Serious footage. Proof of a controlled demolition.

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damocles
but, ive asked before ill ask again, if it was a cd, any of them (slips into marvin the martian voice) "wheres the kaboom? there was supposed to be an earth shattering kaboom!"

[edit on 7-12-2007 by Damocles]


Well quite, those flashes are far too small by a long way to be explosions of the sort that could bring a building down. At least one of them can be seen to be rotating debris, as there is debris falling away from the tower where you see s flash, and afterwards you can see it continue it's path downwards.




posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:05 AM
link   
reply to post by apex
 


You're absolutely right. Those flashes are not even close to the magnitude you'd need to bring down the joists in such a large building.

I mean, I am not completely against the theorists who believe this was an inside job. I don't think its very plausible, but there are some interesting theories. But this is hardly proof.

Go ahead and explain to me why many of the flashes happen AFTER the building starts to fall. I work with computers and I know for a fact that monitor tubes under lots of heat and/or pressure can "burst/flash" just like that. How many computers were in the WTC? Thousands upon thousands. And yes, the burst is VERY bright. This isn't the only explanation. There are too many explanations for these tiny blips to even count.

This is the reason this site is ridiculed. If I was a moderator and saw "PROOF" in the title without anything close to what could be regarded as proof, I'd close the thread without even a second guess.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:10 AM
link   
27 or 28 seconds in, a zoom is taken of an explosion to the upper right of the crash. Smoking gun, literally.... You can see the puff of smoke after the explosion.

The force coming out of the main explosions during the collapse is just incredible. It is almost like there is just one big device on every two floors or so placed right in the middle of the core.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Anubis Kanubis
 


if that is the case it would have to be large enough to sever them all. a blast of that magnitude would have settled the matter

heres why i say that. to cut the core columns using C4 sheets applied directly to the columns you would need approx 1100lbs of ordinance per floor.

if the ordinance isnt applied directly to the columns it would be bigger on an orer of magnitude i dont even want to try to figure out tonight.

but, 1100lbs of ordinance would have been heard over a mile away.
and if that would have been the case we wouldnt be having this discussion cuz the official story wouldnt have had to check anything else

even using the most efficient method of blasting steel, linear shaped charges, it would take 172lbs/floor and you'd hear that clearly with no mistake at some distance.

if your looking at things like squibs then i suggest you watch several of the videos again and pay attention to the fact that you see them pop out and whatever is moving the material CONTINUES to push through the little cloud. now, considering that when HE goes off its an instantaneous overpressure , an impulse if you will, and then its over. theres no force left to continue pushing material.

ergo, the "squibs" are NOT from HE blasts.

now should anyone care to argue that with a large enough set of ordinance packages there would be enough overpressure to do that, then i suggest you explain how a bomb large enough to create that type of overpressure, remember the floors were like a square acre of area, went without being heard all over manhattan.

the CD theories just dont hold water on any level and all the CD theorists are left with is "well, they LOOk like a Cd" and thats not really a strong case is it?



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 09:59 AM
link   
OK.

I don't want to get shot down for this particularly, but there is an alternative explanation for the "squibs" and its this...

After the impacts the buildings are under considerable strain. The weight distribution through them is screwed and all the loadings are transferred.

Any weaknesses within the structure are going to be amplified at that point, and beams under stress will buckle, then snap.

Now I'm a Civil Engineer and I've seen pre-tensioned beams snap and I can tell you right now that its one of the most frightening things you can experience because its literally like having a bomb going off. When they go they do so with huge force, certainly enough to blow out windows.

And, if the struture transfers the loads down through it, the failure will appear to be sequential as it gives way.

Just a thought.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Dwight Howard
 


Err this video is a peice of crap.

Firstly, the Explosions would have needed to be in the center of the building to destroy the main support columns. which means they would not be visible from the outside.

There are Several Walls between the Buildings windows & the Central Columns. And unless those walls are made from translusant Materials, visible evidence of the explosions would be impossible.

Secondly, there are far too many of these flashes. Whom ever doctored the video obviousely had no idea or concept of Overkill...lol And all in the wrong locations to bring the building down.

I do strongly believe this was an Inside Job, as many fier fighters recall hearing multiple explosions comming from the basement areas.

But these flashes are just too wrong!!

These were done post & most likely in a program like Adobe Premier.

[edit on 12/7/2007 by Ironclad]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damocles

the CD theories just dont hold water on any level and all the CD theorists are left with is "well, they LOOk like a Cd" and thats not really a strong case is it?


yet, there were multiple reports by 'earwitnesses' of 'massive explosions'.
so, people DID hear them 'a mile away'.
and rick seigel (911 eyewitness) recorded them from 2 miles away.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by dionysius9
 


I wasn't aware that when aluminum "flashes" from reflecting sunlight that it produces smoke. Wierd. I'm going to try to focus some sunlight at random peices of aluminum and try to replicate the smoke effect that this puts out.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ironclad
Err this video is a peice of crap.

Firstly, the Explosions would have needed to be in the center of the building to destroy the main support columns. which means they would not be visible from the outside.


Not really. If the explosions were focus only at the core supports, the building would have collapse in upon itself and could have not actually collapsed completely. By targeting the outer supports as well as the inner core total demolition was achieved.

If you watch the collapse you will noticed that the building doesn't actually fall down. It appears that it does, but watch the individual floors. They remain in their place as the explosions travels downward - giving it a "falling" appearance. To me, this is the greatest evidence of explosions being used.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Yup, there is definitely shills here. Please don't waste time refuting that, shills.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dwight Howard
Yup, there is definitely shills here. Please don't waste time refuting that, shills.


Yeah, it sucks when those pesky skeptics come along and try to have some form of dialog on a subject. It's just too bad you don't have anything to backup your claims except some little flickers of light that are easily explained. Your responses are a bit adolescent and I believe you're violating the rules against name calling, unless your attempted ad hom judgement of those who disagree with you by calling them shills is considered proper ATS etiquette.

Regardless of that, you haven't proven anything with this video. You should go back to Google-University and Youtube-College or wherever you studied and see if you can dig up something more compelling.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by alaskan
...just looking past the identical flashes that happen in the blue sky to the side of the building? ...




Originally posted by alaskan
Watch from about 3:10 of the video you just posted.
Look at the sky on the left side of the building. Notice flashes.



The video you posted

I'm not saying there couldn't of been explosions, it's just that what you're pointing out isn't getting anybody anywhere.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 11:32 AM
link   
They look like electrical arcs to me. I would assume any building having airplanes crashing into to them would start have short circuits all over the place. Notice that light is not an orange hue, but that of a white light. That very consistent with electrical arcs and not combustion flames.

Here a link to normal 480 volt arc...(480v is common in large buildings)
www.youtube.com...



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 11:35 AM
link   
I don't know too much about how a demolition works, but in response to the OP, if those flashes in the video were supposed to be triggers.. why wasn't there any sign of an explosion afterwards? Such as more smoke, pieces flying out the windows.. et cetera.

If you see the flash, then I'm pretty sure you'd see some damage on the outside.. unless the damage occurred on the inside. But that still doesn't make any sense.

Why would they trigger explosions at the very top of the tower anyway? It would be strategically better to do it at the bottom of the tower if they want to bring it down faster. Putting triggers up top makes no sense. There is plenty of damage up top due to where the plane hit. (I'm talking about the tower with the flashes in question). Just my two cents of course.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by ebe51
They look like electrical arcs to me. I would assume any building having airplanes crashing into to them would start have short circuits all over the place.


Maybe you mean an open circuit? Which might happen wherever physical cables/devices were actually severed/destroyed. Unless you're dealing with massive voltage you're not going to see arcs anyway and all the electrical stuff was either in the core or run out through the floors (and what was running through the floors was probably only 120VAC, like the outlets in your house). So I doubt this.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:07 PM
link   
good video, here's an even better one, with more flash charges, and evidence of thermate shape charges to take out the main core infrastructure ,which the guys at PM have no reason for why the inner core fell in a pancaking collapse, when it shouldnlt have.

I mean if the whole thing tip over and fell like a tree, maybe, but the core falling straight down at free fall speed. Nothing but CD can account for that.

Anyhow take a look at this, it's about 9 minutes long and if your on the fence, it will point you in the right direction.

youtube.com...



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Now I'm a Civil Engineer


Cool. If you ever see me posting misunderstood civil engineering principles, please point it out. BTW, I have a BSCE also.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by ebe51
They look like electrical arcs to me. I would assume any building having airplanes crashing into to them would start have short circuits all over the place.


Maybe you mean an open circuit? Which might happen wherever physical cables/devices were actually severed/destroyed. Unless you're dealing with massive voltage you're not going to see arcs anyway and all the electrical stuff was either in the core or run out through the floors (and what was running through the floors was probably only 120VAC, like the outlets in your house). So I doubt this.



I work as an eletrical designer, before that I worked in the field. Let me tell you, shorts cause arc flashes. You can test this by cutting a cord with power running through it, but I wouldn't do it. Also 120v is used for plugs, however in larger buildings 240v and/or 277v lighting is common. When two or more 277v circuits are in a conduit together and that conduit breaks two hot legs of 277v together become 480v. However it doesn't really matter all standard voltages have enough power to make arcs when they short. I know this for a fact, I can't tell you how many I myself have made arcs, but doing something worng while learning the trade.



[edit on 7-12-2007 by ebe51]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nola213
Nothing but CD can account for that.


Although I believe it was a CD, exact statements like this can't be made yet IMO.

Shoddy workmanship could account for it. Highly doubtful but it is another thing that potentially could account for it. Just saying.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:46 PM
link   
On thing I have against the CD is that in this case nothing fell following the flashes. If CD was going on you expect that the flashes would have been charges to bring something down. Yet, we see nothing fall after the flashes, but it's sometime later when the building starts to fall. The people are still talking while the flashes go off yet the building is still standing. If it was CD I would think you see a short flash followed by instant falling.





top topics
 
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join