It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
How can you dismiss the fact that a supposed 'Christian' president partakes in a function that contains strong pagean undertones and pass it off as a frat-boy get together. I dont know of any real 'Christians' that would or are in any gathering of the sort. I know for a fact that if I were to sneak into an area that Alex did and saw what he saw, I would sound a little paranoid also. I would think it was kind of shocking to find out our supposed 'Christian' president partakes in Santanic rituals.
Originally posted by TxSecret
I'm not buying into that one. In my not so humble opinion, if the damage from the planes (supposed starting point, localized damage) is what caused the "complete collapse" then the structure underneath the bulding should have stayed intact and there should have been a partial collapse. I can envision some or all of the uppers floors collapsing and then falling off 'around' the core.. kinda' like a spindle. (Remember, the core system was MUCH stronger than the perimeter structure) Why did this not happen? Lot's of conflicting information I have gotten regarding the
Originally posted by Duhh
Except that "engineers" understand the transfer of the load! You do not! Simple as that.The explosion early on in the towers,right down the elev shaft,weakened the main shaft at it's basement core.The mass never fell "straight down" it hit every thing there was!That mass forcing down on a weakened shaft,will crush it with ease.The strength of that support was knocked to less than 20% all over.Not hard to see!
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Originally posted by DaRAGE
JEt fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt the steel. But how about bending the steel? Or making it weaker?
What part of 1.2 BILION BTUs don?t you understand?
I will grant you that it is an estimate based on assumptions and ideal conditions, but still, 10,000 gallons of jet fuel produces enough heat to push an airplane across the continental U.S.
And If I see one more person post ?Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel,? I will reach though my monitor, out theirs, and beat some sense into them with a high school chemistry/ physics textbook.
How about the jet fuel being burnt up so quickly?
Like in the explosion...?
Do you honestly believe that the fireball from the impact was 10,000 gallons of jet fuel burning up all at once?
My guess is that the fire ball was caused by a couple hundred, gallons of vaporized fuel, no more than 1,000 gallons max, any more any you would be looking at a massive fuel air explosion. The fireball was big, but it wasn?t that big.
Originally posted by TxSecret
That's an awesome video. I had only seen parts of it but now after seeing the whole thing... wow.
Concerning the seismographic data, particularly at -17 seconds.. I'm still trying to rationalize if it was indeed some actual explosive itself or was it thermite induced 'explosive failure' of box collumns in the core.
[edit on 5-8-2006 by TxSecret]