It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New Video of WTC with Explosions Evident

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 03:28 PM
reply to post by Griff

I wonder if this oil line is for the famous diesel fuel storage tanks for Bldg 7??

Might be interesting to follow up on this.

posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 04:30 PM
reply to post by Griff

Thanks Griff, that sounds like a reasonable explanation.

Originally posted by MOPP4
My 2 cents:

I think what we're seeing is the result of the impact of the jet. You see the smoke first a second before you hear the impact - this seems normal given the distance the filmer is from the buiding. You would not hear the sound at the same instant as the impact. Same principle as see lightning and then hearing the thunder moments later.

What bothers me about this video is that at 6:20 when there are possible explosions, you hear the sound of the second plane crashing, but the person taking the video doesn't react. You would think they would have been startled and move the camera or maybe turn the camera toward the other building. This makes me think the sound of the second plane was added at that time, but I could be wrong. There are other sounds throughout the video that I think were added for effect and that could bring the credibility of the video into question.

Regardless of whether the explosions happened at the same time of the second plane crashing, it still looks like something exploded there.

posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 04:39 PM
reply to post by MOPP4

If the apparent explosion(s) is from the blast pulse or wave from the jet impact...why isn't the pulse more evenly distributed throughout the existing smoke?

The North face does not appear to have been affected at all?? While the East face seems to be sporadically affected???

If the blast wave from the jet impact is that powerful shouldn't the existing external smoke patterns have been more affected as well???

These are the questions that come to mind.

If indeed this video is evidence of internal explosions within the North Tower this would corroborate the testimony of the witnesses within who mentioned explosions occuring at about the time the second plane struck.

posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 06:12 PM

But what shocks me in this video is how loud the sirens passing close by to the camera in the beggining are, but at 6:20 when the second plane supposedly hits, you can just barely hear a slight roar maybe starting at 6:18, then the crash, and its very, very faint. You would think you'd hear a much louder screaming for a longer period of time from a 767 flying into the building. Unless he was on the opposite side, it appears it definitely didnt fly right over him, but still I would expect to hear more of an approach roar from a large passenger jet.

Its called geography - person filming was near WTC 7 which is at north
end of WTC complex. 2nd plane came from the south hitting south face
of Tower 2 passing through and exiting at southeast corner. Filmer would
have been blocked by WTC 7, Tower 1 (north) and by north face of Tower
2 from seeing what was going on at other end of complex.

posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 09:38 PM
I don't think explosions happened when the plane hit the building. It was very apparent that explosions were used to take it down. Into a nice, neat little pile at that... Someone made the lightning/thunder analogy before I could jump to it, light travels allot faster than sound. So much faster in fact it is capable of fooling the senses. There is never a set time for light/sound delay, because thickness of air and temperature all effect the sounds speed to travel. Sound travels a few meters per second faster through hotter air, in my calculations from the temp that day, it was at about 770 m/s, or 1058 ft/s. This is however moot.

posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 11:03 PM
Great video and not faked. The thing which cannot be disputed is that the fire resulting from the first plane hitting was obviously not very hot. We have a lot of gray and black smoke there. The second impact resulted in a similar fire but we did see flames due to it being nearer to a corner of the building.

The video shows better than any I've seen to date the pandemonium on the streets while all this went down and the futile response from city authorities.

There was no towering inferno at the WTC.

posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 11:16 PM
That man fell. It must of been eternity. Damn money. Damn power.

posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 10:22 PM
I noticed this today aswell.

When I saw it I said why did 911 happen.. Oil ok!
Boone 870 directed me to this thread.. We are on the same wave lenght here.. That spray paint sticks out.. I was wondering if it was used for a city line.. Do we have any people who work construction to know what red is used for and what oil lines run threw that area?

posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 11:25 PM
reply to post by zysin5

Red is usually used for electricity. It's my opinion that the markings are only utility markings. The line and arrow look like a k and the 0 means 0 feet away. Might be underground oil lines for WTC 7 servicing the generators. Could account for why it's red. That's total speculation on my part. Where is this marking?

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in