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.
Originally posted by billybob
you seem to have a problem understanding that the towers release ZERO PERCENT of the potential energy from gravity, until they actually move.... the columns cannot fail without some great crushing force. the crushing force doesn't exist until the columns fail.... without failing columns, there is no release of potential energy. the potential energy cannot be released without the columns failing simultaneously first. etc. etc. a logical loop.
911research.com...
Originally posted by teebigins
forget failing columns, portions of columns were straight up removed by the original impact of the plane. Not to mention those supports nearest the initial trauma were also the areas that were coated with the most jet fuel.
Unless your the type who thinks it was a holographic plane.
Your 911research link is weak. No sources, all he does is criticize at a personal level. I may do the same thing, but at least I provide sources,references,facts from unbiased locations.
Originally posted by ANOK
There is absolutely NO evidence that ANY of the central columns were damaged in any way, let alone 'straight out removed'. Think logically, an aluminum plane goes through the steel facade and is still in one piece enough to damage the massive central steel columns?
Remember the plane that supposedly hit the pentagoon?
Maybe, maybe not your not exactly qualified to say. Do you have test results, a study, evidence? I have asked this many times,but none has come up. NIST has and confirmed that is was possible. Also this was not a typical office fire, not to mention winds were 100% realized because they were not bound by other buildings on any side. Many have reported considerable winds that day. I will post sources if you want. One is wiki's sept 11th timeline.
And so what if they were coated in jet fuel, which common sense should tell you they weren't, they still would not have got hot enough to cause global collapse. Office fires, even if helped with jet fuel, simply do not get hot enough in an hour to cause global failure of thousands of tons of construction steel
Im not even talking about central columns. im talking about the outer columns. pay attention.
Originally posted by teebigins
Im not even talking about central columns. im talking about the outer columns. pay attention….
…it's not rocket science just simple physics. unless of course you think that there was demo rigged to send a fireball out the other end.
...Lets stay on topic, whos talking about the pentagon plane? Completely different scenarios.
Originally posted by billybob
the (inane) scenario proposed by brazant zhou is a non-starter.
Yes because my account of the collapse is somehow more legitimate then a MIT physicist. Ill try, but im sure you will all pick it apart and completely miss the main points.
I agree. Using simple physics, and staying within the official story you advocate, maybe you could share your knowledge with us? (and no links, your words pls)
Because as the building fell it gathered momentum countering resistance forces.
How did the undamaged columns fail? Why didn’t the undamaged columns create friction (resistance) and slow the collapse?
Uhh how did wind, have the ability to blow dust from the collapse, over 600 feet from the building? Ill let you figure that out. But gravity as it pulled down the building displaced air/everything in its path sending a small portion of it outward.
How did gravity have the energy to throw pieces of the outer structure, weighing in the tons, up to 600 ft. away from the building?
I saw alot of mangled steel/concrete at ground zero. the clean up took 1000s of truck loads. How do you figure controlled demo would turn the building into micron sized particles anyway? Besides didn't you just say there were ton sized particles 600 feet from the building? Which is it micron sized or ton size particles? Its both bud, but you exaggerate like all other conspiracy theorists.
How did gravity have the energy to pulverize almost everything in the building to micron sized dust particles?
Originally posted by teebigins
Because as the building fell it gathered momentum countering resistance forces.
Uhh how did wind, have the ability to blow dust from the collapse, over 600 feet from the building? Ill let you figure that out. But gravity as it pulled down the building displaced air/everything in its path sending a small portion of it outward.
....Besides didn't you just say there were ton sized particles 600 feet from the building? Which is it micron sized or ton size particles? Its both bud, but you exaggerate like all other conspiracy theorists.
I would appreciate legitimate complaints/arguments with my story or else I will assume you all believe that planes, did infact bring down the twin towers.
Originally posted by teebigins
forget failing columns, portions of columns were straight up removed by the original impact of the plane.
"Theoretical physics can prove an elephant can hang from a cliff with its tail tied to a daisy, but use your eyes -- your common sense -- ..."
Ironically enough, von Mises did mention the idea of such a mutualist system in his initial essay. He wrote of a system in which "the 'coal [miners'] syndicate' provides the 'iron [workers'] syndicate'" with goods and argued that "no price can be formed, except when both syndicates are the owners of the means of production employed in their business" (which may come as a surprise to transnational companies whose different workplaces sell each other their products!) Such a system is dismissed: "This would not be socialisation but workers' capitalism and syndicalism." [Op. Cit., p. 112]
Because as the building fell it gathered momentum countering resistance forces.
"Theoretical physics can prove an elephant can hang from a cliff with its tail tied to a daisy, but use your eyes -- your common sense -- ..."
A man described as "the premiere collapse expert in the country" thought the collapse of the south tower of the WTC was caused by explosives and not jet fuel, before the implosion of the north tower killed him on 9/11.
Deputy Chief Ray Downey, the head of the FDNY's Special Operations Command, was also described by colleagues as "the most knowledgeable person on building collapses there was," and 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer referred to Downey as a "very, very respected expert on building collapse."
According to a World Trade Center Task Force interview with FDNY' Chaplain Father John Delendick, immediately after the collapse of the south tower at 9:59am, Delendick met with Downey below the nearby World Financial Center and asked him if jet fuel had brought about the bizarre and sudden implosion of the building. According to Delendick, Downey "said at that point he thought there were bombs up there because it was too even."
Believeing blindly is probably the most dangerous point to take because it holds no accountability.
The good part is that we still have a country and reguardless of which side of the 911 coin you represent, it is still the same country, and there are patriots on both sides of the debate, being for one side or the other does not make you any more or less American.
"Black ops, or the black art known as counter intelligence, have been a tool of governments against its people for hundreds of years. Americans weren't brought into the intelligence community fold until WWII, when the elite Yale fraternity Skull and Bones (a training ground for the offspring of the eastern-aristocratic illegal-drug- running families) started the OSS and CIA (the Bush family goes way back in Skulls and the CIA) under the supervision of British Intelligence.
Black ops are easy enough to detect. larger-than-life staged events are immediately followed, and sometimes preceeded, with the personal profiles and pictures of the supposed perpetrators, with all of the details filled in at amazing speed, and no deviation or confusion by the outlets reporting it in lock-step comformity. Media outlets are supplied with talking points and the public is bombarded with "the facts of the case" before they have time to think about the strange coincidences.
For instance, a complete personal profile of Lee Harvey Oswald was printed in overseas news papers before he was ever arrested or considered a suspect here in the U.S.."external source
Originally posted by Torlough
My point is how can a government that is so good at planning that they orchestrated and helped in bringing down the WTC and then covering it all up, fail in Iraq so completely.
Face it as far as politics go Iraq is a Huge failure to Bush and his power base.
There is plenty of scientists who believe its impossible for planes to take those buildings down. Here is one: Journal of 911 studies with Proof That The Thermal and Gravitational Energy Available Were Insufficient to Melt Steel in the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade Center on 9/11/01 (pdf). source from another thread