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: 27
33
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2019 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux




Six, the core columns fell after the collapse of the floor systems.


Based on what fact not yet debunked?

You keep obsessing with this false claim. As it is the key driver for global natural collapse for both towers you can not it to be false.

I can understand and feel your passion in this matter, but the admit nothing, deny everything atmosphere you create leaves you blind to what is actually observed.

Core first, rest follows.




posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: EraTera2

Not only did the buildings fall, some mysterious force ejected massive pieces laterally hundreds of feet.

Curious minds want to know why.

Uncurious minds are oblivious to physics.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: EraTera2

Not only did the buildings fall, some mysterious force ejected massive pieces laterally hundreds of feet.

Curious minds want to know why.

Uncurious minds are oblivious to physics.


Long sections toppled out. Provide evidence of an explosion the had the force to launch steel columns.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: neutronflux




Six, the core columns fell after the collapse of the floor systems.


Based on what fact not yet debunked?

You keep obsessing with this false claim. As it is the key driver for global natural collapse for both towers you can not it to be false.

I can understand and feel your passion in this matter, but the admit nothing, deny everything atmosphere you create leaves you blind to what is actually observed.

Core first, rest follows.


Why do you blatantly post falsehoods?



9/11 and the Science
of Controlled Demolitions

www.skeptic.com...

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.


The above state of “And the core collapsed at about 40% of free-fall speed, coming down last” Is shown to be true in the video evidence.



WTC 1 core collapse
m.youtube.com...

Visible core columns
www.dailymotion.com...

World Trade Centre Core Collapsing
m.youtube.com...

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


Maybe you should try to edit the below statement in Wikipedia “Collapse of the World Trade Center.” It would make an interesting thread if you chronicled your effort to try and place a truth movement lie into the article.



Mechanics of Twin Towers' collapse
en.m.wikipedia.org...

The lower portions of both buildings' cores (60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) remained standing for up to 25 seconds after the start of the initial collapse before they too collapsed.[44]


(post by neutronflux removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 03:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
POST REMOVED BY STAFF



Credability: "the fact that someone can be believed or trusted". Quotes from Wikipedia [44] and skeptic.com. Is this credability?

Are visual, actual, real-world, true observations false?



Yes or No?
edit on 19-4-2019 by democracydemo because: (no reason given)

edit on Tue Apr 23 2019 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: democracydemo

True or False. For WTC 1 and WTC 2, after the complete collapse of their floor systems, there were still core columns standing?


I'm going with True



What is standing after the collapse of the floor system. Oh core columns.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: democracydemo

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: democracydemo

Why do you post falsehoods that damage your credibility?



Credability: "the fact that someone can be believed or trusted". Quotes from Wikipedia [44] and skeptic.com. Is this credability?

Are visual, actual, real-world, true observations false?



Yes or No?


Why do you have to create false arguments? While I can use the actual video evidence, and cite sources?



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

Please state how the below is a lie concerning the twin towers.



9/11 and the Science
of Controlled Demolitions

www.skeptic.com...
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.


All you are doing is making yourself look sad and killing your own credibility.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 04:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: democracydemo

Please state how the below is a lie concerning the twin towers.



9/11 and the Science
of Controlled Demolitions

www.skeptic.com...
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.


All you are doing is making yourself look sad and killing your own credibility.


what we have to do is remove the core columns

Priceless
Sublime and beautiful words. Do we have confirmation to this? Oh yes!



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

What are you babbling about?

Below is the actual quote:



9/11 and the Science
of Controlled Demolitions

www.skeptic.com...
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.


what do you not get about “But on 9/11 the stronger core columns came down last, which violates this supposed most fundamental rule of controlled demolition“

The towers fell through the path of least resistance, the floor connections attached to the vertical columns.



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.


edit on 19-4-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

Just keep killing your credibility.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

If the vertical columns did not fall after the failure of the floor system, how did the below take place?




app.aws.org...

the greater majority (above 90%) of the floor truss connections were either bent downward or completely re- moved from the exterior column.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: democracydemo

If the vertical columns did not fall after the failure of the floor system, how did the below take place?




app.aws.org...

the greater majority (above 90%) of the floor truss connections were either bent downward or completely re- moved from the exterior column.


Again, regress to what is observed, not quoted.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 05:54 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

If the below is false, then why doesn’t Richard Gage of AE 9/11 Truth make a very loud and public campaign to have Wikipedia change it? Probably because he knows it’s the actual truth.


en.m.wikipedia.org...

The lower portions of both buildings' cores (60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) remained standing for up to 25 seconds after the start of the initial collapse before they too collapsed.[44]



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux



From video evidence, significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse. Neither the duration of the seismic records nor video evidence (due to obstruction of view caused by debris clouds) are reliable indicators of the total time it took for each building to collapse completely.

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster Answers to Frequently Asked Questions (August 30, 2006)
Where is this video evidence?
edit on 20-4-2019 by democracydemo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 05:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: democracydemo

True or False. For WTC 1 and WTC 2, after the complete collapse of their floor systems, there were still core columns standing?


I'm going with True



What is in this picture still standing



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

See my last post....


Let me get this straight, Richard Gage and AE 9/11 Truth have lawyers? If the below is false from Skeptic Magazine, why don’t they force Skeptic Magazine to make a redaction and force an apology from Skeptic Magazine that specifically called out Richard Gage on his lie.



9/11 and the Science
of Controlled Demolitions

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.



With links of to video showing “significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse.“



WTC 1 core collapse
m.youtube.com...

Visible core columns
www.dailymotion.com...

World Trade Centre Core Collapsing
m.youtube.com...

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




edit on 20-4-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

So....

There is video evidence that shows, “significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse.“

Thank you to mrthumpy to posting pictures of the core columns still standing after the collapse of the floor system of one of the twin towers.

Richard Gage has not pursued a redaction from Skeptic Magazine that called him out on his Lie.

The American Welding Society documented the physical samples of floor connections from the twin towers that shows they were bent downward or sheared away from still standing vertical columns.

There is zero chance any CD system would have survived the jet impacts and fires to initiate the collapse of the Twin Towers as captured by video from multiple angles.


edit on 20-4-2019 by neutronflux because: Fixed

edit on 20-4-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Apr, 20 2019 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: democracydemo

The only thing you are doing is just killing your own credibility. But keep up killing your own cause.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join