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.

 

Proof that there was an explosion at the time of collapse...

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 09:10 AM
link   
I'm glad to see there are so many experts on here. So many to quickly discount the effects of air currents around tall buildings, turbulence at altitude, air displacement, that shockwaves ARE air displacement or expansion not necessarily caused by a bomb, an explosion CAN come from other things than a bomb such as cleaning chemicals in a storeroom or fire extinguishers which could have been damaged before use (there had to be a million of them), steam bursts from boiling water in closed pipes, gas from the many people squashed as the buildings fell (a stretch but none-the-less just as plausible as a planted bomb IMO). Not making light of this just illustrating a point.

I overhauled a 73 caprice with a 454 in HS auto shop. When we went to start it for the first time I was reaching around the hood hinge to adjust the distributor as the exhaust wasn't hooked up. The engine backfired and a fireball exited the open manifold below my face. I jerked back to avoid the fireball and found myself laying on the hood of the car in the next service bay without any recollection how I got there. I told this story to illustrate how we sometimes react to avoid harm without realizing the force we use. Did the pilot of the chopper over-react? The camera man? Maybe. I've not seen anything yet conclusive, just a lot of speculation from a lot of closed minded individuals anxious to justify a conspiracy, and a lot who don't like Bush.

[edit on 24-8-2007 by TheTraveler]

Thought of another posibility. Take a torch and hold it to your garage floor. The concrete will explode due to the moisture in the concrete (a porus material) expanding when it gets hot enough. I've had it happen to me many times.

[edit on 24-8-2007 by TheTraveler]




posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheTraveler
an explosion CAN come from other things than a bomb such as cleaning chemicals in a storeroom or fire extinguishers


I've heard this BS before and it's all bunk. They destroyed a fire extinguisher on Myth Busters to try to get it to explode, and nothing of the sort happens. It's a total misrepresentation of how a fire extinguisher behaves when it's punctured.

Unless the stored chemicals happened to already be high explosives, that's a bunch of bull too. You won't get the same overpressures, or anything close. You'd be lucky to get a closet with chemicals in it that, under certain conditions, could violently burst into flames and cause a deflagration. But that takes some pretty extraordinary conditions (and PLEASE no one say "but 9/11 was extraordinary" -- so is any major disaster, but that doesn't mean you just throw physics out the window and plug your ears).



steam bursts from boiling water in closed pipes


The best photos of the ejected material show that it's made of materials like concrete dust and the aluminum panelings.

I can't find it right now but I've seen a higher-resolution version of this image:



That's not water, is it?


The flow of air through the towers as they fell can be generalized knowing the geometry of the structure. The most important thing, is that the buildings were NOT airtight. Not even close! Especially since the "collapse" is supposed to be basically the building destroying itself floor-by-floor, and concrete dust and large steel debris is shooting out in every direction, I don't understand how in the hell people can think any major pressures can accumulate throughout the entire lower section of building under these conditions. It's no one thinking from a technical perspective.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:20 AM
link   


I've heard this BS before and it's all bunk. They destroyed a fire extinguisher on Myth Busters to try to get it to explode, and nothing of the sort happens. It's a total misrepresentation of how a fire extinguisher behaves when it's punctured.


So mythbusters says its not true. I guess we can all go home now. There's been more than one thing on that show that I've seen happen, they just couldn't duplicate it at that time. They can't cover every possible set of circumstances. I was giving examples that are no less plausible than many consiracy theories.


I weigh over 200 pounds. If I placed a nail on a board and stood on it, it wouldn't go through the board. I strike it with a hammer (much less than 200 lbs) and I could drive it through in one strike. Think about it.

[edit on 24-8-2007 by TheTraveler]



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheTraveler
So mythbusters says its not true. I guess we can all go home now.[


If you'd watched the show, the case is hard as hell to bust into because of how strong it's made, and when it is punctured, the puncture stays small, and all the gas inside exits so fast that it actually takes off like a rocket. The canister doesn't explode. The behavior you're attributing to it isn't consistent with that information.



I weigh over 200 pounds. If I placed a nail on a board and stood on it, it wouldn't go through the board. I strike it with a hammer (much less than 200 lbs) and I could drive it through in one strike. Think about it.


But you have to keep striking again and again just to make it a relatively small distance into the wood; the kinetic energy of the hammer is dwarved by the electromagnetic forces holding the wood together, for scale, even though both you and the hammer are much bigger than the small area you're busting up. And that's just wood. Think about it.

[edit on 24-8-2007 by bsbray11]



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

If your book was exploding and turning to dust as it fell then it wouldn't shift any air.

It's rediculase to think a building that is exploding itself upwards and outwards is going to push air through passageways, through doorways, and down elevator shafts to be forced out one window well bellow the collapse wave.

Also if you really look at the squibs you can see them coming from the middle of the buildings on two side at the same time. What's the odds of that?











Very nice deception ANOK.

How about looking at these short videos.


"Squibs" showing before or after the building is collapsing? Not to mention I hear rumbling, not explosions.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:09 AM
link   
if you believe the shockwave was caused by a falling building, please site one example. also, remember in the clip the helicopter was jerked before the building was collapsed. so if you're going to say it was from cleaning chemicals/ambient air/fire extinguishers remember that they hadn't been compromised yet.


i certainly have no problem finding witnesses to an explosion.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420



i certainly have no problem finding witnesses to an explosion.


He's mentioning the explosion caused by the plane hitting Tower 2.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 12:22 PM
link   

We heard a loud explosion from building 2, and at that time building 2 was collapsing.


taken from 2 eyewitnesses that were there. maybe your youtube plugin is broken...

/sarcasm



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420

We heard a loud explosion from building 2, and at that time building 2 was collapsing.


taken from 2 eyewitnesses that were there. maybe your youtube plugin is broken...

/sarcasm


How about quoting the whole thing. What you expect him to do? Tell every detail in one minute?


Didn't even quote him right as well. No wonder.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 01:06 PM
link   

We heard a loud explosion coming from the area of building 2, and at that point building 2 was collapsing.


Verbatim. they certainly were not referencing the plane hitting the building as you speculated.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420

We heard a loud explosion coming from the area of building 2, and at that point building 2 was collapsing.


Verbatim. they certainly were not referencing the plane hitting the building as you speculated.


Go before that. The one when he is saying Tower 1 was burning and they were preparing to go in.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy

Very nice deception ANOK...

..."Squibs" showing before or after the building is collapsing? Not to mention I hear rumbling, not explosions.


Deception? Why would I need to decieve you, c'mon now I'm not the government...
I have nothing to gain by deceiving anyone, but we all have something to gain by exposing these murdering bastards that mascaraed as our 'leaders'.

I believe those are explosive squibs so how am I deceiving anyone? The only people being deceived here is those that believe the official story.

Thanx for the vids, I don't understand why you think the vids contradict the squib claim, as they are clearly visible.

And yes you can have squibs before and during the collapse. They are explosives going off out of sequence, just like you get in a lot of CD's.
The line of squibs you see going off just bellow the collapse wave are the explosives going off as planned.

It's not compressed air, that is such a stupid suggestion, but I guess it satisfies peoples need to believe their government, and any intelligent logical thinking is shadowed by blind acceptance of authority.

As far as hearing them, why do you think you would have to hear them?
The rumbling is louder than the explosives going off deep inside the building.
Believe your eyes not your ears.

Go look at some conrolled demolitions and you will see the similarity.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

And yes you can have squibs before and during the collapse. They are explosives going off out of sequence, just like you get in a lot of CD's.
The line of squibs you see going off just bellow the collapse wave are the explosives going off as planned.

It's not compressed air, that is such a stupid suggestion, but I guess it satisfies peoples need to believe their government, and any intelligent logical thinking is shadowed by blind acceptance of authority.

As far as hearing them, why do you think you would have to hear them?
The rumbling is louder than the explosives going off deep inside the building.
Believe your eyes not your ears.


Wrong, you see squibs just after the building starts to collapse, not before. Thats why I asked if you see them before or during the collapse just to emphasize the video. I was expecting the word after. And yes I have seen many demolition videos. And usually the explosions are louder than rumbles.



You see the explosive "squib" before the building starts to collapse in the video above. North Tower shows squibs after the building starts to collapse.




posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 06:22 PM
link   
ok so im not even going to go into the "squibs" (god i still wanna gouge my eyes out when i see that) as ive done it ad nauseum. im as sick of typing it as im sure most of you are of reading my take on it.


but, as to the video in the OP. i just want to make sure im clear on this. we're expected to believe that an explosive shock wave was powerful enough to jolt the helicopter and the wave was the result of a detonation of explosives inside the building.

i got that right?

so i have to ask, how is an explosion big enough to jolt a helicopter violently and not be seen blowing out all the windows that are left and all sorts of flaming debris BEFORE the collapse? but more importantly, how could an explosion that powerful NOT be heard in jersey and by EVERYONE in manhattan? this isnt a movie where a small bomb takes out an entire building. this isnt a movie where a small bomb knocks people to the ground as they run away. ive set off some decent sized shots from 300m away and wasnt knocked to the ground and it would take a MUCH bigger explosion than some of the ones ive done to jolt a helo

billybob posted my fav CD clip ever. someone explain to me WHY we cant hear all the demo charges going off even during the collapse? or even the first one that initiated the fall? thermate again?

i stand by my opinion that if it was high explosives that brought down the buildings you wouldnt have a handful of witnesses (relative to the number of people that were actuall in manhattan that day) you would have 1000's. read THOUSANDS. there would be no debate on the subject. every single camera with a live feed mic would have picked it up and there wouldnt be a few dozen similar stories there would be thousands of IDENTICAL stories.

you simply cannot bring down a building with high explosives covertly in such a way that it even remotly looks natural. ok, cannot is too broad, ill say its highly improbable as i dont like the term "impossible". however, ive tried to figure out how dozens of times, and yes, im qualified to calculate what it takes to cut steel columns and beams. ive done it.

but in the spirit of open mindedness, im wiling to set aside the calculations ive already done and try a new excersise.

if someone who's qualified to do so could tell me EXACTLY how many of the core columns would have to be cut to drop the building and on how many floors, ill calculate the demo and post not only my result but my work so ya'll can double check it, lets see if it can be done. im going to be generous and give the cd crowd 50lbs per floor. if we can do it for under 50lbs per floor (and thats being really generous cuz i dont think the building would mask the sound of even 50 but we'll go there just for kicks) ill then concede its possible. any more than 50 and im staying with my bs on the cd stance

[edit on 24-8-2007 by Damocles]



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 08:12 PM
link   
Iam going to get kicked off the site for saying this but you are all #ed in the head if you believe there were "squibs" and controlled demolition. Plain and simple. A plane hit each tower and basically cut them in half. COME BACK TO EARTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 08:15 PM
link   
well, welcome to ats and heres hoping they let you go wtih a slap on the wrist.

its commonly accepted that there are more polite ways to disagree with each other...not always easy but if some of us former military types who are used to using the F-word as a verb can do it anyone can


hope to see ya around a while.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Dam, I think you assume that I assume controlled demolition brought the building down and thats why I am interested in the explosions of the day. I see much evidence that there were explosions but none of it is mainstream and not a lot is mentioned in the official reports, and some of what is has been outright proven wrong.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 


(scratches head) uhh...what? lol no offense but im just confused. i personally dont make assumptions about what anyone thinks or doesnt.

ive said all along that aside from my own opinions, im willing to answer any questions on demo anyone may have whether they think it was a cd or not.

in teh end i dont care if people think it was a cd. i dont think it was but i dotn feel its my mission to change anyones mind, i just really want people to form opinoins based on information that doesnt come from lethal weapon movies. yes, i share my opinions pretty vocally but that doesnt mean ill only answer questions in a way as to support my opinions.

and i know that most of what i typed had nothing to do with your post, im just kinda rambling. i blame the meds



new topics




 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join