleExhale



really? please show the weights of all floors on that day or please stop making up rubbish you think sounds reasonable.

Yes, really. It's common knowledge. The thickness of steel changed the floor system weights at different heights of the tower.

Even though I have already explained this earlier, here's some more:
The Towers steel varied by thickness at different levels. In the lower levels, the thickness was most frequently around 4 inches, while at higher floors, it could be as thin as 0.25 inch. This is a fact.

But you want the weights of EVERY floor ON the day of 9/11... got it, because that is a witch hunt and you know it. It's already a fact that the towers are lighter at the top.



Who ever said it was gravity alone?

You are welcome to list who gravity's helper was.

Look, I get it, you love it on that horse, but it's time to get off.




top topics



 
26
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join