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.

 

What happened to the top 20 floors of the WTC?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 08:00 AM
link   
I've been re-watching some of the 9/11 documentaries lately, and there is one question that don't seem to get asked, let alone answered. Why did the floors above the impact zone pulverize just like the rest of the towers?

Most people who believe the pancake theory claim that the weight of the top 20 floors brought down the towers, but by this logic the top floors should have hit the ground quite intact.

If you watch the videos of the collapse you can see the top floors tip over and fall down as the floors below are pulverized, it then dissappears in the smoke and about half a second later it emerges from the smoke but this time it is completely pulverized! How can this be if there were no explosives? I could accept it if it broke into some larger pieces, but the top 20 floors completely pulverize as well! What force could have done this?

If this has been debated before I am sorry for bringing it up, but I'm at work now and have to run to catch the bus... No time for searching
I'll put in some pictures tomorrow that show what I'm talking about, but a quick google search should give you plenty...


Edit: I'm sure pulverized is not the best word as there were larger chunks, but these were still quite small and "bite-sized". Ready to be loaded onto trucks...

[edit on 23-11-2006 by DrLeary]




posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Dear DrLeary:

A shower of neutrons caused that phenomenon. They superheated all matter in those 20 floors you’re talking about. The pulverization you observed is the concrete exploding while all water content is turning to steam. You can read more about this on the thread about how hydrogen bombs brought down the WTC towers.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 09:51 AM
link   


Edit: I'm sure pulverized is not the best word as there were larger chunks, but these were still quite small and "bite-sized". Ready to be loaded onto trucks...


Yep, bite sized...thats why they had hundreds of workers using torches to cut apart the wreckage to be loaded into the trucks.



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Most people who believe the pancake theory claim that the weight of the top 20 floors brought down the towers, but by this logic the top floors should have hit the ground quite intact.



Yeah, this is definitely something people ignore. "Pancake theory" isn't "officially" supported by NIST anymore, but that doesn't stop people from ignoring that, and pushing the theory anyway, either.


Without the so-called driving mass, the buildings would have had no reason to continue falling, let alone at the same pace at which they started. Most of the mass of both buildings in general was hurled over the side and couldn't have "driven" any collapse anyway.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999



Edit: I'm sure pulverized is not the best word as there were larger chunks, but these were still quite small and "bite-sized". Ready to be loaded onto trucks...


Yep, bite sized...thats why they had hundreds of workers using torches to cut apart the wreckage to be loaded into the trucks.


What are you implying here? I'm just saying the pieces look like they are way smaller that what would have been expected to from a normal collapse. Sure they would need to do some cuting of the rubble to make it fit on the trucks, but how is that relevant?



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Thats a good point you make Dr Leary.If indeed the pancake theory were correct all the floors above the impact zone would not have been pulverized.Or they may have just toppled to one side,as one of the towers started to do(can't remember which)but then it turned to fine rubble as the rest of the building came down.Good point .
BTW ,There is always gonna be people who believe the official story,until Bush himself says "okay, you got me"but we both know that will probably never happen.

[edit on 24-11-2006 by crowpruitt]



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I couldn't find the exact video I was looking for, which has the best angle of the WTC2 collapse, but these shots are taken from Loose Change 2.nd Edition Recut.

The first one shows WTC2 just after the collapse has started. Note that the top is not falling straight down like WTC1, but it's tipping over forwards and to the right (relative to the camera).



The second picture shows the top just before it dissappears into the smoke. Maybe a second after the first picture. The top floors are still intact.



The third picture shows what appears to be debris emerging from the smoke cloud where you would expect to see the top floors. Remember, it was falling at an angle, so it should "bounce" off the rest of the building and fall off in the same direction that the top was tipping. This would have caused huge damage to surrounding buildings if it had fallen as one big chunk. Instead we see it turning into dust before our eyes... I've circled the area where I believe some of these remains are seen emerging from the smoke.



These are rather poor quality pictures taken from the google video version of Loose Change, and I'm sure others can do this better, but you really have to watch the video itself to really get the full effect....

Now who can explain this to me please? Does anyone have any pictures of the WTC area right after the smoke has settled? We should see atleast some intact floors on top of the pile of rubble...



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 11:44 AM
link   


What are you implying here? I'm just saying the pieces look like they are way smaller that what would have been expected to from a normal collapse. Sure they would need to do some cuting of the rubble to make it fit on the trucks, but how is that relevant?


And the debris from a "normal" collapse looks like?

How is cutting the rubble relevant? Did you read your post? Something about how it was ready to be loaded on trucks?



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
Dear DrLeary:

A shower of neutrons caused that phenomenon. They superheated all matter in those 20 floors you’re talking about. The pulverization you observed is the concrete exploding while all water content is turning to steam. You can read more about this on the thread about how hydrogen bombs brought down the WTC towers.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods


I'm with you wizard. If you stop to think about it a structure of that size would probably be next to impossible to bring down so neatly. You would have the WTC toppling over a massive area and Im talking well over 40 city blocks. Now had they just created a destruction model that was believable they would had the building break off at the impact points..this is where they messed up.

Wizard,
I was even going so far as to say it was some kind of particle accelerator (exotic) more so than a hydrogen device.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   


If you stop to think about it a structure of that size would probably be next to impossible to bring down so neatly. You would have the WTC toppling over a massive area and Im talking well over 40 city blocks.


Brought down so neatly? Did you not pay attention to the area after the collapse it was ANYTHING but neat.

40 city blocks? You do realize that 12 city blocks is generally just about a mile? So in your world, an 1100 foot building would fall over three miles? I know its been awhile since my math and physics classes, but that just doesnt add up. Okay, we will use 40 square blocks. Five by eight. That is still roughly 2,200 feet by 3,500 feet or so...either way, much bigger than the buildings were tall.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 10:24 PM
link   
I've asked this question in many threads and none of the official story pedlars have ever tried to answer it.

It was neat in the sense that it collapsed to it's foundations and didn't topple as the top of the South Tower should have continued doing. But as we can see it lost it's momentum when the undamaged floors collapsed from underneath it.

Physically impossible without some other force acting on the undamaged structure bellow the tilting top section.

It should have continued it's topple taking some of the undamaged floors with it on the pivot side. There is nothing that could change it's mind other than something causing the undamaged floors to fail. It should have been an unsymmetrical chaotic collapse, but no it zippered itself while throwing tons of steel up to 600 ft and turning concrete etc.. into dust.



edited to add image

[edit on 24/11/2006 by ANOK]



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 10:32 PM
link   
The WTC towers had to be the world's best demo jobs. What I want to know is this: if Controlled Demolition Inc was on tap for cleanup... was it one of the company's involved in this job? Did they act as consultants to Mossad and other military spec ops?

What I also want to know is what happened to all the gold in the basement.. it simply vanished??




posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Controlled Demolition Inc owned by the Loizeaux family...


The company is headed by Mark Loizeaux out of Baltimore. In February 2000, a Federal Jury Indicted Mark Loizeaux, Douglas Loizeaux and Controlled Demolition on charges of falsely reporting campaign contributions by asking members and employees to donate to the campaign of Elijah E Cummings, a Democrat Representative for Maryland. The Baltimore Sun reported that the illegal contributions allegedly occurred between 1996 and 1998, but the Loizeaux brothers and the company were acquitted in September 2000. Controlled Demolition have been awarded Federal Contracts worth billions of dollars. One such contract was for the demolition and removal of the remains of the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma that had been previously hit by a terrorist bomb. The rubble of this building was carried away to a landfill site operated by BFI Waste.

Source

This company is benefiting hugely from doing the governments dirty work. Government contracts are the cream of the crop for companies, and they will do almost anything to get one. Nothing pays better than the government, or should I say the tax payers.



posted on Nov, 27 2006 @ 05:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999



What are you implying here? I'm just saying the pieces look like they are way smaller that what would have been expected to from a normal collapse. Sure they would need to do some cuting of the rubble to make it fit on the trucks, but how is that relevant?


And the debris from a "normal" collapse looks like?

How is cutting the rubble relevant? Did you read your post? Something about how it was ready to be loaded on trucks?


Well yeah, surely there would be some cutting involved, but if this had been a "normal" collapse they would have been there for weeks and months just cutting and hauling out huge pieces of the building. I'm talking about whole floors more or less intact here. Other "pancake collapses" without explosives involved have left a lot more of the building intact. But as far as I can tell, there was no large pieces left of the WTC. For christ sake, you have a fireman saying the largest piece he could find was like half of a keypad from a phone... Falling buildings may squash and generally break the content inside, but it doesn't pulverize and dematerialize thousands of tonns of people, furniture, hardware, etc etc etc.

Edit to add:
Look at how they removed the rest of the buildings at WTC in the clean up operation: They blow them into little pieces and load it onto trucks. You don't see hundreds of workers with blowtorches cutting the building into pieces. That would simply take too long and be too dangerous for the workers.

[edit on 27-11-2006 by DrLeary]



posted on Nov, 27 2006 @ 10:04 PM
link   


But as far as I can tell, there was no large pieces left of the WTC. For christ sake, you have a fireman saying the largest piece he could find was like half of a keypad from a phone


I dont know what youve been looking at or listening to, but you really need better sources. No large pieces left? One of the towers left a 7 story tall chunk of the outer facade. I mean good grief, there were beams left that were over 100 feet long......what pictures did you look at?



posted on Nov, 28 2006 @ 02:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999



But as far as I can tell, there was no large pieces left of the WTC. For christ sake, you have a fireman saying the largest piece he could find was like half of a keypad from a phone


I dont know what youve been looking at or listening to, but you really need better sources. No large pieces left? One of the towers left a 7 story tall chunk of the outer facade. I mean good grief, there were beams left that were over 100 feet long......what pictures did you look at?


Do you have a source for this?



posted on Nov, 28 2006 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Sure, just let me do a search for the pics...

www.time.com...

A few pictures with firemen as reference to size of pieces.

www.zombietime.com...

Good shots of large chunks of the towers.....

www.parrhesia.com...

More pics...including some that show elevator motors, some office furniture remains, large pieces of the towers...


www.w3.org...

31Oct2001 still cleaning up....


positron.jfet.org...

26Jan2002, debris collection site, Fresh Kills, NJ.....wait a minute...i thought all the steel went to China....OOPS guess not......

mceer.buffalo.edu...

Report with pictures showing damage caused by collapsing buildings, including WTC7....hmmm if WTC7 damaged other buildings when it collapsed, and controlled demos drop buildings into their footprints......WTC7 must not have fallen into its footprint.......

hereisnewyork.org...

Large number of pics from that day, didnt go through all of them.....


Any other questions?



posted on Nov, 28 2006 @ 07:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Sure, just let me do a search for the pics...

www.time.com...

A few pictures with firemen as reference to size of pieces.

www.zombietime.com...

Good shots of large chunks of the towers.....

www.parrhesia.com...

More pics...including some that show elevator motors, some office furniture remains, large pieces of the towers...


www.w3.org...

31Oct2001 still cleaning up....


positron.jfet.org...

26Jan2002, debris collection site, Fresh Kills, NJ.....wait a minute...i thought all the steel went to China....OOPS guess not......

mceer.buffalo.edu...

Report with pictures showing damage caused by collapsing buildings, including WTC7....hmmm if WTC7 damaged other buildings when it collapsed, and controlled demos drop buildings into their footprints......WTC7 must not have fallen into its footprint.......

hereisnewyork.org...

Large number of pics from that day, didnt go through all of them.....


Any other questions?


I ask the question again: Where are the top 20 floors?




posted on Nov, 28 2006 @ 07:36 AM
link   
They are in a few million pieces all over the area. You asked for proof of large pieces of wreckage, I supplied it. The top 20 stories fell apart on the way down, just like the rest of the towers.



posted on Nov, 28 2006 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
They are in a few million pieces all over the area. You asked for proof of large pieces of wreckage, I supplied it. The top 20 stories fell apart on the way down, just like the rest of the towers.


They fell apart and broke into a million pieces on the way down you say? And what force exactly did this? Gravity? While gravity is a strong force it simply cannot pull steel reinforced concrete into a million pieces. Somebody please back me up here!!!

[edit on 28-11-2006 by DrLeary]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join