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.

 

How were the WTC buildings rigged with explosives?

page: 9
0
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vushta

So far we've gotten.....act like a janitor and stick it on a wall....any wall that you can get to..stick it on a steel beam..any beam that you can get to. And then..Boom..it falls like a perfect demo job.
Sorry, that just in not credible.


So far we've gotten from your side......act like a passenger and highjack a plane. Crash the plane into a wall...any wall that you can get to.....have an explosion....any explosion will do to weeken the facade and core (note that both plane impacts were very different)...And then...Boom...it falls like a perfect demo job.
Sorry, that just is not credible either.




posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff


So far we've gotten from your side......act like a passenger and highjack a plane. Crash the plane into a wall...any wall that you can get to.....have an explosion....any explosion will do to weeken the facade and core (note that both plane impacts were very different)...And then...Boom...it falls like a perfect demo job.
Sorry, that just is not credible either.


The only problem with your theory of incredulity is that is what happened.

The planes were highjacked...Do you disagree with this?

The planes did crash into the towers...Do you disagree with this? It was on T.V. and in all the papers.






any wall that you can get to


Yup. Doesn't matter anyway does it?



.have an explosion.


Yup. Everyone saw that too...Do you disagree?



..any explosion will do to weeken the facade and core (note that both plane impacts were very different)


Well..no.
Not any explosion. A fully fueled huge frickkin' plane traveling 530 MPH is not "any explosion"......and don't forget to factor in the force of collision.



(note that both plane impacts were very different)


Well not really. They were both fully fueled huge frickkin' planes traveling 530 MPH.
The construction of the buildings they collided into and exploded in were very much the same tho providing similar results.


Care to run your theory thru the process I just did?



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Vush, please don't ignore my post. We're not saying that 9/11 was an inside job. We're saying that it wasn't impossible to set up. It has nothing to do with what people saw on TV. Obviously we didn't see a bunch of dudes on TV planting explosives in the towers. We ALSO didn't see what exactly happened on those planes. You're trying to say it's completely impossible for one of the most powerful governments in the world to demolish a building without people noticing?

[edit on 24-7-2006 by Barcs]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by DropInABucket
I had not seen referance to this paper as of yet (did a search and suprisingly didn't find this either, but could have goofed ) , so I thought it would post it, to help out with the physics of CD in regards to WTC:

External Link

Though this doesn't say how the explosives were throretically set per se, it does have calculations as to how much explosives would be needed if CD was used.

And before the anti-CD people say it, yes the author of this has been slammed by "Screw Loose Change" as having no credentials via Google search. He is an amature physicist, but this paper has been run by several physics groups and the math has been verified in the few web forums I checked.

So I used his numbers along with some numbers I found on the CDI's Website on the implosion of #500 Wood Street

According to CDI it took 13 people 7days to place 595lbs of explosives.

595 / 13 / 7 == 6.5lbs per person per workday

According to Mr. Trumpman it would take approx 1.4 tons of explosives (HMX) to bring down WTC1. If using the CDI's work per day as a benchmark, and using a team of 20 people:

2800 / 20 / 6.5 == 21.5 workdays (if pre-weakend, approx. x2 if not pre-weakened)

I would consider that plausible IMO as long as security was bypassed (I know that this is the main question of this thread).

Not 100% on-topic I will admit, but at least this throws some numbers into the mix to show that it wouldn't take an army nor a year to set this up. 40 people and 2 months could have been all that it took to set the charges, unless I'm off on my math.





Thanks for that effort DIAB, it gives some perspective for above the board time needed.

The major problem still remains though. How was it done with no one noticing? This iis no small point.

The time factor you gave were for full crews working completely in the open with a full ragne of equipment from cutting torches..equipment to rapidly strip walls of their sheathing and bobcats running around inside the building to move debris etc. If you factor this into the time need it either goes up in factors of magnitude, or fall in the hole where I believe it actually resides and thats the hole of unbelievability because it simply cannot be done covertly.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 04:03 PM
link   
I've already told you countless times Vushta how I believe it could have been done. And I also don't believe that a sporatic collision and sporatic fires can do the same thing as a controlled demolition. Like you guys keep saying...it takes weeks and alot of planning for a CD. Then how can chaotic plane collisions and fires do the same thing? In three buildings no less? Anyway, we are getting off topic.

You want my scenario again? Here it is.

Have 3 "construction" workers to place the thermite reactions (we've already gone through how it would be easy if there actually was inside help). First day of work.....claim maintenance in the core via one of the elevators. Place the devices on all structural columns (this would be the time eating element involved to get to each column....but could be done....gypsum is fairly easy to cut and patch) in the core at this elevation (anywhere from the bottom to the first 1/3 of the building)....interesting what Valhal has come up with regarding the 22nd floor. Could this be done in one day? Maybe, I'm not a demolitions/thermite expert so I say maybe.

Second day of work....claim maintenance in the core via one of the elevators. Place the devices on all structural columns in the core at this elevation (approximately between the first 1/3 of the building to the 2/3 point).

Third day of work...same thing just higher up near the top.

Depending on how long it would take 3 workers to place the devices per level, it wouldn't take months or even weeks.

That's 3 workers doing the job in 3 days (if they can place them in a days work). As far as ignition....use magnesium strips to initiate heat on a timer. You'll say ..."but magnesium is unreliable"...and I'll say..."it didn't have to be 100% for it to work"...and..."That's why I think the core in building 1 stood for a second before completely cascading down into itself".

That's a very easy way to have only 3 people in the know, plus the higher ups, doing it in 3 or a few more days.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by alienanderson


Wikipedia make it sound simple Vushta...


wikipedia

A building takes several weeks to be prepared for implosion

Selected columns are drilled and nitroglycerin and TNT are placed in the holes

Smaller columns and walls are wrapped in explosive cables

The goal is to use as few explosives as possible, and only a few floors are rigged with explosives

The areas with explosive are covered in thick plastic and fencing to absorb flying debris





Well thats vague. Its giving more of the concept of a demo more than describing what involved...like saying open heart surgery is done by opening the chest..stopping the heart..working on it and then starting it up again. That kinda tells you how it works but not whats involed in accomplishing those things.

a building takes several weeks?

But anyway it does give some detail that having posted it yourself, I assume you accept as somewhat valid.

So.

It states that structural members are drilled.
How was that done with no one noticeing?..just tell people you're running some wires?
But wait..you have to be down to the actual steel to 'drill the holes'..how was that done without stripping wall sheathing and fireproofing? I'm sure no one would question ripping the fireproofing of the steel.

Then smaller beams and walls are 'wrapped with explosive cable' ( looks like a mattress wrapped around a beam)...no one would notice THAT.

So by your own discription...how was all that done with no one noticing?



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Barcs
Vush, please don't ignore my post. We're not saying that 9/11 was an inside job. We're saying that it wasn't impossible to set up. It has nothing to do with what people saw on TV. Obviously we didn't see a bunch of dudes on TV planting explosives in the towers. We ALSO didn't see what exactly happened on those planes. You're trying to say it's completely impossible for one of the most powerful governments in the world to demolish a building without people noticing?

[edit on 24-7-2006 by Barcs]


I'm not going to ignore anyones post because I think the question is one of the most important questions that need to be answered in order deal with 911 realisticly.

My pointing out what was seen on T.V. was just an attempt to put both side of the debate an somewhat equal criteria.

I don't think that the power of any government has much to do with whether something is possible or not..I don't think governments have the power to do what in the real world can't be done.



You're trying to say it's completely impossible for one of the most powerful governments in the world to demolish a building without people noticing?


Well not really.
I'm sure that the government could demolish a building without people noticing..just not any building.

Could a government agent sneak into your home and steal your couch without you knowing it ? Sure, if you're not home.

Could a government agent sneak into your house and steal your couch while you're sitting on it without you noticing it? I doubt it, and it doesn't matter how powerful the government is.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
That's 3 workers doing the job in 3 days (if they can place them in a days work). As far as ignition....use magnesium strips to initiate heat on a timer. You'll say ..."but magnesium is unreliable"...and I'll say..."it didn't have to be 100% for it to work"...and..."That's why I think the core in building 1 stood for a second before completely cascading down into itself".

That's a very easy way to have only 3 people in the know, plus the higher ups, doing it in 3 or a few more days.


But Griff..What are you basing that on? It flies in the face of all other information about the time needed to set up a CD. Even one where the work is done in the open.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vushta
So by your own discription...how was all that done with no one noticing?


Not exactly my description, just 2 minutes research on wikipedia. 20 minutes later I had read and digested the more detailed article I posted an excerpt from after.

But you asked a reasonably valid question - how do you drill holes into steel columns without anyone noticing? I guess you choose times when there is no one around e.g. late at night, when an office is vacant, when an office has been evacuated for a fire drill, etc

Or maybe workmen were noticed drilling, but no one was suspicious - because of the way they conducted themselves

Or... maybe workmen were noticed drilling, and someone was suspicious - they reported it and were told some cover story and they just went back to work - slightly puzzled and uncomfortable but not too worried

My point is - you think it is ridiculous to suggest a CD took place, whereas others think it is ridiculous to believe WTC collapsed from plane impact and fires

I'm not saying it was a CD - but I am not saying it could not possibly have been one


Originally posted by Vushta
If you factor this into the time need it either goes up in factors of magnitude, or fall in the hole where I believe it actually resides and thats the hole of unbelievability because it simply cannot be done covertly.


That's your opinion Vushta. You stated a few pages back that you had done some research into controlled demolitions and had formed the opinion that it could not have happened.

Care to share some of this research with us?

How about listing some of the steps involved in a legal CD and then pointing out a particular procedure that would have been impossible to follow in a CD of WTC?


[edit on 24/7/2006 by alienanderson]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 04:46 PM
link   
I think if anyone cannot possibly imagine how the Gov't and its vast resources and compartmentalized nature rigged those buildings or accept that there's some% chance its possible, is not being reasonable. It's like talking to a wall, or a brick in the wall, or wait, a tree that doesn't bend...




I'm not saying it was a CD - but I am not saying it could not possibly have been one




posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 04:57 PM
link   


Saying that they are incapable of pulling off an operation like that seems very silly to me.




I'm not saying that the rigging of the building would be impossible..I'm saying that the rigging of the buildings with on one noticing something odd going on is impossible.
It doesn't matter if the people are trained government experts or not. They are not invisible.
It doesn't matter if they 'know what they're doing' or not..what needs to be done where it needs to be done is not affected by that. Ripping walls and burning steel is very noticable I would imagine as would be trailing miles of detcord through the halls and stairways would be.



Saying that they are incapable of pulling off an operation like that seems very silly to me.


You have too much faith in the government.
Again I'm not saying the building couldn't be rigged, I'm saying that they couldn't be rigged without notice.

Actually I think a CD of a 1300+ foot tall building is impossible using conventional techniques. I think a building that tall couldn't be prefailed and still withstand the wind load.

But thats just a guess.


Saying that they are incapable of pulling off an operation like that seems very silly to me.


[edit on 24-7-2006 by Vushta]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by aecreate
I think if anyone cannot possibly imagine how the Gov't and its vast resources and compartmentalized nature rigged those buildings or accept that there's some% chance its possible, is not being reasonable. It's like talking to a wall, or a brick in the wall, or wait, a tree that doesn't bend...



To clarify..I'm not saying the government couldn't rig a building...I'm saying it couldn't be done without notice.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Second day of work....claim maintenance in the core via one of the elevators. Place the devices on all structural columns in the core at this elevation (approximately between the first 1/3 of the building to the 2/3 point).


REPLY: Your scenario only refers to the core; the perimeter columns would also have to be done, with no access to them, how did they do it? They couldn't. It didn't happen, and you can come up with all kinds of theories, but that is what they are.

At the very least every other floor would have to be done for a CD. Hard wiring it is the most reliable, but some claim radio controlled, of course not considering that for it to "look correct" every charge would have to work, in sequence.... the heck with interference from all the steel in the buildings(s), and the fact the seismologists who recorded the event shows no explosions, just the collisions, and the collapses.

Geez what a waste of time......... have fun......



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Its certainly possible for people to notice. I agree.

We can't assume it was a totally stealth operation, it may have been under a vast number of guises, and it just wasn't considered by any witnesses as setup for a controlled demo. I'm sure that was the last thing they would have thought.

Certainly I agree its possible it was probably noticed, but its possible that whoever noticed it just didn't care. If there were reports from witnesses about such activities would you even accept it? Lol would that even sway you?

Is it not reasonable to assume the buildings were not fully occupied at certain times of varying length, maybe at night, holidays, weekends and such? It may also be reasonable to consider unorthodox methods used to disguise such an operation from witnesses. I'm saying its possible it was done WITH people noticing.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by zappafan1
At the very least every other floor would have to be done for a CD


Is that a guess?

Here, check out the article I posted an excerpt from earlier...


howstuffworks.com

Generally speaking, blasters will explode the major support columns on the lower floors first and then a few upper stories.

In a 20-story building, for example, the blasters might blow the columns on the first and second floor, as well as the 12th and 15th floors.

In most cases, blowing the support structures on the lower floors is sufficient for collapsing the building, but loading columns on upper floors helps break the building material into smaller pieces as it falls. This makes for easier clean-up following the blast.


That indicates 4 floors in 20

20/4 = 5

So a fifth of the number of floors, not half the number of floors

So if WTC towers were 110 floors high

110/5 = 22 floors per tower would have to be rigged



[edit on 24/7/2006 by alienanderson]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Vushta have you ever been in a building like the WTC towers?

It's like a small town, thousands of people who don't know each other. You go to your office, you see a guy in work clothes in a closed off area doing some kind of work, why would you even pay them any attention?

OK you might be curious, you ask your work mate,
'Hey what they working on now?'
'I don't know, they're always doing something'
You go back to work and forget about it.

When I was a bike messenger I was in and out of buildings all day, I saw plenty of maintenance work going on all the time. Often you would see areas closed off with drop clothes hanging to stop dust spreading around. They could have easily been planting explosives, how would I know, or anyone else? You couldn't see them.

People in huge office buildings rarely know anyone but the people they work with, and have even less knowledge of the maintenance that goes on all the time in these big buildings. Your mind is on your job, not everyone elses.

And security guards, I got to know a lot of them as a messenger, a couple of my friends are also security guards in office buildings. They are just regular working joes, low paid, generally un-educated past high school. Someone comes in with an official pass, easily obtained by the government, and no one will say anything.

Without a pass the general procedure is sign in, write down where you're going and why (easily made up), sign out when you leave.

It's not the impossible task you are claiming.

[edit on 24/7/2006 by ANOK]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 06:09 PM
link   
So you all claim fires and damage from the plane bought them down?

Yet it would take thousands of pounds of explosives and an army to place them on every other floor to bring them down?

You don't even know when you are contradicting yourselfs



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 06:10 PM
link   

posted by alienanderson:

Is that a guess?
Generally speaking, blasters will explode the major support columns on the lower floors first and then a few upper stories.


REPLY: No..... hardly a guess 8^) The outer columns, as someone posted earlier, carried about 48% of the gravity load of the building. There's no way the building would have come down in the manner it did with only core column damage.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vushta

Originally posted by DropInABucket
I had not seen referance to this paper as of yet (did a search and suprisingly didn't find this either, but could have goofed ) , so I thought it would post it, to help out with the physics of CD in regards to WTC:

External Link

Though this doesn't say how the explosives were throretically set per se, it does have calculations as to how much explosives would be needed if CD was used.

And before the anti-CD people say it, yes the author of this has been slammed by "Screw Loose Change" as having no credentials via Google search. He is an amature physicist, but this paper has been run by several physics groups and the math has been verified in the few web forums I checked.

So I used his numbers along with some numbers I found on the CDI's Website on the implosion of #500 Wood Street

According to CDI it took 13 people 7days to place 595lbs of explosives.

595 / 13 / 7 == 6.5lbs per person per workday

According to Mr. Trumpman it would take approx 1.4 tons of explosives (HMX) to bring down WTC1. If using the CDI's work per day as a benchmark, and using a team of 20 people:

2800 / 20 / 6.5 == 21.5 workdays (if pre-weakend, approx. x2 if not pre-weakened)

I would consider that plausible IMO as long as security was bypassed (I know that this is the main question of this thread).

Not 100% on-topic I will admit, but at least this throws some numbers into the mix to show that it wouldn't take an army nor a year to set this up. 40 people and 2 months could have been all that it took to set the charges, unless I'm off on my math.





Thanks for that effort DIAB, it gives some perspective for above the board time needed.

The major problem still remains though. How was it done with no one noticing? This iis no small point.

The time factor you gave were for full crews working completely in the open with a full ragne of equipment from cutting torches..equipment to rapidly strip walls of their sheathing and bobcats running around inside the building to move debris etc. If you factor this into the time need it either goes up in factors of magnitude, or fall in the hole where I believe it actually resides and thats the hole of unbelievability because it simply cannot be done covertly.


Add to all this the time it takes to: cut holes in sheetrock to get to the structural beams to install the charges, cut holes in sheetrock to run the wires, haul sheet-rock and joint-compound into the building to repair the holes you just made, repair the hole you just made in the sheetrock, tape and apply joint-compound to the sheetrock, time for the joint-compound to dry, re-paint (or re-apply wall vinyl) and wait for the paint to dry, clean up the HUGE mess you just made, cart all the sheet-rock scraps and mess out of the building... can anyone help me here... did I miss anything?

Another point: What does everyone think the reason is to apply fire-resistant coating to structural steel beams? Just to waste time? No... It is applied to protect the structural steel from fire! Why does structural steal need to be protected from fire? Because fire weakens steel. If there were no chance of structural steel being weakened from fire they would not apply protection to it.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Zappafan...

WTC 2 didn't have any core column damage. The plane missed the central portion.
Watch the vid and you'll see that...

So if only the outer columns were damaged, using your logic, how did the building fall then?

[edit on 24/7/2006 by ANOK]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join