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 TeslaandLyne
No explosions reported for WTC7.. why was it so weak?
[edit on 12/15/2007 by TeslaandLyne]
Originally posted by thedman
Yes there was some damage and fire on the south side, but isolated fires in the other parts of the building.
Here are the real quotes from FDNY men on the scene - not the
cherry -picked, edited out of context stuff you see on the "truther" sites
wtc7lies.googlepages.com...
Actually listened to lecture and talked to several of these FDNY chiefs
Originally posted by Aim64C
I have no idea why we are arguing over frequency... but, since I do happen to be an electronics technician, I believe I can straighten this whole mess out.
Originally posted by Aim64C
For all intents and purposes - a single wire exposed to an oscillating magnetic field of a radio transmitter does not generate any current. It's so small that you cannot utilize it without an amplifier (or you are standing dangerously close to the transmitter).
Originally posted by Aim64C
Although I am still in the dark as why this was a point of debate.
Originally posted by adjay
If you read over my posts, you'll see Defcon5 claimed that controlled demolition was impossible due to a mobile setting it all off, yet without any more details obviously nobody here would know the system used, if it was in fact a controlled demolition, and therefore is still a possibility.
What about the fact that if it had been wired in advance, as many claim, that some person in the building using a cell phone could have triggered the charges before the event happened?
Originally posted by defcon5
Originally posted by Aim64C
Although I am still in the dark as why this was a point of debate.
Because I mentioned that they do not allow cell phone operation in areas were blasting equipment is used because they are not Intrinsically Safe Devices. This is of course a true statement, but then I got jumped on that they would be willing to just go ahead and take this risk, even though construction/demolition companies don’t, to wire up a building in advance.
Originally posted by adjay
reply to post by albie
No, he is definitely not as sure.
After he see's the fireman's statements about the floors "popping out" and the "boom boom boom boom boom", the dialog is:
Interviewer: "But he says it was as if ... [explosives had been used]"
Jawenko: "That's what it looks like"
Jawenko: "But don't tell me they put explosives on all 100 floors. That's not possible."
Interviewer: "Why not?"
Jawenko: "Of course it isn't."
Interviwer: "You wouldn't do it like that?"
Jawenko: "It would take a year."
Interviwer: "A year to place all those explosives?"
Jawenko: "And prepare them and hook them up. With all the cables down there."
This is a much different picture to him saying "absolutely" repeatedly regarding whether explosives were used on WTC7. With regards to his comments above, his opinion hinges on "But don't tell me they put explosives on all 100 floors." - but what if there was? This hints that his opinion may be different. He assumes traditional (cables) demolition techniques as well, when the evidence points to thermite, and the hypothesis could include any number of different ways of using "explosives".
Also as I pointed out before, WTC1 and WTC2 were hit by planes which could provide a "cover" for any controlled demolitions work, but that is another thread (this one is about WTC7).
Originally posted by Conspiriology
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
No explosions reported for WTC7.. why was it so weak?
[edit on 12/15/2007 by TeslaandLyne]
here see for yourself
www.youtube.com...&rel=1&border=0
Why do I pick up my cell phone in my car radio seconds before it rings, or when it switches between digital systems. Also I pick up peoples cell phones in EEG wires just prior to them ringing? Now admittedly in EEG we are dealing with amplified signals as brainwaves are in the microvolt range. Are both cases do to amplifiers in the system then?
And the reason cell phones are not allowed at demolition sites is not because of electric current in wires (percussion tubing is used nowadays because most explosives are set off using high-velocity percussion. You can shock it and burn it all you want to - it's not going to do anything...) - it's because of potential current developing between individual molecules and triggering an explosion.
Originally posted by albie
There is not one jot of evidence that building 7 was blown up.
Originally posted by ZeuZZ
How anyone can look at WT7 fall down that quickly and not suspect it was controlled demolition is beyond me.
Originally posted by deltaboy
How fast do tall buildings usually naturally falls?
Originally posted by ZeuZZ
They dont.
Give me one example of a tall building which completely collapses. To save you the time, there are none.
That is before the three collapsed all on the same day, all the exact same way, on September 11th.
[edit on 17-12-2007 by ZeuZZ]
Originally posted by deltaboy
Soooooooo... which means we can't compare to any pass events of another naturally falling tall building because it has never been done before so we just considered it a demolition instead eh?
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
Is not this the Tesla statement the he could explode the weapons of
on coming armies making their weapons useless. Well its back to hand
to hand combat then. Best to explode arms before they start heading
towards you.
This may not help the remote detonation by cell phone agenda but
helps the UFO with the beam detonator theory.
In any case since Tesla started sending electric fields and currents
through the air, guess the IllumiNazis turned another Tesla device
against us.
We must free these devices from the immoral holders and find out
how 9 /11/01 happened.
Pre wiring is to slow compared to plopping down plastic with a cellphone
detonator, just like later in IRAQ.
Was not there a used cell phone drive at one time for the poor or tax credit.
Osama's gangsters must have re programmed them and stuck them
around the WTC complex. I mean if we agree if explosions took place
not accounted for by plane fuel.
Originally posted by ANOK
C'mon that's kinda silly. No building has ever naturally globally collapsed because it just doesn't happen. Precedence tells us it doesn't and so does physics, where are you getting the idea it could happen from exactly?
That's the kind of ass covering crap the government would say, meaningless words designed to whitewash the reality.
Words in a thread are just a waste of bandwidth if they have nothing to back them up.