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.

 

Time to prove the official report right

page: 4
3
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   
It has also been brought up that this is actually one of the engines we're seeing protruding from the north face of WTC 2, and not the nose.

Whatever it is. It's tangible, and obviously solid. ( No holograms please. ). There's a shadow right down the side of the building to prove that it's a physical object.

But back to your original topic Griff. . .

Here's a video of a botched demolition of the Zip Feed Mill is Sioux Falls, ND.. You may have seen this before.

I find this to be a good example to pay attention to because of the way it fell, and, ( being a silo ), it's hollow construction.


wikimapia.org...


The demolition was carried out by Dykon Explosive Demolition. The 202 foot tower was intended to fall on it's side to the east. Charges were set to accomplish this task but miscalculations in the amount of explosives & the state of the building resulted in simultaneously cutting the support structure throughout the building. The structure fell vertically @ 20 feet into it's basement to remain standing 160 feet tall at an @ 15 degree tilt.

This 202 foot, 15.5 storey building fell 20 feet, or 1.5 storeys and didn't collapse under it's own freefall weight. WHY?

It fell one tenth of it's total height! That's like the caps of the towers falling @ 136 feet before hitting any resistance. I know it's by far not a parallel comparison, but it still lends some credence to the question why the caps disintegrated, and didn't "ride the wave" as they pulverized the structure beneath them. . .

2PacSade-




posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 02:44 PM
link   
2PacSade

Seeing, the video and the still, I would say conclusively it is most definetly the nose, its all in one motion following the path of the way the flight flew in.

I can't see how that much was left intact, when it had to go through the first outer steel mesh, then proceed through the building, crash into concrete, then out the other set of steel.



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 03:37 PM
link   
I would like to say, that you all are looking in the wrong direction in regards to the "nose of the jet".

I don't think you guys fully understand the speed at which the jet is traveling. If you guys have ever herd of a "ping pong ball cannon", you would know that a plastic, very easily damaged, ping pong ball can actually travel through 2 free standing soda can's, and leave almost perfectly round "cookie cutter" holes. It also has enough power to travel through a 1/2 inch piece of plywood. On a much larger scale, an entire jet, would be a massive force and slice through the building like butter.

Also, the video images are just not clear enough to show the exact level of damage, so don't base your thoughts on that.

I think it is much easier to debunk the official story by sticking to the highly irregular physics involved in all 3 WTC collapses.

[edit on 29-1-2007 by SWAT Life]



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy
And no one claimed that the fires alone collapsed the building. It was a combination of severe structural damage and fires. Plus there were tanks of diesel fuel in the building and it had worse structural damage thaqn the WTC 1 & 2. Plus the cantilever design was a big factor.

And the experts at the scene said they knew hours in advance it was going to collapse.


Well the builidngs that i posted had severs fires and structural damage, the fires burned a lot longer then the fires in the towers and the building 7.

What experts knew hours in advance ? according to the 911 commission report all the fire chiefs there did not expect the towers to collapse. They were only worried about some of the upper floors collapsing but not the whole building.

Also if the experts knew the buildings were going to collapse why didn't they get the firemen and police out earlier ?

Quote from 911 commission report:

None of the chiefs present believed a total collapse of either tower was possible. Later, after the Mayor had left, one senior chief present did articulate his concern that upper floors could begin to collapse in a few hours, and so he said that firefighters thus should not ascend above floors in the sixties.






Originally posted by SWAT Life
I would like to say, that you all are looking in the wrong direction in regards to the "nose of the jet".

I don't think you guys fully understand the speed at which the jet is traveling. If you guys have ever herd of a "ping pong ball cannon", you would know that a plastic, very easily damaged, ping pong ball can actually travel through 2 free standing soda can's, and leave almost perfectly round "cookie cutter" holes. It also has enough power to travel through a 1/2 inch piece of plywood. On a much larger scale, an entire jet, would be a massive force and slice through the building like butter.

Also, the video images are just not clear enough to show the exact level of damage, so don't base your thoughts on that.

I think it is much easier to debunk the official story by sticking to the highly irregular physics involved in all 3 WTC collapses.

[edit on 29-1-2007 by SWAT Life]


Problem is that if you look at most other aircraft crashes you will see that that an aluminum airframe is very fragile and is usually destroyed very easily.

Following is a photo of an aluminum airframe destroyed just from hitting a few small tress.

i114.photobucket.com...




[edit on 29-1-2007 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 29-1-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 07:23 PM
link   
SWAT Life

If the speed caused the plane to go through like this, then we should see this happening in expermental crash video's with planes, but we don't even at high speeds, upon impact the plane usually just explodes and is destroyed.

Again, the nose is an extremely fragile part of a plane, I can see no logical reason why this was left intact the way it appears, if it wasn't destroyed upon initial impact, then surely it should have been on the way in, and if not inside, then surely when it exited the steel structure on the opposite side.

Its passing through a lot of concrete and solid, very sold steel.



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Just to add something, it looks like the wings are left intact as well as the sides of the building shows the wings in the film clip.



[edit on 29-1-2007 by talisman]



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by talisman



I got this from here:
Prison Planet


Anyone have a snap shot of the east facade of WTC 2 before collapse? I'd like to see the damage to that facade. Thanks.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Griff

Check this link to see if this is the photo your looking for
911research.wtc7.net...

One thing to note is that in the North Tower, you can see in where the damage is, and you can see some of the columns still standing, the plane didn't make it all the way through.

Which raises the question about the South Tower, if the Plane supposedly survived going through, without touching the core as much as in the North Tower, or at least far less then the North Tower, then why did the South Tower even collapse?

And then of course the even more confusing question, why did it go down first??



[edit on 31-1-2007 by talisman]



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 02:39 AM
link   
They were demolished begining from the top - exploded better said. That is why they fall "simetrical". It was not typical "demolition", WTC 7 was typical demolition
Check these
911scholars.org...

janedoe0911.tripod.com...

[edit on 31-1-2007 by pai mei]



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
SWAT Life

If the speed caused the plane to go through like this, then we should see this happening in expermental crash video's with planes, but we don't even at high speeds, upon impact the plane usually just explodes and is destroyed.



Well what experimental crash video are you talking about? Please don't tell me you are talking about the NASA's Boeing 720 crash test.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by SWAT Life
Well what experimental crash video are you talking about? Please don't tell me you are talking about the NASA's Boeing 720 crash test.


I'd also like to see some crash videos. The only one that comes to mind is the one that they flew a F4 jet into a concrete "wall". And actually, you can see that the jets wing slices almost the whole way threw the wall.

www.ifilm.com...

This actually kind of refutes the claims at the pentagon that the wings wouldn't produce any damage to the pentagon face. Which is another thread....not to derail my own thread.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Griff

That is one I was refering to, we don't even see the plane go through completely to the other side, and it was travelling at very high speed. The nose is destroyed upon impact. The width of the wall is nowhere near the width of the WTC,

With the WTC, there is very strong dense Steel and Concrete, the Nose goes all the way through this and out the other side of Steel.

I find this very hard to believe, since the nose is not very strong at all.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 12:40 PM
link   
I too find it very hard to believe it was the nose. IMO the video is too grainy to verify either way. I'm open minded on this one as it could be the engine that was found in the street. I just wish more care would have been taken at the biggest crime scene in US history.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 12:53 PM
link   
No doubt some of you have seen this vid before.

Its of WTC 7 and clearly shows penthouse area collapsing before any other part of the building starts to collapse. Its a great vis and one that leads me to believe that at least number 7 was a CD

youtube.com...

[edit on 31-1-2007 by thesaint]



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Thanks for posting that video. Something I noticed.

When the penthouse collapses, it shoots air out toward the smoke. For a second, you can see the facade of the building through the blown out smoke. I don't see any massive fires.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 11:41 PM
link   
Bump. Anyone else notice that you can see the facade for a second and there is no evidence of these massive fires? I do admit that it is the upper floors, but I thought the whole building was ablaze?



posted on Feb, 1 2007 @ 12:28 AM
link   
Griff

Have you see this site?

amanzafar.no-ip.com...

Many high res *untouched* photos, including one week before attack, and after the attack.

thesaint

Isn't that similar to that video of the North Tower? 10 seconds or so before collapse we see some things starting to fall off the side of the North Tower, but since the video was on a stationary tripod, you can clearly see a *shaking* before collapse.

Its similar in the sense of something falling off the building just before collapse. That to me is highly suggestive of something explosive happening, such as 'bombs'.



posted on Feb, 1 2007 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
Griff

Have you see this site?

amanzafar.no-ip.com...

Many high res *untouched* photos, including one week before attack, and after the attack.



Those are great pictures. I only wish he had taken some between the pics of where he shows the debris clouds almost clearing from the north tower's collapse and the one where he says "In the afternoon sun, the colour of the smoke is different. I am no longer shooting against the sun." I'm going to e-mail him to see if he does. He had a perfect view of WTC 7's south facade. If he does, it might solve the arguement of how much damage was on the south facade and to what extent. Because those that follow are WTC 7 on fire. I might also have to change my stance about small fires in WTC 7 after seeing this pic.



Hope I'm not breaking any copywrite laws. These are copywrighted pictures taken by Aman Zafar.

That can not be just debris from WTC 1 collapsing. It is WTC 7 on fire. And the whole south elevation was at least smoking.

Thanks Talisman for bringing this site to my attention.

Edit: I'm still open minded that the smoke could have been comming from WTC 4 & 5...or is it 5 & 6? Either way.

[edit on 2/1/2007 by Griff]



posted on Feb, 1 2007 @ 08:00 AM
link   
I just e-mailed him. This is what my e-mail said.


Hello Aman,

I am a civil engineer in DC that is interested in the WTC buildings. By the way, great photos on your site. I am wondering if you have any pictures of after the smoke and debris cleared from the north tower's collapse (the last tower to collapse) and before the set of photos where you say "In the afternoon sun, the colour of the smoke is different. I am no longer shooting against the sun." I am interested because you would have had a perfect view to see the extent of the damage to WTC 7's south facade. Thank you.

Also, I have used one of your pictures in a post on an internet forum. Here is the link to the post. www.abovetopsecret.com... If you do not give permission to use this photo in this way, I understand and will take it out immediately. Thank you.



posted on Feb, 1 2007 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from Ground Zero. Most of the steel has been recycled as per the city's decision to swiftly send the wreckage to salvage yards in New Jersey. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage.

The bulk of the steel was apparently shipped to China and India. The Chinese firm Baosteel purchased 50,000 tons at a rate of $120 per ton, compared to an average price of $160 paid by local mills in the previous year.

Mayor Bloomberg, a former engineering major, was not concerned about the destruction of the evidence

The pace of the steel's removal was very rapid, even in the first weeks after the attack. September 29, 130,000 tons of debris -- most of it apparently steel -- had been removed.


LINK

does someone want to explain why the rush rush with destroying and moving the evidence? no? okay i will then.

there is too much evidence from videos that the official story was a lie so they realized they had to cover their behinds and remove the REST OF THE EVIDENCE as soon as possible.



new topics




 
3
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join