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.

 

Nice footage of skyscraper demolision..

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cool Hand Luke
It is not a fact. They have none of the characteristics of a CD.
Just to clarify, what are the characteristics of a CD?


I don't know why you don't know these characteristics since you have watched Richard Gage's presentation. He can do a better job of explaining these things than I, but you say none, I say all, so let's run through them. (taken from 9/11: Blueprint for Truth)

-Direct evidence of explosives. Which include the following:
--All columns on a floor are cut at once
--Sounds produced by explosions
--Rapid on-set of destruction at the base
--Dust clouds: thick, billowing and enormous (pulverized concrete)
--Evidence of cutter charges
--Squibs: explosive cutting charges visible upper floors
--Demolition waves remove column support

-Free-fall speed of collapse
-Straight down symmetrical collapse into footprint
-Government documentation
-Expert corroboration
-Foreknowledge of collapse
-Video documentation

-Shows no typical characteristics of destruction by fire

In the case of the Twin Towers, a few things change since it was brought down from the top(which had never been done before in a CD).

-Rapid on-set of destruction not at the base, but from the "plane"(I say missile) impacts.
-Straight down symmetrical collapse not into own footprint, but outside footprint
-All columns on a floor are cut at once. They are cut, then blown latterly.

I will not show the evidence of those characteristics for WTC7 because we're on the subject of the Twin Towers. You can find the evidence that shows all those characteristics for WTC7 on Gage's site: www.ae911truth.org...

Some of these we have already covered.

-All columns on a floor are cut at once. They are cut, then blown latterly.
This one is obvious, but here's some pictures:




--Sounds produced by explosions
I've mentioned one witness. Secondary explosions were mentioned all over the news on 9/11, but never after. There are many witness accounts of explosions which are not hard to find if you search. Again, do watch the Naudet film as many of these explosions can be heard. Pay close attention when they first go inside the lobby. Note the windows are shattered and panels blown off the walls. The fire from the initial attack could not have traveled 90 stories through the elevator shafts. It would have simply run out of oxygen.

-Rapid on-set of destruction not at the base, but from the "plane" impacts.
Can clearly be seen in all the videos. Notice the pulverized concrete only seconds into the collapses.

--Dust clouds: thick, billowing and enormous (pulverized concrete)
That is very obvious. I don't think I need to say anymore.

--Evidence of cutter charges
Angled cuts:


--Squibs: explosive cutting charges visible upper floors
I'll get into squibs in my next reply since you asked to show proof of their symmetry.

--Demolition waves remove column support


Here's a picture to compare:


-Free-fall speed of collapse
Something else we have been talking about. It's very close to free-fall speeds.

-Straight down symmetrical collapse not into own footprint, but outside footprint
Certainly straight down and symmetrical.

Continued below...




posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:15 AM
link   
-Expert corroboration
Many experts have retracted their statements about CD.
Matthys Levy
Van Romero
Mike Taylor
Ronald Hamburger

911research.wtc7.net...

-Foreknowledge of collapse
Mayor Giuliani was told:
www.youtube.com...

-Video documentation
No comment needed.

-Shows no typical characteristics of destruction by fire
Yup, certainly doesn't.

That's all but the government documentation and that's something everyone is looking for.

So how many of those characteristics do we see with the Twin Towers' collapse? All except for the one.

Now I'll reply to your other replies.


I started to realize to believe these theories you have believe that tons of explosives were put into that building with nobody saying anything or anybody noticing... All the flashes happened after the had started collapsing...


First, I just want to say that is the reason behind most people not believing the CD hypothesis. It is hard to believe that not as many people said anything, but maybe they did. Over 2700 people were in those buildings when they collapsed, if those people were alive today wonder what they knew before 9/11? Some people have came forward and mentioned construction work going on, the very obvious dust in the buildings and a few other things. Ace Elevator was working on the elevators during the 9 months prior to 9/11. The core columns were directly accessible via the elevator shafts. The buildings were accessible.

www.youtube.com...

About the flashes. Most flashes in a CD occur during the collapse itself. Most of the explosives would be planted on the core columns and could not be seen. The flashes we do see in the videos are exactly like the ones we see in known CD(very brief). You have to remember that this was not just a standard CD, it was highly controlled and very precise. Meaning they could have planted the explosives in a manner which not very many flashes can be seen. Also, the pulverized concrete can also block our view of flashes.


Why do we not see molten metal spewing from more locations other than the one and only spot which just happens to be where a good portion of the aluminum plane wreckage was?


I do not want to get into a debate about planes here because this is about CD, but there is a lot of evidence showing planes never impacted those buildings. But for the sake of agreement, I'll go along with the plane impacts and I will agree that we only see the molten metal pouring from that location. Again, I have to emphasize this was most likely highly controlled so they could have planted the explosives in key locations to keep us from seeing the prep work being done in videos. Those things are irreverent in my opinion, as the collapses themselves are the most damning evidence.


And in fact you do see it. Again compare the debris falling to the rest of the building.


Compare the debris to the rest of the building? Why? It completely collapsed in about 10 seconds. Hell, even if we give a little and say it collapsed in 15 seconds, that's still no where enough resistance to prove the pancake theory.


They are not symmetrical.


I don't think you understand what I mean by symmetrical. What I'm trying to get at here is the squibs are in the centers, on all visible sides of the building. I don't need to post any videos to show this, as the symmetry can be seen in any video in which squibs can be seen.


You are talking about the puffs of smoke that came out after the building started collapsing but were a few floors down from where the collapse was happening.


Few floors? Try 20 floors or more! Richard Gage says 40, but personally, I haven't seen any proof of that, yet.

Continued below...


[edit on 18-8-2008 by Niobis]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:15 AM
link   

By the way this is also another reason not to believe the CD theory. If explosives were used, should we not see uniform "squibs" all around the building and on each floor?


We do! That's what I've been trying to explain to you.


There are many things that could have exploded or sound like explosions like the elevators crashing, jet fuel falling into lower floors, transformers exploding, generators exploding, and just pieces of concrete crashing.


I won't comment on the jet fuel because of my opinion on that matter, but would a transformer or generator exploding cause a tripod to shake like this(given the distance of the camera)?

www.youtube.com...


Why are all the flashes after the building has started to collapse? Why were none seen to initiate the collapse?


As I mentioned earlier, the explosives set off to initiate collapse would be on the core columns, and we can't see the core, obviously. Refer to the above video. What could cause the tripod to shake? Of course if someone hit the tripod, but look closely, something falls off the building.


Yes many people saw molten metal. But what does that have to do with thermite or thermate?


Please, by all means explain why we would see molten metal or steel if thermate wasn't used?


Now imagine concrete crashing down from 70 stories up along with thousands of tons of steel with it.


Hmm...that video works against you. I see chunks of concrete left over, and none of it was pulverized. The dust is from the ground, not the block. I wonder what would have happened if that was reinforced with steel? I assume it wouldn't pulverize into dust.


Really? Care to prove that?


Yes, I do. I've spent the last 2-3 hours typing my reply so I'm not going to search for answers, do the math and everything else needed to prove that. I'll just simply say, I can't prove that claim and I am only speculating.



The lighter material will be pushed out and upwards.


Material cannot defy gravity unless there's another factor involved. Further, you said out and upward, but it was up then outward. That can only be explained with explosives.


The very people that do CD for a living? Here are their thoughts on why it is not a controlled demolition.


Van Romero is a CD expert too, so why did he first say it was CD and then later retract his statement? Along with the other experts, I'd say he was threatened.

Phew, that took a while.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 05:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Niobis

-Direct evidence of explosives. Which include the following:
--All columns on a floor are cut at once


Proof that this happened on 9/11?


--Sounds produced by explosions


Again this is lacking on 9/11. Did you not watch the videos I posted earlier and compare them to CDs? I thought you said you watched the Naudet films.


The fire from the initial attack could not have traveled 90 stories through the elevator shafts. It would have simply run out of oxygen.


So you are saying liquid jet fuel cannot flow down elevator shafts?



---Rapid on-set of destruction not at the base, but from the "plane" impacts.


Yes well that is where one might expect to see a collapse begin; at the point where the structure has been significantly weakened.


Can clearly be seen in all the videos. Notice the pulverized concrete only seconds into the collapses.


Yes I'm glad that you noticed it starts after the collapse. Again how many thousands of tons of pressure are put on these materials? How about all the drywall on each of those floors.


but from the "plane"(I say missile) impacts.


Really? So all the video evidence of a plane hitting the towers is compromised somehow? How about all those witnesses? Are they all lying? Do they not now what a plane looks like? How about the member on ats who saw a plane hit the towers as in this thread. Are you calling him a liar?


--Dust clouds: thick, billowing and enormous (pulverized concrete)


Now go back to the videos I posted earlier or any video of a CD for that matter. Do the dust clouds happen because of the explosives or because of the immense energy caused by the weight of the buildings collapsing on themselves? Remember in a CD all they are doing is using charges to cut the steel beams to weaken them.


--Evidence of cutter charges


None. And if you are referring to this picture as proof of that, then boy oh boy you are not going to like this.

Find me a picture like that is not post cleanup.


-Straight down symmetrical collapse not into own footprint, but outside footprint


I am not sure if you are arguing that it did or did not fall into its own footprint with that statement. BTW gravity pulls down and it did not fall into its own footprint as you can see from the pics of damage to other buildings.


-All columns on a floor are cut at once. They are cut, then blown latterly.


That is quite a theory. But again where is the debris supposed to go? Inwards? When you have a 30 story section acting as a piledriver where is the debris supposed to go? Take another look at your pics.





Also go back to the close up vids I posted earlier that show the initial floors collapsing. Or here's another one that includes your "symmetrical" "squibs".



--Demolition waves remove column support


Here's a picture to compare:


First image doesn't work. Demolition waves? All I see is the top section of the building collapsing on the floors where the plane did damage and pushing the debris outwards.


-Free-fall speed of collapse
Something else we have been talking about. It's very close to free-fall speeds.


Yes do please time any video yourself where you get a clear view from top to bottom and time it yourself.

For the rest of the physics and information why it was not a CD and refutes all of Richard Gage's and Steven Jones' claims I will refer to you to this site.

That site goes into extensive detail on each of your claims and many others and deals with quotes that are taken out of context and sometimes just pulled out of Dr. Jones' and Richard Gage's a$$.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cool Hand Luke
So you are saying liquid jet fuel cannot flow down elevator shafts?

Please provide your estimate, or your reasoned calculation for how much jet fuel you claim flowed down elevator shafts.

Speculation, without numbers, is pointless.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cool Hand Luke
Really? So all the video evidence of a plane hitting the towers is compromised somehow? How about all those witnesses? Are they all lying? Do they not now what a plane looks like? How about the member on ats who saw a plane hit the towers as in this thread. Are you calling him a liar?


I will reply to all your replies later. In the mean time, I ask you to read the entire thread about witnesses of "planes" you linked to. There are many problems with all the videos, and the witness accounts cover a wide variety of aircraft, from airbuses to missiles. I posted information about missiles and even a video showing something other than the "plane" hitting the South Tower.

If you disagree or can prove otherwise, we'll talk about it there.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by Cool Hand Luke
So you are saying liquid jet fuel cannot flow down elevator shafts?

Please provide your estimate, or your reasoned calculation for how much jet fuel you claim flowed down elevator shafts.

Speculation, without numbers, is pointless.


My comment was in response to him saying there was no way fires could spread 90 stories down.


"When I walked out into the lobby, it was incredible," he recalled. "The whole lobby was soot and black, elevator doors were missing. The marble was missing off some of the walls. 20-foot section of marble, 20 by 10 foot sections of marble, gone from the walls". The west windows were all gone. They were missing. These are tremendous windows. They were just gone. Broken glass everywhere, the revolving doors were all broken and their glass was gone. Every sprinkler head was going off. I am thinking to myself, how are these sprinkler heads going off? It takes a lot of heat to set off a sprinkler head. It never dawned on me that there was a giant fireball that came through the air of the lobby. I never knew that until later on. The jet fuel actually came down the elevator shaft, blew off all the (elevator) doors and flames rolled through the lobby. That explained all the burnt people and why everything was sooted in the lobby."

snip...

...the room they were working in began to fill with a white smoke. “We smelled kerosene,” Mike recalled, “I was thinking maybe a car fire was upstairs”...


Mike Pecoraro's Account

63rd floor North tower


Paul Neal: Almost immediately after the impact, somewhat bizarrely, I smelled an overwhelming stench of aviation fuel, Jet A1 gas, which I recognized because I'm a private pilot and I'm used to airfield environments. I recall smelling it and almost instantly dismissed it as being illogical and didn't have any place in the World Trade Center.


Source

50th floor North tower

By the time they got to about the 50th floor, United Airlines Flight 175 had slammed into the south tower of the World Trade Center, something he wouldn't know about until later.

Instead, the smell of kerosene was getting stronger and soon he felt people bumping into him as Roselle, Frank and he continued downstairs. The problem was, the people bumping into him were going the wrong way. "I heard applause and was told they were firefighters," he said. "I clapped a few on the back, but I was scared for where they were going."


30th Floor North tower


Jen Murawski: "At 8:46am, the 1st plane flew into the north tower, my building. My co-workers and I escaped by descending 30 flights of stairs through jet fuel fumes and water."


Lobby & 3rd floor North Tower


Firefighter Peter Blaich
As we got to the third floor of the B stairway, we forced open an elevator door which was burnt on all three sides. The only thing that was remaining was the hoistway door. And inside the elevator were about I didnt recognize them initially, but a guy from 1 Truck said oh my God, those are people. They were pretty incinerated. And I remember the overpowering smell of kerosene. Thats when Lieutenant Foti said oh, thats the jet fuel. I remember it smelled like if youre camping and you drop a kerosene lamp.

The same thing happened to the elevators in the main lobby. They were basically blown out. I dont recall if I actually saw people in there.
What got me initially in the lobby was that as soon as we went in, all the windows were blown out, and there were one or two burning cars outside. And there were burn victims on the street there, walking around. We walked through this giant blown-out window into the lobby.


Source

Lobby


As he waited for orders, Meldrum, the chauffeur (Fire engine driver), noticed that all windows in the high lobby were blown out. Glass and marble from busted walls littered the floors, crunched underfoot. He caught an occasional whiff of jet fuel, a smell like kerosene, wafting from elevator shafts. On the floor by the elevators he saw burned people.


Source

I think you're getting the idea.

Many more accounts of jet fuel and elevators falling here










[edit on 18-8-2008 by Cool Hand Luke]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Niobis

I will reply to all your replies later. In the mean time, I ask you to read the entire thread about witnesses of "planes" you linked to. There are many problems with all the videos,


How do you explain the damage done to the building after the planes hitting them exactly matching the planes that all the videos show and thousands of witnesses describe?


and the witness accounts cover a wide variety of aircraft, from airbuses to missiles.


I agree. Nobody was expecting planes to hit the towers that day so I think we can forgive people for not paying attention enough. I do realize that not everyone is an expert on planes but the vast majority saw a normal looking passenger jet that hit the towers.

You have no evidence of missiles or any other aircraft for that matter.


If you disagree or can prove otherwise, we'll talk about it there.

I won't bother as this claim that planes did not hit the buildings is completely and utterly rediculous.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Niobis

-Foreknowledge of collapse
Mayor Giuliani was told:
www.youtube.com...



An engineer from the Department of Buildings reported that the structural damage appeared to be immense. The stability of both buildings was compromised. In particular, the engineer was worried about how long the north tower would stand.
Page 203
“102 Minutes”, Jim Dwyer and Kevin Flynn



As I was walking towards the Fire command post, I found Steve Mosiello. I said, Steve, where's the boss? I have to give him a message. He said, well, what's the message? I said the buildings are going to collapse; we need to evac everybody out. With a very confused look he said who told you that? I said I was just with John at OEM. OEM says the buildings are going to collapse; we need to get out.

He escorted me over to Chief Ganci. He said, hey, Pete, we got a message that the buildings are going to collapse. His reply was who the f### told you that? Then Steve brought me in and with Chief Ganci, Commissioner Feehan, Steve, I believe Chief Turi was initially there, I said, listen, I was just at OEM. The message I was given was that the buildings are going to collapse; we need to get our people out. At that moment, this thunderous, rolling roar came down and that's when the building came down, the first tower came down.


Source


My Thayer School engineering training came back, and I realized that with that intensity of heat in a building in which the steel girders were insulated with asbestos, it had to collapse within one hour. I called the fire department, police, etc. and told them the building was guaranteed to collapse


Source


Approximately 40 minutes after I arrived in the lobby, I made a decision that the building was no longer safe. And that was based on the conditions in the lobby, large pieces of plaster falling, all the 20 foot high glass panels on the exterior of the lobby were breaking. There was obvious movement of the building, and that was the reason on the handy talky I gave the order for all Fire Department units to leave the north tower.


Source


I received a radio transmission from FDNY Captain Joe Folino, an OEM responder, who informed me that the Mayor had requested that I join him and Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik at 75 Barclay Street, where they were establishing a temporary executive command center. I left the North Tower lobby and went to Barclay Street.

In addition to the Mayor and the Police Commissioner, several Deputy Mayors and Senior City Hall staff were at the command post. The Mayor was on the phone with the White House, and had been told the White House was being evacuated. Suddenly, the building began to shake, and someone yelled the towers were coming down. We could hear the roar of the building collapsing, and then there was silence and darkness.

FORMER COMMISSIONER OF THE NEW YORK CITY
OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
RICHARD J. SHEIRER


Source


From there Giuliani, needing phone lines, commandeered a Merrill Lynch back office at 75 Barclay Street. After 45 minutes someone yelled, "Get down! It’s coming down!" The force of the collapse flattened the building across the street,


Source


...Lhota says. “We got through to the governor’s office and peppered them with questions: Is this terrorism? Are more planes on the way? Are the airports closed? Should we close the tunnels? The mayor also wanted to talk to the White House. As I handed him the phone, saying, ‘Vice President Cheney is about to get on the line,’ a police official ran in yelling, ‘Get down! Everybody get down! It’s coming down!’ ”


Source

Yes engineers and firemen did warn that the Tower would collapse based on their expertise. Would you not warn the Mayor and everyone you could to get them out of there?

All these and more found at www.911myths.com


[edit on 18-8-2008 by Cool Hand Luke]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Cool Hand Luke
 


Which one of those random quotes specifically states the quantity of alleged jet fuel that fell down the elevator shafts?

Those quotes are hearsay. None of them provide an accurate amount of falling jet fuel.

Also, if you don't mind, please show me which alleged planes allegedly hit the towers using forensic evidence and serial numbers. You're making the claim that two planes hit the towers, so that should be an easy response for you. Confirmed serial numbers, please.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Which one of those random quotes specifically states the quantity of alleged jet fuel that fell down the elevator shafts?


None and I never said I could give exact figures of jet fuel falling down 90 stories to start fires. Why are so worried about the quantity of how much fuel fell down? Many eyewitness accounts show that smelled a strong odor of kerosene and yes even in the lobby.


Those quotes are hearsay. None of them provide an accurate amount of falling jet fuel.


So let me get this straight. Your line of thinking is that because the people running for lives did not stop to take a measure of how much fuel there was in the area negates the fact that it was present?

Are you calling these people liars? Are they "in on it"?


Also, if you don't mind, please show me which alleged planes allegedly hit the towers using forensic evidence and serial numbers. You're making the claim that two planes hit the towers, so that should be an easy response for you. Confirmed serial numbers, please.









Air France flight 358 didn't hit a steel building at 500 miles an hour. It didn't even burn the fuel in the wings, yet its aluminum skin melted to the ground. It simply went off the runway and caught fire. What melted the airliner was its contents, like seats, clothing and other combustibles including chemical oxygen generators. It's not unreasonable to conclude the airliner and contents didn't even need the contents of the building to melt. Yet the NIST replicated the fires by burning office furniture in a controlled experiment and found the ceiling temperature to reach 1,100 degrees C. (They say "Yeah but that's the ceiling" to which I say "Now imagine what the actual flame is.. Do you think it's cooler?") More than enough to melt aircraft aluminum as well.


Source

Now imagine that plane hitting a building and the whole plane on fire including the wings and had shattered into much smaller pieces. Exactly how much evidence are you looking for?



Not every part is stamped with a serial number but I will try to find you proof of identification later.

For the moment go here and reflect on the photos of found wreckage from flight 11




[edit on 18-8-2008 by Cool Hand Luke]

[edit on 18-8-2008 by Cool Hand Luke]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cool Hand Luke
None and I never said I could give exact figures of jet fuel falling down 90 stories to start fires. Why are so worried about the quantity of how much fuel fell down? Many eyewitness accounts show that smelled a strong odor of kerosene and yes even in the lobby.

Your argument dies a death right there. If you can't give an accurate figure for jet fuel falling down the elevators, then how do you know that any of it fell at all? Was it 1 gallon, maybe 100 gallons, maybe 1000? You have no idea. You can't claim any effects of jet fuel as an ignition source in the lobby, when you don't know how much of it allegedly fell down the elevator shafts, or which shafts it allegedly fell down.

Eyewitnesses smelt kerosene - so? How many of them reported seeing and hearing gushing streams of jet fuel down the elevator shafts? None!



Not every part is stamped with a serial number but I will try to find you proof of identification later.

Cool Hand Luke, I asked you for confirmed pieces of debris that match, by serial number, the airframes of the alleged planes used in the attacks.

All you did was give me a link to a site showing pictures of unidentified pieces of scrap metal. Again, from which alleged planes did that scrap metal come from? Prove it.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cool Hand Luke
Proof that this happened on 9/11?


I've already showed you proof of that. What will it take for some people to see these things? Do we expect George Bush to come on TV and say "my fellow Americans, on September 11, 2001 your government attacked you. We placed explosives inside the Twin Towers and murdered 3000 people. Terrorism is a lie. I will resign from office and release a paper with all the names involved in the attacks." ??

I don't think that is gonna happen!


Ask yourself this simple question about both collapses, does this look like an explosive force or a gravitational force? The answer is staring you right in the face! It's up to you to open your eyes and see.



Look at this closeup video. You can see the corner of the North Tower being blown out! Gravity cannot do that as quick as seen.

www.youtube.com...


Again this is lacking on 9/11. Did you not watch the videos I posted earlier and compare them to CDs? I thought you said you watched the Naudet films.


No, they was not 'lacking' on 9/11. Your lacking to see(or hear) because you don't want to. I did watch the Naudet film and I've been trying to get you to watch it also. Explosives can clearly be heard! They do not mention them, but watch the reaction of the firefighters. Some of them are startled and jump when the explosions occur.

There are literally hundreds of witness accounts, including medical response, firefighters, ect. that report the explosions.


So you are saying liquid jet fuel cannot flow down elevator shafts?


My opinion on that matter is different from yours, but let's say jet fuel did travel down the elevator shafts. By the time it reached the lobby, what could ignite it to blow the door off the elevator, the windows in the lobby and panels off the walls? It simply wouldn't have enough force behind it after traveling that far to blow panels off the wall, which may I remind you, those panels were not near the elevators.


Yes well that is where one might expect to see a collapse begin; at the point where the structure has been significantly weakened.


Wrong! With the North Tower collapse, about 15-20 floors are dropped before the rest of the building starts dropping. That violates the official theory of pancake collapse. Plain and simple, my friend.


Again how many thousands of tons of pressure are put on these materials? How about all the drywall on each of those floors.


Key word: "pulverized". I don't need to say anymore.


Do the dust clouds happen because of the explosives or because of the immense energy caused by the weight of the buildings collapsing on themselves?


They happen because 90,000 tons of concrete were pulverized into dust no larger than a human hair. Some of the dust reached NJ. The dust clouds themselves prove CD. Again, refer to the video you posted earlier where 3500 lbs. of concrete are dropped. Do we see any pulverized concrete? Absolutely not.


None. And if you are referring to this picture external image as proof of that, then boy oh boy you are not going to like this.


Actually, I like that video because it works against you. Thank you for posting it. Note the guy near the end pointing out the cuts-they are not 45 degree angled cuts. The "similarities" they we're supposed to note, I do not see any similarities between Ground Zero and those beams. Also, note the slag as it speaks for itself. They used oxy-acetylene torches at Ground Zero, which are fairly clean cutting torches.

en.wikipedia.org...:Railway-cutting-2-a.jpg

[edit on 18-8-2008 by Niobis]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cool Hand Luke
I am not sure if you are arguing that it did or did not fall into its own footprint with that statement.


Obviously, it did not fall into its own footprint. It fell outside its footprint because destruction was from the top, down. Gravity would not hurl 20 ton steel beams 500 feet. Again I will ask, how do you explain the columns being individualized?


When you have a 30 story section acting as a piledriver where is the debris supposed to go?


Please, please show me these piledrivers you speak of. As I mentioned earlier, with the North Tower, about 15-20 floors were dropped before the rest of the building started to collapse. The "piledriver" doesn't exist. As for the South Tower's piledriver, hey look, it's starts falling away from the rest of the building, but then somehow magically violates The Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum.


Also go back to the close up vids I posted earlier that show the initial floors collapsing.


Emphasis added.

See, you're getting there, just open your eyes a little wider and you'll have the rest.


Demolition waves?


I reposted the first image above. Yes, demolition waves. Note the straightness of those waves. Both collapses feature demolition waves. Again, compare them to the other picture of a known CD.


How do you explain the damage done to the building after the planes hitting them exactly matching the planes that all the videos show and thousands of witnesses describe?


Again, I do not want to get into a debate about planes here because this is about CD. If you want to dispute planes or no planes post in the other thread and I'll respond there.

As for the the damage that looks like a plane hit the building, that was accomplished with explosives. The Naudet footage of the North Tower attack and the "live" NBC footage of the South Tower attack clearly shows us how those holes were created.


Yes engineers and firemen did warn that the Tower would collapse based on their expertise. Would you not warn the Mayor and everyone you could to get them out of there?


No steel framed building has ever collapsed because of fire. There was absolutely no indication those buildings were going to collapse other than someone knew they had explosives inside. Firemen most likely thought the damn thing was going to collapse because they continuously heard explosions all over the building. Ever think of that? If you were in a building and heard explosions, wouldn't you say the building is not safe and get out?

This quote from you is about planes, I know but...

Exactly how much evidence are you looking for?


Exactly how much evidence of CD are you ignoring?



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Niobis

Ask yourself this simple question about both collapses, does this look like an explosive force or a gravitational force?


Gravitational force


The answer is staring you right in the face!


Here is your answer Whoops wrong one. Fixed now (thats what I get for having 20 pages open at once :p)




Doesn't work


Look at this closeup video. You can see the corner of the North Tower being blown out! Gravity cannot do that as quick as seen.

www.youtube.com...


Thank you for that video. You underestimate gravity and force

Again why aren't there any "charges" going off before the collapse?


Explosives can clearly be heard! They do not mention them, but watch the reaction of the firefighters. Some of them are startled and jump when the explosions occur.


Did you or did you not watch the movie. They clearly explained the "explosions" as people who had jumped to their death. Also there were fires in that building so naturally windows will fall. Also debris that was falling off from where the airplanes hit.


There are literally hundreds of witness accounts, including medical response, firefighters, ect. that report the explosions.


I agree. Here is a list of their quotes in context and in full

More here


By the time it reached the lobby, what could ignite it to blow the door off the elevator, the windows in the lobby and panels off the walls?


Fires are not static and there are any number of things that could have ignited the fuel including an elevator that falls and crashes causing sparks for which there is evidence of.


It simply wouldn't have enough force behind it after traveling that far to blow panels off the wall, which may I remind you, those panels were not near the elevators.


How sure are you of that?
May I remind you that when you have a sealed floor in a building and explosion goes off, the pressure has to go somewhere. Hence the panels and windows being blown out.


Wrong! With the North Tower collapse, about 15-20 floors are dropped before the rest of the building starts dropping. That violates the official theory of pancake collapse. Plain and simple, my friend.


Did you just read what you just wrote? The first sentence you typed there is the pancake collapse




Do the dust clouds happen because of the explosives or because of the immense energy caused by the weight of the buildings collapsing on themselves?



They happen because 90,000 tons of concrete were pulverized into dust no larger than a human hair. Some of the dust reached NJ. The dust clouds themselves prove CD.


Refer to this www.911myths.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">link


Actually, I like that video because it works against you. Thank you for posting it. Note the guy near the end pointing out the cuts-they are not 45 degree angled cuts.


WOW. Listen to the man in the helicopter again.



Also, note the slag as it speaks for itself. They used oxy-acetylene torches at Ground Zero, which are fairly clean cutting torches.

en.wikipedia.org...:Railway-cutting-2-a.jpg


You mean this picture?
Your telling me you can't see slag in this picture?


Have you by any chance ever used an oxy-acetylene torch? I have. I worked in a welding shop for 4.5 years and I can tell you those beams were cut with oxy-acytelene torches.

Will continue later...



[edit on 18-8-2008 by Cool Hand Luke]

[edit on 18-8-2008 by Cool Hand Luke]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cool Hand Luke
Gravitational force


With that statement, I can see we're getting nowhere. You can't even see that 20+ ton beams being ejected 500 feet is an explosive force. When did gravity become so strong on Earth?

Let me ask you something else, why do you think people started thinking the collapses were a CD? Is it because they resemble a CD? Probably so. Is it because the collapses can only be fully explained by CD? Probably so. Gravitational collapses do not resemble CD, they are an entirely different collapse and have different characteristics.


Here is your answer

lol, yes it is. Did you even read that article?


The official explanation that the Twin Tower collapses were gravity-driven events appears insufficient to account for the documented energy flows.



Doesn't work

Both links work fine for me. I'll try a different host.



Again why aren't there any "charges" going off before the collapse?


Actually they do, and I've already showed you proof of that, also. Remember the video in which the tripod shakes before the North Tower's collapse? Here's another one that shows the explosions before the collapse:

www.youtube.com...


They clearly explained the "explosions" as people who had jumped to their death.


Yes, they do, but I wasn't referring to that part of the film. Later on, you can see one of the firemen jump as you hear a loud explosion. The sound is much different than the ones heard earlier. Also, since the subject has arose, why do suspect people were jumping from the buildings? Could it be because of the explosives? In my opinion, yes. We can only speculate on that matter, though.


I agree.

Then why have you been arguing "this is lacking on 9/11"? You're contradicting yourself.


May I remind you that when you have a sealed floor in a building and explosion goes off, the pressure has to go somewhere.


Again, refer to the Naudet film while they are inside the North Tower. Did you happen to notice how far away the elevators were from those windows and panels. With your explanation, that "plane" must have been carrying a lot of fuel. *Sigh*


Did you just read what you just wrote? The first sentence you typed there is the pancake collapsep


No, you're misinformed, and again you have contradicted yourself. The top floors of the North Tower were supposed to be the "piledriver" crushing the rest of the building. Instead, they collapsed and then the rest of the building follows. Hence, no "piledriver".


Listen to the man in the helicopter again.

I don't understand what you're trying to point out here.


Your telling me you can't see slag in this picture?

I see the slag, but nowhere near as much as I do on the angled cut in the picture of Ground Zero. Where's all the slag from the cuts shown in the video you posted?

Yes, I have used oxy-acetylene torches, and I say it wasn't cut with an oxy-acetylene torch. It's too straight and perfectly angled to be cut by hand. Look at the obvious differences between the cuts in the video and the cut in the picture.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Niobis

With that statement, I can see we're getting nowhere. You can't even see that 20+ ton beams being ejected 500 feet is an explosive force. When did gravity become so strong on Earth?


Again I refer you to this paper


Let me ask you something else, why do you think people started thinking the collapses were a CD? Is it because they resemble a CD? Probably so. Is it because the collapses can only be fully explained by CD? Probably so.


No I disagree. While initially without looking at many videos at all sure it might look like a CD but there is no evidence of it happening. Gravity is perfectly capable of explaining what happened that day.


Gravitational collapses do not resemble CD, they are an entirely different collapse and have different characteristics.


Does gravity not pull down? Does it pull sideways? No it doesn't and when you have a critical failure of 2-3 floors(depending on who you listen to) thats 20-35 feet that a massive weight falls with little resistance because of the damage that the planes and the fires did.


lol, yes it is. Did you even read that article?


My apologies, I meant to link this one

Oh and by the way that link that you quoted is being revised. Read the top. That was also a third iteration on the same subject.


With your explanation, that "plane" must have been carrying a lot of fuel. *Sigh*


Yeah those planes are a thorn in your side
I mean if it wasn't for them you could make a claim. But it is a fact two planes hit those towers that day.


No, you're misinformed,


Thanks for letting me know. Now I can go on and live my life.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Niobis
Let me ask you something else, why do you think people started thinking the collapses were a CD? Is it because they resemble a CD? Probably so.


Not according to the professionals at im implosionworld.com:

implosionworld.com...

They seem to cover every question you have brought up.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 11:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cool Hand Luke
But it is a fact two planes hit those towers that day.

No, Cool Hand Luke, it's far from being a fact.

Despite me asking, you can't make a positive ID on the alleged planes that were allegedly used to hit the towers. You have not shown me one piece of alleged wreckage that has been confirmed, by serial numbers, as belonging to AA11 or UA175.

You better be careful about what you claim as fact.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cool Hand Luke
Again I refer you to this paper

I have not finished reading the entire thing, but I will. Thank you.


but there is no evidence of it happening. Gravity is perfectly capable of explaining what happened that day.


You can't say "no evidence" because for the past 2-3 days I've been presenting evidence to you. Flashes, sounds, rapid collapse, squibs, individualized beams, experts that say it looks like a CD, foreknowledge of collapse-those are all characteristics of a CD. Gravity on Earth does not individualize steel beams or cause 110-story buildings to completely collapse leaving pools of molten steel in the basements. I could maybe believe it if it only happened once, but it happened twice in one day. Something the world has never seen before or after. And there have been many planes crash into many buildings, but those buildings are still standing.

The 9/11 Commission, FEMA or NIST cannot fully explain the collapses with fire and gravity alone. Neither of the three have looked at CD(although I'm positive they know), which can and would fully explain these collapses.

No matter if you say "no evidence", or I say "all evidence", could we both agree a new investigation needs to be conducted?


Does it pull sideways? No it doesn't

Again, it seems to me you are contradicting yourself. Maybe you want to explain that another way?


My apologies, I meant to link this one

That, along with the other are long papers, so it will take me a while to read them. When I finish, I will post my opinion on them.


Yeah those planes are a thorn in your side

No, they are not "a thorn in my side". Note the emphasis of "a lot". It is my opinion and belief that planes were not involved in any 9/11 attack.


But it is a fact two planes hit those towers that day.

No, that is not a fact either. As I mentioned earlier, if you want to discuss planes and no planes find a thread talking about planes and we'll debate the issue. I have all the "plane" videos on my computer and everyone of them has a problem that I can and will point out. Also as mentioned earlier, there is a video showing something other than the (fake) "plane" hitting the South Tower. If you want to watch that video I posted a link to it in the thread about witnesses you linked earlier.


Thanks for letting me know. Now I can go on and live my life.


You're welcome.




top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join