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.
Originally posted by bsbray11
Nor is it possible to tell much else about it! From all we can tell from that photo, it's possible that none of that is from a floor slab at all.
But even if those two chunks were from a floor slab - you still understand that the amount of dust to actual chunks is extremely disproportionate, right?
Originally posted by AgentSmith
Not everyone has all day to trawl the internet, some of us work, go to school/college, spend time with friends and partners, sleep, eat, go out, fish, go shooting, bike riding, running, jogging, walking, go to the movies, walk on the beach, shop, party, etc, etc.
It's not that easy to find stuff sometimes that's good enough quality to watch.
And all the stuff that I saw from a 'conpiracy' site that you or bsBray I think posted seemed to show that the demo theory was crap anyway.
You didn't respond very well I must say, sometimes silence is better than trying to have the last word (Yes I know I should pay attention to my own advice sometimes ).
[edit on 25-8-2005 by AgentSmith]
If you really can't find the video's of the two towers collapsing then what the hell are you doing on this forum ? You sure aren't looking for the truth.
Originally posted by bsbray11
Congrats on your ability to rant mercilessly without offering any real evidence, Faust.
Originally posted by AgentSmith
Originally posted by bsbray11
Congrats on your ability to rant mercilessly without offering any real evidence, Faust.
As he was pointing out, everyone else seems to do it. He has as much 'evidence' as you or anyone else.
Know you now know how some of us feel about some of these elaborate, over the top and unlikely theories.
Originally posted by DaTerminator
Now I'm a big skeptic of 9/11 conspiracies. I've heard alot of irrational takes on the subject from illuminati mind-controlled people hijacking airliners to ufo's crashing into the pentagon. To me, this is all irrational and if you would like to prove me wrong go ahead.
I watched the towers burn. I watched as the second jet crashed into the side of the building while people watched in terror. I have seen video footage of the 19 terrorists entering the plane and heard audio of the telephone calls concerning the hijackers. I find it insulting to believe anything other than that islamic terrorists led by Osama Bin Laden materminded and executed the 9/11 attacks. Where is your logic? Mind explaining these things to me?
Originally posted by mr conspiracy
Go watch: 9/11 In Plane Site - The Director's Cut
You will soon sooon soooon become a true trueee belieeever.
Originally posted by HowardRoark
And one more time, (just for the heck of it)
What they don’t show you in the “in plane site” video.
The exterior columns of WTC 2 bowing inward just prior to the collapse.
Originally posted by Shroomery
Keep thinking a little piece of the tower has enough weight and momentum to crush the rest of the tower though and you'll story will hold up just fine.
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Originally posted by Shroomery
Keep thinking a little piece of the tower has enough weight and momentum to crush the rest of the tower though and you'll story will hold up just fine.
And just how much do you suppose that "little piece of the tower" weighed?
Just because a tower has damage to the upper part does not make it ok for it to come down. Keep thinking a little piece of the tower has enough weight and momentum to crush the rest of the tower though and you'll story will hold up just fine.
Originally posted by msdos464
Just because a tower has damage to the upper part does not make it ok for it to come down. Keep thinking a little piece of the tower has enough weight and momentum to crush the rest of the tower though and you'll story will hold up just fine.
That piece of tower is able to fall through the floors, wich causes whole tower to collapse.
Originally posted by Shroomery
Originally posted by HowardRoark
And just how much do you suppose that "little piece of the tower" weighed?
That's pretty much irrelevant, but I'd assume about somethig along the lines of less then 1/10th of the remaining tower (very generous number).
Ever crushed something that's 10 times heavier than yourself Howard ?
Try crushing an 800 kg car by jumping of a ladder.
But I hear the apples and oranges excuse coming up.
[edit on 26-8-2005 by Shroomery]
[edit on 26-8-2005 by Shroomery]
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Originally posted by Shroomery
Originally posted by HowardRoark
And just how much do you suppose that "little piece of the tower" weighed?
That's pretty much irrelevant, but I'd assume about somethig along the lines of less then 1/10th of the remaining tower (very generous number).
Ever crushed something that's 10 times heavier than yourself Howard ?
Try crushing an 800 kg car by jumping of a ladder.
But I hear the apples and oranges excuse coming up.
[edit on 26-8-2005 by Shroomery]
[edit on 26-8-2005 by Shroomery]
Oh, my.
Just when I thought you couldn’t come up with anything more ridiculous, you pull out a doozy.
It appears to me that your contention is that the top part should not have collapsed the bottom part because the top part only weighed 1/10th the mass of the bottom.
In other words, you seem to feel that the structural strength of a building is related entirely to its mass. Is this correct?
BTW, are you familiar with the terms “live load” and “dead load” when used in connection with structural engineering?