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.

 

Helicopter laser beam right before WTC falls?!? Have you seen this?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 03:27 PM
link   
You mean, a hundred thousand tons of concrete just disappeared into thin air, and you want to say a plane did that?

And that explains why there were several pools of molten metal under the wreckage for six weeks after 911?

And that explains why there are spikes in radioactivity ever since; and hundreds of rescue workers are now dying from and suffering from cancer and lung diseases?

I don't think even six Airbuses could do that much damage. The building was designed to withstand airplane hits ... but not mini-nukes, which is what it looks as if it really was, from the evidence.

: | Em




posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by EmilyCragg
You mean, a hundred thousand tons of concrete just disappeared into thin air, and you want to say a plane did that?

And that explains why there were several pools of molten metal under the wreckage for six weeks after 911?

And that explains why there are spikes in radioactivity ever since; and hundreds of rescue workers are now dying from and suffering from cancer and lung diseases?

I don't think even six Airbuses could do that much damage. The building was designed to withstand airplane hits ... but not mini-nukes, which is what it looks as if it really was, from the evidence.
: | Em



What "evidence" are you referring to? The "mini-nuke" bit is a bunch of oats after they have been through a horse. I think I just saw a newspaper article that says that the Titanic was sunk by a nuke. Wait that was the weekly World News. I have yet to see proof of "molten pools of metal", I have seen proof in threads on ATS that state that there were no such pools. As for the concrete, the majority of it was of the low aggrigate lightweight variety poured on sheetmetal for flooring. That would probably explain the immense dust clouds created during the collapse.
Only the center core where the elevators and stairways were had structural concrete.

One of the other ATS threads has a chemical break down of the components of the dust from the WTC. I'll admit that there are traces of Thorium and Thallium but no other possible sources of radioactivity are mentioned. This same breakdown also has no Nitrates listed, which to me tends to shoot the controlled demolition theory in the foot, with the majority of explosives being Nitrate based.

I have heard of respritory problems with some of the rescue workers, but where are these hundreds of cancer cases. They are probably hype being cooked up by the lawyers who are sueing over the collapse.

If you have any evidence please post it, I'd love to see it.



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 06:09 AM
link   
I notice everyone is eager to explain the flashes.

www.youtube.com...

why disappear off into discussion over collapse when the 'flashes' may not even have affected WTC 2.
Just because the flashes occurred seconds before WTC2 collapse it doesnt necessarily link the two.
The flashes could be related to the WTC1 building or the flashes could be related to something else completely.





[edit on 20-12-2006 by debate]



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 08:51 AM
link   
Hey all,

Jeezus christ,

i dont even know what to say about this, except that its almost as bad as that weired holographic plane theory ,
Far out .

Omega



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Surely if there was a beam from a helicopter to bring down the towers its only purpose would be as a trigger to activate explosives or thermite.

[edit on 20-12-2006 by Clipper]



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Or to pick up the aliens that were implanted into the WTC towers prior to their construction. (War Or the Worlds shows this clearly)



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:11 AM
link   
Ok, let me make this point

1) flashes are seen

Now whether you wish to speculate that the flashes are from the helicopter thats fine yet i am still wondering

1) where the flashes originated
2) what caused them
3) what they actually are

Since no flashes were caught for the demolition of WTC1 and no other flashes were seen at all (well not that i can find mentioned or seen) these flashes are an anomoly.

I cannot stress enough that one shouldnt assume that

1) flashes were from helicopter
2) flashes are linked to demolition of WTC2



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:21 AM
link   
for instance...

it is a common misconception that lighting starts from above and moves down. It actually starts at the ground and moves up. (the visible light)

the visible light is electrostatic charge.

Now with this in mind,

The flashes could be lightening strikes between helicopter and WTC1?

WTC1 has a massive build up of positive charge and the helicopter creates a leader.

This is not saying the helicopter had a beam weapon or such stuff but due to the helicopter letting out a rescue line it is entirely possible that the line produced a conduit for electrons... and bang ... lightening.

This requires the assumption that WTC1 or WTC2, unsure which, had an incredible build up of protons.

n.b this is just a hypothosis of why the flashes occurred.



[edit on 21-12-2006 by debate]



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:28 AM
link   
I feel I would like to add something to a possibility here on the light beam coming from the Helo. I listened to some ex-MI5 bomber who was an inside agent for the British Govt. in Northern Ireland and some of his testimony on how the detonated bombs.

He claimed that they used laser ( Infra red ) operated sniper rifles to activate a LDR type detonator from line of sight to maximise the casualties in Northern Ireland. Could this light beam be similar technology ? I wonder if thats all it took was to shine a light at a detonator that is Light Dependant Reactive to set off the main charges ?.



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by mazzroth
I wonder if thats all it took was to shine a light at a detonator that is Light Dependant Reactive to set off the main charges ?.


through the perimeter wall? If visible light was being used what would stop the sunlight doing it?
Also the helicopter was above WTC1, WTC2s line of sight was covered by smoke.

see the problem with using visible light to detonate explosives?

1) clear line of sight
2) do it in the dark and hope no-one has a torch



[edit on 21-12-2006 by debate]



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by debate

Originally posted by mazzroth
I wonder if thats all it took was to shine a light at a detonator that is Light Dependant Reactive to set off the main charges ?.


through the perimeter wall? If visible light was being used what would stop the sunlight doing it?
Also the helicopter was above WTC1, WTC2s line of sight was covered by smoke.

see the problem with using visible light to detonate explosives?

1) clear line of sight
2) do it in the dark and hope no-one has a torch



[edit on 21-12-2006 by debate]


Im not really that clever but if I were to locate a Lasered Target I would place it in a visible position like the antenna, but hey Im not that clever



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by debate
The flashes could be lightening strikes between helicopter and WTC1?

WTC1 has a massive build up of positive charge and the helicopter creates a leader.

This is not saying the helicopter had a beam weapon or such stuff but due to the helicopter letting out a rescue line it is entirely possible that the line produced a conduit for electrons... and bang ... lightening.

This requires the assumption that WTC1 or WTC2, unsure which, had an incredible build up of protons.

n.b this is just a hypothosis of why the flashes occurred.


Actually the helicopter would be the one to build up the charge. If you ever have the chance to watch a helicopter land at night, watch the ground just before it touches down. If you are in the right place you can see a massive spark go from the aircraft to the ground. I spent almost five years as a Navy Search and Rescue crewman. One of the first things that they taught us was to let the hoist cable go into the water before reaching for it. People have been killed by grabbing the cable before it has grounded itself.

As far as this video goes, I still haven't seen the flashes. I have seen the anti-collision strobe light, but nothing else out of the ordinary.



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Actually the helicopter would be the one to build up the charge. If you ever have the chance to watch a helicopter land at night, watch the ground just before it touches down. If you are in the right place you can see a massive spark go from the aircraft to the ground. I spent almost five years as a Navy Search and Rescue crewman. One of the first things that they taught us was to let the hoist cable go into the water before reaching for it. People have been killed by grabbing the cable before it has grounded itself.

As far as this video goes, I still haven't seen the flashes. I have seen the anti-collision strobe light, but nothing else out of the ordinary.


You havent seen the flashes?
www.youtube.com...
1 min 7seconds -- arrow above WTC1 is identifying a helicopter


www.terrorize.dk...
as can be appreciated the better quality the easier it is to see the flashes.

As for the charge build it.. it would require the line to contact with the building. For it to bridge a gap over half a meter -- like lightning-- it would require a huge amount much more than what a chopper can produce.

anti-collision light -- interesting



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499
What "evidence" are you referring to? I have yet to see proof of "molten pools of metal", I have seen proof in threads on ATS that state that there were no such pools.

One of the other ATS threads has a chemical break down of the components of the dust from the WTC. I'll admit that there are traces of Thorium and Thallium but no other possible sources of radioactivity are mentioned.
If you have any evidence please post it, I'd love to see it.



Thier is plenty of evidence for the pools of molten metals in the basements of all the WTC buildings.


The president of Tully Construction of Flushing, NY, said he saw pools of "literally molten steel" at Ground Zero. Bollyn also cites Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, MD, as having seen molten steel in the bottoms of elevator shafts "three, four, and five weeks" after the attack.

A report by Waste Age describes New York Sanitation Department workers moving "everything from molten steel beams to human remains." 2 Â

A report on the Government Computer News website quotes Greg Fuchek, vice president of sales for LinksPoint Inc. as stating:

In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel 3 Â

A Messenger-Inquirer report recounts the experiences of Bronx firefighter "Toolie" O'Toole, who stated that some of the beams lifted from deep within the catacombs of Ground Zero by cranes were "dripping from the molten steel." 4 Â

A transcription of an audio interview of Ground Zero chaplain Herb Trimpe contains the following passage:

When I was there, of course, the remnants of the towers were still standing. It looked like an enormous junkyard. A scrap metal yard, very similar to that. Except this was still burning. There was still fire. On the cold days, even in January, there was a noticeable difference between the temperature in the middle of the site than there was when you walked two blocks over on Broadway. You could actually feel the heat.

It took me a long time to realize it and I found myself actually one day wanting to get back. Why? Because I felt more comfortable. I realized it was actually warmer on site. The fires burned, up to 2,000 degrees, underground for quite a while before they actually got down to those areas and they cooled off.

I talked to many contractors and they said they actually saw molten metal trapped, beams had just totally had been melted because of the heat. So this was the kind of heat that was going on when those airplanes hit the upper floors. It was just demolishing heat. 5 Â

A report in the Johns Hopkins Public Health Magazine about recovery work in late October quotes Alison Geyh, Ph.D., as stating:

Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel. 6 Â

A publication by the National Environmental Health Association quotes Ron Burger, a public health advisor at the National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who arrived at Ground Zero on the evening of September 12th. Burger stated:

Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen’s and the thousands who fled that disaster. 7 Â

As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running. 8 Â

A member of the New York Air National Guard's 109th Air Wing was at Ground Zero from September 22 to October 6. He kept a journal on which an article containing the following passage is based.

Smoke constantly poured from the peaks. One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots. 9 Â


The book American Ground, which contains detailed descriptions of conditions at Ground Zero, contains this passage:

... or, in the early days, the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole.



Along with this video.
www.youtube.com...

As far as radition their is this report but it blames the Depleted Uranium on the aircraft, only problem is the 757 and 767 carry Tungsten for counterweights. Boeing stopped using Depleted Uranium with the later 747s.

www.xs4all.nl...

From: "Leuren Moret"



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by debate
You havent seen the flashes?

As for the charge build it.. it would require the line to contact with the building. For it to bridge a gap over half a meter -- like lightning-- it would require a huge amount much more than what a chopper can produce.

anti-collision light -- interesting

Like I said I saw the flashing anti-collision light on the helicopter. I saw no flashes out of the ordinary.



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 04:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Like I said I saw the flashing anti-collision light on the helicopter. I saw no flashes out of the ordinary.


ahhh ok. You do realise that the flashes were over 50ft in length?

Spire is 360ft tall



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by debate
ahhh ok. You do realise that the flashes were over 50ft in length?

Spire is 360ft tall



All I saw was the anti-collision strobe of the helicopter reflected in the smoke. Nothing more nothing less. I waited until I could get to work today to see the video in a large hi-res monitor and still saw the same thing.



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 02:25 PM
link   

ahhh ok. You do realise that the flashes were over 50ft in length?


That was a 50 foot flash ??? Geeeesh... this is rediculous...think about it... MILLIONS upon millions of people are watching... the government is going to send a NYPD helicopter to the roof and shoot a "laser" into the roof to cause the building to collapse. The Disinfo just keeps on spewing out!



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
That was a 50 foot flash ??? Geeeesh... this is rediculous...think about it... MILLIONS upon millions of people are watching... the government is going to send a NYPD helicopter to the roof and shoot a "laser" into the roof to cause the building to collapse. The Disinfo just keeps on spewing out!


ROFL! Nice one Cameron. I wonder if these people realize that most laser beams are not visible to the human eye? At least most of the high energy ones. I watch our laser cut steel all of the time and have yet to see the beam.



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Well...the Loose Change supporters are still around here...GRASPING at anything. Jim, did you see the debate with Mark Roberts against the LC guys? It was quite pathetic. But worth the laughs.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join