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.

 

Federal Grand Jury To Hear Evidence - World Trade Center 9-11 Was Controlled Demolition.

page: 24
33
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Evidence is the entire issue here and it's only about the claimed CD aspects of the day.
I don't see it going very far at all unless there is amazing never-before-seen evidence being submitted and I'm very keen to see it if it exists because what we've seen so far varies from ambiguous to ridiculous.




posted on Feb, 12 2019 @ 02:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: democracydemo

The jury has the power to tell the truth with its verdict. Let's hope no special interests will taint the jury.


And of course according to you they are just going to dismiss this since they are being presented with evidence for thermite demolition



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:09 PM
link   
a reply to: mrthumpy

No, my bet is that DOJ in DC will not allow this to proceed. The judicial system is as compromised as the other 3 branches.

Everybody knows it was an inside job. The system will simply adapt to prevent the truth ever being recorded on a government document. Just like JFK story and all the others. The story is never changed for the record, but everybody knows its a sham.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: mrthumpy

No, my bet is that DOJ in DC will not allow this to proceed. The judicial system is as compromised as the other 3 branches.

Everybody knows it was an inside job. The system will simply adapt to prevent the truth ever being recorded on a government document. Just like JFK story and all the others. The story is never changed for the record, but everybody knows its a sham.


Let’s gets this straight. You believe nukes brought down the WTC. Is that a false statement. You don’t believe thermite or conventional pyrotechnics brought down the towers. Is that a false statement. Many people that believe in Nukes think Jones and his thermite paper are a distraction. Is that false.

So? You not believing in thermite, which is what the grand jury petition is based on, thinks the DOJ is going to stifle an inquire on a theory you don’t even find credible. Is that a false statement you would like to expand on?

To you, it’s not because there is zero credible evidence of thermite/nukes/demolitions, but because of the DOJ? Especially when you don’t believe thermite was the reason for collapse which is what the grand jury petition is based on?

Contradict much......
edit on 13-2-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 06:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

You


No, my bet is that DOJ in DC will not allow this to proceed.


Why would the DOJ stop an investigation into a theory people pushing the Nuke theory believe the government used Jones to start as a distraction.

So by your logic of, “No, my bet is that DOJ in DC will not allow this to proceed,” you out of hand showed your pet theory of nukes is wrong. Or there is absolutely no evidence of thermite as the grand jury petition claims.

Which is it?


edit on 13-2-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed

edit on 13-2-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

You Salander! Step away from the rabbit hole.


No Salander, step into the rabbit hole. Keep falling....



posted on Feb, 14 2019 @ 01:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: mrthumpy

No, my bet is that DOJ in DC will not allow this to proceed. The judicial system is as compromised as the other 3 branches.


Saves everyone from wasting their time looking at fake evidence then



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux



The bowing became so great, the load of the upper 29 floors was no longer transferred to the building’s foundation. The 29 floors above the buckling fell into the building below. The falling mass sheared the floor connections to the vertical and core columns. The core columns fell last. There was no magical violation of Newton’s laws of physics. Just the over loading of floor connections.


This is about the initiation of the collapse. I can't find anything beyond that from what your quotes refer to: ws680.nist.gov... Help!

Newton steps in at this point and Global -to street level- collapse x 3 is at jury.



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

What are you talking about. The video evidence shows the core columns still standing for the twin towers after the complete collapse of the floors system. Which is backed by



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.


Long columns such as in the WTC needed lateral support. Is that false. The floor system provided that lateral support. Is that false. After the loss of lateral support, the steel columns became unstable, and toppled over. Is that false.

A column is strong when straight. Is that false. When a loaded column bends, the load is no longer transferred directly to the foundation. Is this false. The load is “caught” in the geometry of the bend. Is that false.



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

Would you like to actually explain in the form of an actual constructed argument how Newton’s laws were violated. Or you going with each floor connection in the WTC was magical and did not have a maximum static and dynamic load limit?



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux




The video evidence shows the core columns still standing for the twin towers after the complete collapse of the floors system.


You do not have that video evidence.
edit on 15-2-2019 by democracydemo because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

What do you mean there is no video evidence?

Can you prove the blow from eskeptic is a lie. If you are the one making allegations the below source is a lie, then the burden of proof is on you.



9/11 and the Science
of Controlled Demolitions
www.skeptic.com
www.skeptic.com...

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.


So let’s spell out what usually happens.

You ignore a respected publication that is concerned about its reputation in stating obvious facts. You play this little rant game. Then I post Links to videos that show the core columns still standing because you are too lazy to do the research yourself. Then you are exposed for pushing you biased and false arguments.

I have posted the video in other threads. Threads I think you were part of? I am more than happy to let you post yourself into a corner....... then provide the video links.

I guess conspiracists don’t have long term memory.
edit on 15-2-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo



You do not have that video evidence.


Why would I own WTC video by the way. The cores still standing is part of the video evidence. The video is accessible from different sources online.

I found my notes, and the links to the videos showing the core and outer vertical columns fell after the complete collapse of the floor systems are still good.

So provide the evidence if you think the below quote from eskeptic is a lie.



www.skeptic.com...
And the core collapsed at about 40% of free-fall speed, coming down last.

edit on 15-2-2019 by neutronflux because: Worded more specific.



posted on Feb, 16 2019 @ 06:18 AM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

And like a typical conspiracist, you totally ignored a question directed at you.

Would you like to actually explain in the form of an actual constructed argument how Newton’s laws were violated. Or you going with each floor connection in the WTC was magical and did not have a maximum static and dynamic load limit?



posted on Feb, 16 2019 @ 06:20 AM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

So your on going list.

One:
Would you like to actually explain in the form of an actual constructed argument how Newton’s laws were violated. Or you going with each floor connection in the WTC was magical and did not have a maximum static and dynamic load limit?


Two:
So provide the evidence if you think the below quote from eskeptic is a lie.

“www.skeptic.com...
And the core collapsed at about 40% of free-fall speed, coming down last.”



posted on Feb, 16 2019 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Oh joy. Neutron modus operandi, drown the opponent with questions.

I did view those videos and saw parts of the perimeter columns standing, not the core.
As i meantioned in my post about skeptic.com i can't find how Chris Mohr deduced "stronger core columns came down last", hence the call for "Help".

As for for Newton, start with the third one.



posted on Feb, 16 2019 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: neutronflux

Oh joy. Neutron modus operandi, drown the opponent with questions.

I did view those videos and saw parts of the perimeter columns standing, not the core.
As i meantioned in my post about skeptic.com i can't find how Chris Mohr deduced "stronger core columns came down last", hence the call for "Help".

As for for Newton, start with the third one.


Sad to see you to regress to blatantly false arguments.

You did not provide any material or sources to debunk


9/11 and the Science
of Controlled Demolitions
www.skeptic.com...
And the core collapsed at about 40% of free-fall speed, coming down last


Links to the videos of the cores/structural steel falling after the collapse of the floor systems.



9/11 Footage shows core of both towers standing; Debunks Basement BombsTheory
m.youtube.com...

Core of WTC 1 momentarily standing after collapse
m.youtube.com...

WTC Collapses - Cores Visible
the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com...


If the structural steel of the buildings (core and outer vertical columns) didn’t fall after the collapse of the floor systems, how did DR. Wood get the videos of the structural steel still standing after the complete collapse of the floor systems for her infamous theories?

Sorry, the structural steel (core and outer vertical columns) toppled only after losing the lateral support of the floor systems.

And your attempt at blatantly false arguments are pitiful.
edit on 16-2-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed

edit on 16-2-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed

edit on 16-2-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Feb, 16 2019 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

Back to you

One:
Would you like to actually explain in the form of an actual constructed argument how Newton’s laws were violated. Or you going with each floor connection in the WTC was magical and did not have a maximum static and dynamic load limit?


Two:
So provide the evidence if you think the below quote from eskeptic is a lie.

“www.skeptic.com...
And the core collapsed at about 40% of free-fall speed, coming down last.



posted on Feb, 22 2019 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

To add my efforts into the WTC2 visible core claim, i whipped up a video from an another vantage point trying to address this issue:




posted on Feb, 22 2019 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: neutronflux

To add my efforts into the WTC2 visible core claim, i whipped up a video from an another vantage point trying to address this issue:



Why.

The cores and structural steel fell after the collapse of the floor system.

Is the below a lie?


9/11 and the Science
of Controlled Demolitions
www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/11-09-07/
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.


When there is video that shows the core columns and structural steel fell in the wake of the floor system.



9/11 Footage shows core of both towers standing; Debunks Basement BombsTheory
m.youtube.com...

Core of WTC 1 momentarily standing after collapse
m.youtube.com...

WTC Collapses - Cores Visible
the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com...
collapses-cores-visible.html?m=1


When Dr Wood’s arguments are based on the facts the structural steel of WTC 1 and WTC 2 were left standing in the collapse of the towers’ floor systems, and references videos showing as much.

But you can keep on ignoring the simple truths which makes you look biased and disconnected. Keep pushing the falsehoods that killed the truth movement.


edit on 22-2-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed

edit on 22-2-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed




top topics



 
33
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join