Trying to resolve 9/11

a reply to: democracydemo

You didn’t hit a nerve with me. You created your own “evidence”.

Now again...

I counted them on the video did i not?

Is that after your claim you tweaked the audio? So you are manipulating the sound? Where, if the “explosions” actually had the force to cut steel columns, the detonations would be clear, obvious, and would have echoed about manhattan.

Let’s say you claim eight loud bangs that are expected from any large building fire, or from a structure failing by overloading.

Eight bangs who’s audio you manipulated, is that false?

Next, there is no way CD systems would survive the jet impacts and fires to initiate collapse on the floors impacted by the jets as attested to by the video evidence.

Next you claim:

Nature of material used to cut core colums (Nano-thermite anyone)?

If you are saying nano-thermite cut the columns by shockwave, it still would have to create a pressure wave to cut the columns. The energy created by that shockwave is still going to produce audible energy of at least 130 dB.

If you are saying thermite cut the core columns, then why is the no visible white hot sparking from the WTC video evidence. Why would there be “explosive” sounds. Thermite burns relatively slow. Why is there no glowing metal from the collapse video?



Next. You.

Would, lets say, a normal shaped cutting charges even leave this evidence in the first place? Provide evidence for your claim!

But you are not claiming shape cutting charges are you?

You claim eight explosions from the video you “tweaked”?

I did some tinkering with the original video/audio and ended up with this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Oh. Sorry. You tinkered. Nice that you “tinkered” to create your “evidence” that should be obvious.

Anyway.

You again.

Would, lets say, a normal shaped cutting charges even leave this evidence in the first place? Provide evidence for your claim!

Let’s say you claimed eight loud bands you
Tinkered into “evidence”.

You claim eight cutting charges? Well, flight 175 probably took out about 7 core columns, and the tower did not fall.

Some estimates are more than 7 core columns taken out by Flight 175, with no serious consideration the tower would have collapsed from the jet impact.

That indicates your eight supposed “explosions” could not be cutting charges on individual core columns to take out enough of the 44 core columns to initiate collapse. For you fantasy to work, the supposed explosives would had to be wide area in nature. Not eight shape charges only taking out eight columns. Explosions that would need to take out multiple core columns with each detonation. Explosions that would look like the one event that is known to have taken out 7 core columns, and produced a seismic event of .7 magnitude.




Again. CD systems would not have survived the jet impacts and fires to initiate collapse of the twin towers as attested to by video evidence.

You are falsely confusing expect sounds of “explosions” from a building fire, and expected from a building failing from being overloaded.

You have produced no evidence of explosions with the force to cut steel columns. Explosions that would be obvious, awe inspiring, and echoed about manhattan.
Very similar to the explosive sounds starting around 4:14 mark of the FDR drive video

18 Views of "Plane Impact" in South Tower | 9/11 World Trade Center [HD DOWNLOAD]
m.youtube.com...

How far is FDR drive fromWTC 2?

But you only have audio you “tinkered” with from expected normal building fires, or sounds from a building being overloaded.

You cannot produce physical evidence of columns cut by pyrotechnics. Especially when the truth movement claims the resistance of each floor had to be removed by removing the structural steel of each floor.

a reply to: neutronflux

If anybody is falling for blatant lies, it is those who believe the statements of known liars, those who 18 years later still believe the official story. If you're looking for somebody who believes blatant lies sir, have a look in the mirror.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

If anybody is falling for blatant lies, it is those who believe the statements of known liars, those who 18 years later still believe the official story. If you're looking for somebody who believes blatant lies sir, have a look in the mirror.

How’s that “evidence” on nukes at the WTC coming along?

And quote where I believe every bit of the “official narrative”?

Just because I don’t believe in:
Nukes?
Dustification?
No jets with holograms with lasers and/or missiles?
Thermite ceiling tiles and/or paint?
Richard Gage’s fizzle no flash bombs?

So Mr./Ms. Salander, which from the list above should I find more credible than fire related collapse?

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

What if there was floors missing

a reply to: stonerwilliam

What if extraterrestrials crashed cloaked spacecrafts into the towers.

Now, can you create a logical argument with cited evidence. Or you just going to keep making up BS with no bases in reality.

What if a zombie army of midgets ran into the building with large band saws.

What if Chaney teleported out key supports.

What if micro black holes were teleported in.

It’s easy to make up crap.

a reply to: stonerwilliam

By the way. Where the jets crashed into the towers. The place the collapse of each tower was initiated, there was visible hanging floor slabs. Also, as each floor collapsed, dust was blown out.

Debunking 9/11 Truthers: "Explosive Squibs & Lateral Debris Ejection!"

January 27, 2019 Anton Dyba

www.google.com... ormat=amp

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: stonerwilliam

What if extraterrestrials crashed cloaked spacecrafts into the towers.

Now, can you create a logical argument with cited evidence. Or you just going to keep making up BS with no bases in reality.

What if a zombie army of midgets ran into the building with large band saws.

What if Chaney teleported out key supports.

What if micro black holes were teleported in.

It’s easy to make up crap.

thats the spirit neutronflux get with the programme

www.abovetopsecret.com... aliens NO

But follow the money trail

a reply to: stonerwilliam

Here is list of Tenants in WTC 2 (South Tower) on September 11 2001

en.wikipedia.org...

There are no "missing" floors - several floors are not occupied, probably under going renovations

When a floor was vacated by tenants, the Port Authority would begin renovations, which included asbestos removal and abatement

a reply to: stonerwilliam

So you have no argument built in logic or actual evidence. Just another truth movement fabricated mythology.

It has been interesting to see how others try and resolve 9/11 with things like denial, censorship and ridicule. The trends of projecting ones own faults is also high. Being censored is a ostracizing experience indicative of the site sponsored mockery of 9/11. If website policy is to ignore or hide from 9/11 like China does with its Tiananmen square massacre then why even have an open 9/11 forum?

Deny ignorance sounds good. Actions say otherwise if the truth is inconvenient or uncomfortable. Overall I have found the ATS guard has weakened from what they where 5 or 6 years ago. With an aerial view of the Pentagon now out it is a tough one to argue with a straight face these days. Despite failing evidence, the believers still hold the ATS ground in its discourse and moderation.

a reply to: stonerwilliam

But follow the money trail

There is no money trail.
If you believe there is then lay it out with evidence.

a reply to: kwakakev

What? This photo?





What does your rant have to do with there is no evidence of WTC controlled demolitions? And groups like AE 9/11 Truth push false mythology concerning 9/11 for personal gain.

And there are sick people despite the DNA evidence, wreckage, Pentagon Damage, the radar data, the flight recorder data, the coroner’s reports, and funerals for the remains of those on flight 77 deny flight 77 hit the pentagon.

originally posted by: kwakakev
It has been interesting to see how others try and resolve 9/11 with things like denial, censorship and ridicule. The trends of projecting ones own faults is also high. Being censored is a ostracizing experience indicative of the site sponsored mockery of 9/11. If website policy is to ignore or hide from 9/11 like China does with its Tiananmen square massacre then why even have an open 9/11 forum?

Deny ignorance sounds good. Actions say otherwise if the truth is inconvenient or uncomfortable. Overall I have found the ATS guard has weakened from what they where 5 or 6 years ago. With an aerial view of the Pentagon now out it is a tough one to argue with a straight face these days. Despite failing evidence, the believers still hold the ATS ground in its discourse and moderation.

We're never going to find out why fires burning three months later = thermite are we

originally posted by: mrthumpy
[We're never going to find out why fires burning three months later = thermite are we

My point exactly. It is a very sad and pathetic state to think such a thing is humorous. I do find it offensive to those that died that day and those that have died since. I also find it offensive to humanity and the rule of law to let such actions go without question.

Free speech is a luxury that at times will be divisive. If there is anyway to resolve some of these bigger problems then free speech must also be encouraged.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

If anybody is falling for blatant lies, it is those who believe the statements of known liars

Unbelievable that people are still pushing the thermite BS!!!

originally posted by: kwakakev

originally posted by: mrthumpy
[We're never going to find out why fires burning three months later = thermite are we

My point exactly. It is a very sad and pathetic state to think such a thing is humorous. I do find it offensive to those that died that day and those that have died since. I also find it offensive to humanity and the rule of law to let such actions go without question.

Free speech is a luxury that at times will be divisive. If there is anyway to resolve some of these bigger problems then free speech must also be encouraged.

But you've declared that fires burning three months later = thermite and you're sticking to that no matter what


What is humorous is witnessing the mental gymnastics that you guys will go through to maintain your delusions. It's fascinating to watch

a reply to: kwakakev

Free speech is a luxury that at times will be divisive. If there is anyway to resolve some of these bigger problems then free speech must also be encouraged.

From the one that posted

With an aerial view of the Pentagon now out it is a tough one to argue with a straight face these days. Despite failing evidence,

When all evidence points to the damage at the pentagon was from flight 77. With the flight crew and passengers ending up dead at the pentagon.



Then for you to post

I do find it offensive to those that died that day and those that have died since.

And then not calling out Pilots for 9/11 Truth for being blatant liars?

You kwakakev have a credibility problem.

originally posted by: kwakakev

Deny ignorance sounds good. Actions say otherwise if the truth is inconvenient or uncomfortable. Overall I have found the ATS guard has weakened from what they where 5 or 6 years ago. With an aerial view of the Pentagon now out it is a tough one to argue with a straight face these days.

Perhaps you could share the aerial view pic you speak of and state what you found convincing evidence of and why.
I, as a fellow Ozman, do not have a dog in this race but I'm very interested in any evidence, particularly evidence I've not seen previously.

a reply to: Pilgrum

Does this help?

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: neutronflux

I do get it. I so wish the official story was right, I really do. I am not prepared to sacrifice my cognition though to hold onto this dead weight.

How does a plane magically pass through one of the pentagon rings without touching it? Propaganda. Wake the hell up or just leave it to natural selection to sort out. Your call.

a reply to: neutronflux

I'll be very disappointed if that is, in fact, the pic kwakakev was speaking of. Mainly because the explanation is so simple and there's nothing of a conspiracy nature involved in it at all.

I'm always hoping for something new and more challenging to attempt analysis on - maybe the grand jury will see such new evidence.