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 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?
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.
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.
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?
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-
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?
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.
Originally posted by solidshot
there were reports of explosions in a sub basement level, this could have been the central core been "blown"?
and reports of a 50 ton press "disapeering" 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
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.
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
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.
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.
Originally posted by gps777
First time i`ve even heard of this justc,who`s they the US Gov?
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 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?