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.

 

The Tops of the WTC? What happened to them?

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
The core at ground level for at least one of the towers was still intact, as was much of the structure beneath. And what debris was there, was mostly aggregate from concrete, rebar, and thinner pieces of steel. So some debris may have fallen into the basement but it's far from a 6-story ditch.


Oh, I didn't know that. I thought they both filled the basements. Thanks.




posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 08:16 AM
link   
One should look at the picture posted, showing ground zero.

There is a distinct lack of building mass, especially steel beams.. just like 1000 victims on 9/11, some of the steel simply vanished into thin air.. quite literally.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 09:21 AM
link   
So you think that, the bodies that were never found were blown up with the explosions from the demo. In a true collapse crushed bodies would have been found, dead people largely intact but squished. Not pulverized into biologically unidentifable substances that would have attached themselves to all that dust, eewww that means you could have been breathing in the remains of people, gross.


[edit on 3-7-2007 by Blue_Jay33]



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 09:41 AM
link   
What we need it someone who is good at math (I am not
), calculate the squre footage per floor and ~weight of a floor (just the floor not anything else). When that is determined, I sure people will be able to see that under that weight and resulting pressure, bodies would be nothing more than blobs.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 09:50 AM
link   
its already been calculated how much energy was required, the official explaination doesn't account for the massive energies and the mechanism required to pulverised the towers into dust and melt steel i-beams. Otherwise no-one would argue differently. You simply don't expect the results seen under natural building collapse conditions, even with something as big or bigger than the WTC. I would be willing to bet money on that, and I don't gamble unless I know I am going to win.


[edit on 3-7-2007 by VicRH]



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 05:46 PM
link   
I can see where the idea of exotic weaponry comes from, but I would find it more likely for there to just be explosives that turned it into dust. However there is other evidence of exotic weaponry such as toasted cars on FDR drive (which is half a mile away). Which are toasted in really weird specific ways.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vinci
I can see where the idea of exotic weaponry comes from, but I would find it more likely for there to just be explosives that turned it into dust. However there is other evidence of exotic weaponry such as toasted cars on FDR drive (which is half a mile away). Which are toasted in really weird specific ways.


How do can the below pictures be explained:








BeZerK



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Precisely those pictures
.

People say it's the dust's heat, but I've posted videos of people standing there waiting for the dust to hit them, and they survived. (They were close to the WTC). And so that same dust cannot travel to FDR and do those very specific burns on those cars.

Thus I'm confused
.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vinci
Precisely those pictures
.

People say it's the dust's heat, but I've posted videos of people standing there waiting for the dust to hit them, and they survived. (They were close to the WTC). And so that same dust cannot travel to FDR and do those very specific burns on those cars.

Thus I'm confused
.


I am as confused as you are. What caused these cars to be burnt in the way they are?

I have no idea. Fire could not have traveled miles away for that effect to happen on the cars in the above pictures. I have no answers to this


BeZerK



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 07:13 PM
link   
I sat and thought about it, I can't really find some plausible explanation.

Nothing could have come from the towers that would cause those cars to shrivel up like that. Maybe if they were at the base of the towers, but not half a mile away.

Kind of makes space weapons seem plausible



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vinci
I sat and thought about it, I can't really find some plausible explanation.

Nothing could have come from the towers that would cause those cars to shrivel up like that. Maybe if they were at the base of the towers, but not half a mile away.

Kind of makes space weapons seem plausible


Indeed the space weapons is the only thing that could be plausible, but unfortunately my mind is yet to comprehend that.

I mean if it was a micro nuke, then there would be signs of radiation and people would have been very sick due to the increasing threat of radiation, so we can rule that out. It could be explosives that was present in the building because the explosion would not travel that far.

Space Weapons?

I mean if China has the technology to destroy a satellite 800kms above earth from the ground, then god knows what kind of technology the current administration has. - Source

BeZerK



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Actually, I remember reports about people who worked at ground zero were having serious problems, some kind of infection and I recall reading it affecting their brains.

I'll try to dig it up later, but does anyone know/remember anything about that?



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vinci
Actually, I remember reports about people who worked at ground zero were having serious problems, some kind of infection and I recall reading it affecting their brains.

I'll try to dig it up later, but does anyone know/remember anything about that?


To be honest i don't recall anything in regards to what you said.

But i do know people who are sick due to the toxic dust that was present in and around the WTC complex after the collapses, which the Government are not doing all they can to help these people, most of them being Heroes.

Please let me know when you find it.

BeZerK



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 08:10 PM
link   
If the liquid caused by a thermite / thermate reaction was launched into the air and landed on a car it would have caused this. However did anybody get burned or die from this on 9/11.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
If the liquid caused by a thermite / thermate reaction was launched into the air and landed on a car it would have caused this. However did anybody get burned or die from this on 9/11.


No i have heard about anyone dying of Thermate on 9/11.

I don't know if thermate can be launched that far and not hit other buildings etc. If you look at the map its quite far away from the collapse area.

BeZerK



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 09:16 PM
link   
I don't think thats possible, it's too heavy to have gone that far and cause such damage, without other reports of people getting hurt by it.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 09:20 PM
link   
Vinci,

I agree i don't think its possible for Thermate to eject itself miles away and not hit people or buildings.

Space Weapons are still in the #1 spot for the time being even though my mind cant comprehend it... yet


BeZerK

[edit on 3-7-2007 by BeZerk]



posted on Jul, 4 2007 @ 05:20 AM
link   
This is a pretty good article on the nuke theory...

More than thermate

Also...


The US produced, and for many years deployed "Atomic Demolition Munitions." The Medium Atomic Demolition Munition (MADM) produced 1-15 kilotons of yield, and weighed 400 pounds. The Special Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM) yielded .01-1 kilotons and weighed only 163 pounds.

Source

Some interesting nuke facts on that site...


The smallest nuclear weapon the US produced was the "Davy Crockett" - a recoilless rifle round. It weighed about 51 pounds, was 16 inches long and 11 inches in diameter. It produced a variable yield of up to 1 kiloton.


Is this true?...


Sources close to FEMA in New York confirmed to WMR that the lymphoma cases are believed to be the result of a release of extremely high levels of radiation from a series of nuclear events on the morning of 911.

Source



posted on Jul, 4 2007 @ 05:42 AM
link   
BeZerk, there are several threads on the Micronuke theory floating about here on ATS, all with great information that will answer your questions


Micronuclear weapons work on a principle that means the radiation is extremely short lived (days), because it is working in a different manner to your typical Hiroshima type bomb. They are pure fusion type weapons, not fission. That alone mite mean something to you.. if not, give it a google (fusion vs fission) and have a look at the science behind it



posted on Jul, 4 2007 @ 06:06 AM
link   
ANOK,

Thanks for that information.

So its a possibility that a micro nuke could or would have been used. Might be plausible and would explain people being exposed to high levels of radiation.

shrunkensimon - thanks for that, i will look at the other threads in relation to the micro nuke theory and research extensively, before i can definitely draw a conclusion.

You learn something knew everyday


BeZerK



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join