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.

 

explosions before collapse in video

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 02:15 PM
link   
video.google.com...

In this video various loud explosion can be heard before the collapse of the towers. Also a dust cloud can be seen rising up from the base of WTC2 which is very interesting.

These explosions must have been very loud as they are caught on the camera microphone from across the river.

As a side note I was thinking how it was interesting that both towers fell the same way when they were hit at different points.

Its hard to comprehend how the weight of a section at the top of the buildings 1/5 of the size of the rest of the structure could vaporize the intact 70-80% of the towers below at free fall speed.




posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 03:25 PM
link   
also interesting is this site www.apfn.net...

Here it is claimed that the siesmic data showing the point of impact of the planes doesn't appear to match with the official time of when the aircraft hit the buildings.

Very strange....any takers?



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthtone
also interesting is this site www.apfn.net...

Here it is claimed that the siesmic data showing the point of impact of the planes doesn't appear to match with the official time of when the aircraft hit the buildings.

Very strange....any takers?


Craig Furlong has done some excellent work on the discrepancies between the aircraft impact times and the seismic study data. He has found and tied together various points of evidence which reveal that the basement explosions preceded the aircraft impacts and could not have the jet fuel or any other aircraft or impact related phenomenon as their cause.
A report is in the process of being compiled and made ready for the Journal of 911 Studies. This should appear shortly and makes very interesting reading and a damning indictment of the official story.

Gordon.



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthtone
video.google.com...

In this video various loud explosion can be heard before the collapse of the towers. Also a dust cloud can be seen rising up from the base of WTC2 which is very interesting.
Its hard to comprehend how the weight of a section at the top of the buildings 1/5 of the size of the rest of the structure could vaporize the intact 70-80% of the towers below at free fall speed.


That is an amazing video. I am surprised to have not have seen it before. Its a rare and unique look into the events.
I have a few questions for you or the mods if i may:
1. Has this video only recently come to light?
2. Is the cameraman a credible film maker?
3. What do you (everyone) think of the helicopters bright flashes caught on the tape when they fly over the top of the towers? is this just a flash of light or is there another more sinister possibility? How come this has not (to my knowledge) been discussed on ATS previously?
4. has this video been 'debunked' in anyway? I was very impressed with the
work that went into it, it really gives the viewer a crystal clear image of what went on that day.
5. At the end of the film they state that they hope that this film can be used in evidence to bring the real perpetrators to justice. does anyone think this could be a possibility?



posted on Sep, 3 2006 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by earthtone
video.google.com...

In this video various loud explosion can be heard before the collapse of the towers. Also a dust cloud can be seen rising up from the base of WTC2 which is very interesting.

These explosions must have been very loud as they are caught on the camera microphone from across the river.

As a side note I was thinking how it was interesting that both towers fell the same way when they were hit at different points.

Its hard to comprehend how the weight of a section at the top of the buildings 1/5 of the size of the rest of the structure could vaporize the intact 70-80% of the towers below at free fall speed.


I love that song in the beginning "god bless america" great song. I have always known this was a controlled demolition its just i never could find the proove until weeks ago i see this video "911 Eyewitness" video, i must of seen this video hundreds of times and emailed it to all my friends.

I was thinking of doing my own 911 website, so the whole world could see what i have seen in the videos, the pictures and to proove that the us government are nothing but evil human beings brainwashing us all and trying to kill us all so they can make profit.



posted on Sep, 4 2006 @ 06:45 PM
link   
You know I liked the video also, but if you watch the part when the footage of WTC 7 coming down, you can hear the same "booms" that were heard & documented at numerous other points in the film. How can this be? I know this has been mentioned on another thread before. I'll see if I can find it, but take a listen again & tell me what you think. They are "NEVER" addressed in the video like other filter changes, etc. Wierd-



posted on Sep, 4 2006 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by pmexplorer

3. What do you (everyone) think of the helicopters bright flashes caught on the tape when they fly over the top of the towers? is this just a flash of light or is there another more sinister possibility? How come this has not (to my knowledge) been discussed on ATS previously?


I thought it was very evident that the flashes occured as the helecopter was coming in and out of view thru the smoke. That the flashes were sunlight reflections off the windows of the aircraft as it's course was perpendicular to the camera. At the end of the clip it comes out of the smoke & has taken a course which is almost directly away from the camera, and therefore the windows of the craft are facing away. . . They mentioned something about droping a line, but I didn't see that. It definately wasn't an "Independence Day" death ray or anything like that!

Plus- Why would they need to fly helecopters over the buildings to "trigger detonation sequence", or anything like that. Wireless digital systems can be triggered from great distances, and can be tested before hand with respect to signal strength & active communications with the remote units. How many high rise "line of sight" locations were there around the towers that could be utilized? I think the choppers were flying around blind with no concrete plan. It has been documented that the NYPD & FDNY were at odds with eachother how to handle the situation.



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 01:24 PM
link   
I didn't really take much notice of all that helicopter business. It was the explosions before the collapse and the large dust cloud coming from the bottom of the tower that was the interesting part.

Any suggestions on what could be causeing that dust cloud?




posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2PacSade
You know I liked the video also, but if you watch the part when the footage of WTC 7 coming down, you can hear the same "booms" that were heard & documented at numerous other points in the film. How can this be? I know this has been mentioned on another thread before. I'll see if I can find it, but take a listen again & tell me what you think. They are "NEVER" addressed in the video like other filter changes, etc. Wierd-


I never thought about sound evidence before. That is a line of questioning that hasn't been covered godamn!

The best evidence is the first-hand tapes that are straight from the camera like these...no conversion , streaming, transferring whatever technological mayhem going on. And you can really hear the explosions in that video....doesn't sound like a fire exstinguisher blowing up or "air bubbles in concrete exploding" OR BS like that, whatever the apologist swine turn out when they are all cranked up on patriotism and blood in the air, mainstream media news through a drip into the vein...

WHAT THE HELL IS THAT DUST CLOUD?



[edit on 14/9/2006 by earthtone]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 12:58 AM
link   
There was at least one vehicle heavily smoking at the base of the Towers. I've seen video of this before (not sure where you could find it now), and the smoke coming out of the car is cotton white. I also suspect I've seen it coming from at least two directions at the bases of the Towers, which is why I say "at least one vehicle." Reasons for these car fires, I've never seen.

I could easily see a situation here in which smoke is generated by some secondary source (a car, smoking for whatever reason) to cover-up from smoke coming from a more incriminating primary source (ie, thermite reactions at the bases of the core structures).



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 01:04 AM
link   
yup it is to be excepted that things would be smoking below. However the cloud is large, raising a fair way up the building, and the colour doesnt look quite white. It is a big cloud and doesn't seem like it would be from a car fire which would be black smoke right?

I just wonder if it had anything to do with the damage to the basement and what that was all about. If smoke was appearing from the bottom maybe it would support the claims that stuff was happening in the basement and lower, explosions and all that business, in some way part of the demolition process, to weaken the building for the final collapse.

[edit on 14/9/2006 by earthtone]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 01:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by earthtone
yup it is to be excepted that things would be smoking below. However the cloud is large, raising a fair way up the building, and the colour doesnt look quite white. It is a big cloud and doesn't seem like it would be from a car fire which would be black smoke right?


Right, a burning vehicle would in all likelihood be burning black and sooty, especially if the fire got to the gas tank, where there would be more than enough fuel for the flame. Not to mention there would probably be an obvious explosion. White smoke does not seem to be likely for a car fire, but is given off during thermite reactions, for one. And that cloud would be massive for a single car to be producing, aside from the above problems with that idea.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 02:43 AM
link   
I cant see how some smoke coming from somewhere? near bottom of the building would prove explosives were used when the building collapsed at the floor that was damaged.

I watched a doco the other night and they had a close up of the floor that was damaged by the jet liner,nothing at all looked suspicious at all,it appeared to simply give way at that point and consatina to the next floor downward,and nothing to sugest explosives were used.

If say for instance explosives were used,why then was it necessary to us planes as a decoy,simply blame the explosives on the terrorists


And vice versa,the planes were used factwhat was the purpose of explosives?why was it necassary(insert whoever you fancy) to bring them down?
added shock value? i disagree,it was shocking with the planes alone.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 02:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by gps777
I cant see how some smoke coming from somewhere? near bottom of the building would prove explosives were used when the building collapsed at the floor that was damaged.


there were reports of explosions in a sub basement level, this could have been the central core been "blown"? source

and reports of a 50 ton press "disapeering" link



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 03:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by solidshot
there were reports of explosions in a sub basement level, this could have been the central core been "blown"?

Thanks solidshot i apreiciate your reply.So just so i get this correct in my head,the core is blown repeatedly over time until sufficient damage as to cause the core to drop pulling the building down from the inside.Makes sense to me that in a building so large could be a way to destroy it into its own foot print.

What of the second tower(not sure which)where the top collapsed unevenly? and why would the floor that was hit mostly by the plane collapse first?if it mostly came down because of the core at the bottom being blown out?what would be the chances of getting that type of timing, it would have had to of been detonated after the collapse of that floor to make it appear it was due to the plane,how would they know how to significantly damage the core as to not destroy the building with the previous supposed explosives used.


and reports of a 50 ton press "disapeering" link

A 50 ton press,does`nt mean however it weighs 50 ton.



I`m not sure what this press has to do with all this? would`nt be the first time tradesmen nick other tradesmens tools or more it else where.

However even when i even entertain the idea that explosives were used and i dont have to entertain it very much with WT7 as it looks suspicious to me,i cant get passed why?



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 03:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by gps777
If say for instance explosives were used,why then was it necessary to us planes as a decoy,simply blame the explosives on the terrorists


well they tried that before when they last tried to blow up the wtc but unfortunately, the guy they were trying to set up got suspicious of their motives (he wanted to make a 'peaceful' protest by using a harmless white powder in the van & they wanted him to use real explosives). when it went to court, he used in defence evidence hours and hours of secret tapes he had made between himself and his fbi handlers which prove THEY provided him with the explosives.

besides, they wanted something more public, like the jfk assassination was as it affects the psyche a lot more.

i have also found audio evidence of explosions in a bbc documentary that was shown the other night. i have extracted the audio from it and put a link to the mp3 in my thread here



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 03:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by justyc
well they tried that before when they last tried to blow up the wtc but unfortunately, the guy they were trying to set up got suspicious of their motives (he wanted to make a 'peaceful' protest by using a harmless white powder in the van & they wanted him to use real explosives). when it went to court, he used in defence evidence hours and hours of secret tapes he had made between himself and his fbi handlers which prove THEY provided him with the explosives.

First time i`ve even heard of this justc,who`s they the US Gov?


besides, they wanted something more public, like the jfk assassination was as it affects the psyche a lot more.

I suppose thats a matter of opinion,i`m of the opinion the world was shocked enough by the planes slamming into buildings,if they wanted to use just that to further an agenda,i was sold.


i have also found audio evidence of explosions in a bbc documentary that was shown the other night. i have extracted the audio from it and put a link to the mp3 in my thread here

Cool i`ll have a listen,thanks justyc



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by gps777
What of the second tower(not sure which)where the top collapsed unevenly? and why would the floor that was hit mostly by the plane collapse first?if it mostly came down because of the core at the bottom being blown out?what would be the chances of getting that type of timing, it would have had to of been detonated after the collapse of that floor to make it appear it was due to the plane,how would they know how to significantly damage the core as to not destroy the building with the previous supposed explosives used.


The thing i have always wondered about this building, is if the top was toppaling (sp) off of the main core what caused the rest of it to fall? if the top was falling off to one side it can't have caused a "pancake" effect and by falling to one side surely would have been removeing weight and stress from the lower structure makeing it more likely to stay up rather than fall down?


Originally posted by gps777



and reports of a 50 ton press "disapeering" link

A 50 ton press,does`nt mean however it weighs 50 ton.



I`m not sure what this press has to do with all this? would`nt be the first time tradesmen nick other tradesmens tools or more it else where.


i may be wrong but from what i read i was under the impression that this press was significantly larger than the one shown, and the term 50 ton was being used in refernce to it's weight rather than it's pressing power on this occasion?

[edit on 14-9-2006 by solidshot]

[edit on 14-9-2006 by solidshot]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by gps777
First time i`ve even heard of this justc,who`s they the US Gov?


well, if you count the fbi as the us gov.

interesting. wikipedia has a few 'edits' on this story but luckily you can review the revisions - scroll to the bottom to read 'alleged fbi foreknowledge'

original wiki report

second revision

what it says now



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 04:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by solidshot
The thing i have always wondered about this building, is if the top was toppaling (sp) off of the main core what caused the rest of it to fall? if the top was falling off to one side it can't have caused a "pancake" effect and by falling to one side surely would have been removeing weight and stress from the lower structure makeing it more likely to stay up rather than fall down?

I dont want to come off as one who thinks he`s an expert but also feel nobody could be an expert on this event it was unprecedented and the scale of damage done by the force of the plane and the fire internally unknown,when that particular floor gave way even tilting would still be tremendous on the following floors below it.

I have seen footage of that tilting top was slowly sliding off of centre the more it went down,and from memory(years ago of the footage)was approx half the width of the tower over centre before it disappeared into the dust.What that means if anything i have no idea.


i may be wrong but from what i read i was under the impression that this press was significantly larger than the one shown, and the term 50 ton was being used in refernce to it's weight rather than it's pressing power on this occasion?

A press weighing 50 ton is quite a size,what would they need a monster like that for in the bowels of the tower?

Presses i know can be a bender for sheetmetal or fly presses for for punching in mass production work i`ve worked with some large ones at a guess 20 ton weight fly press would have been the largest and it stood about 15 foot high.Largest bender 6 metres long approx 10 feet high a guess ten ton weight.These being in large factories.So i`m puzzled if the press was 50 ton and in the towers basement for what?and disappeared,and it it did? what significance would this have with explosives?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join