It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Eye witness testimony = crap.
The fall accelerated as the accumulated weight rose.
It wasn't a massive failure. It was parts failing which in turn caused other parts to fail. And once a tipping point we got to the stage that it was TONS of falling debris that caused the acceleration.
But they would not turn to a bunch of rubble without first offering resistance. ANY resistance, would have delayed the collapse, and increased the running time of the event.
The top sliding off sideways for example. What we have seen here instead, is that gravity was deliberately made the single most important factor in the collapse, circumventing all of the other variables, and putting the towers straight down in their own footprint.
Actually only gravity could cause an acceleration. But either way, NIST actually gave figures for the dynamic loading a single floor could take, and not just contradictory data for which they pick a meaning. They said in their last FAQ that one generalized floor could take 6 under dynamic loading, and I think 11 under static. In other words, one floor falling onto one floor stops the "reaction" dead in its tracks. So for two, three, four, five, and six.
This I have to agree with. In fact, I have come across evidence of this as being one of the reasons why the WTC was "slated" for destruction. The Towers were about to be condemned. Guiliani knew it, and so did Silverstein. They probably saw the problem upon inspections after the first attack back in the 90's. I posted about this a while back. I'd really have to dig to find it though.
Taking in a bigger picture, and I just follow the leads like any investigator. As you know, I am not beyond changing my opinion, so long as it the change is dictated by fact.
As you know, I used to wear a shield, so I am well versed in the flaws of eyewitness testimony. The only thing it is really good for, is corroboration of other evidence, and in some cases to corroborate identical testimony.
The velocity of the collapse should have been interrupted at each point of failure, but in this case it did not. This is evidence that the failure of each floor had occurred, before the mass above it had reached that point.
This may be true of the floor structure, but not the inner columns. Furthermore, if the descending rubble was not concentrated, why did it not simply shower over the the resistance of the remaining structure?
Originally posted by WraothAscendant
No increased mass would accelerate it.
And that is pure speculation and did you miss where I said I think the NIST was trying to cover up shoddy materials on top of other things?
You disbelieve them on so many other levels but when they say the floors should have been able to 6 floors of weight you agree with them without question. See an unbalance here?
It didn't start out the same speed it ended man.
Ok I have said this time and time and time again man. There is no good reason the top would have just slid off. It wasn't severed by a giant samurai sword, a plane hit it which compromised the structure. It didn't cleanly chop one building into two parts.
Not just gravity...... Weight. Denisity. Velocity. In differing measures.
Please don't take this as a snipe but what happened to your objectivity man?
My objectivity is intact. I have posted only factual information. But again, I am willing to look at facts which may counter those that I have already examined
Doesn't state a case for CD though. The scenario I mentioned up at the beginning of the thread (all those days ago) points that out.
But please don't take this or other words as sign I no longer respect you. It just I feel like I am trying to break through a brick wall of denial with facts.
Then why did you site eye witness testimony like you did? And even the corroboration will TAINT eye witness testimony. Eye witness testimony is crap and the more people you get into it the worse it tends to get.
Add to it the ability of mankind's for lying and greed. Once again. If Mr. Alex Jones was right do you honestly think he would be continuing to draw breath if he couldn't be subverted?
The collapse was NOT fast to start it built up speed as it went along. And once you get to a point and your dropping ALOT of weight on those floors they will fail VERY quickly by the sheer mechanism of the massive weights your dropping on them.
Neither was the core columns one piece. NONE of it was down to the nitty gritty one continuous piece of steel. Or concrete.
Yet every single argument I have you simply ignore despite the fact you say you "like how I think.".
And no it wouldn't just slide off.
It was collapsing inside into the hollows inside the building.
What say you we drop this? I would prefer to keep the respect between us and I don't think it's going to last long if this continues especially with BS there joining in a good ole double teaming.
Not direct evidence of CD, I agree. It goes to motive though, as well as knowledge beforehand.
Don't take this the wrong way, but I'm not the one trying to rewrite physics. I know that may sound harsh, but I think you might be holding on too tight. There is no brick wall of denial here. I have gone back and forth with my opinion on this fluidly, based on all of the evidence I am exposed to. You may be right in the long run, but I have seen no facts presented to challenge my observations at this time.
Eyewitness testimony has a place, when corraborated with other evidence. There are people who do know what they saw after all. The only way to determine which ones though, is to follow the other evidence.
You can't "taint" eyewitness testimony by corrobarting what they have said with facts that were uncovered independently of their observation. This is why you question people seperately during an investigation.
Actually, the more people you have, the better chance you have of uncovering corroborative testimony. If you have two people who see a hit and run, and one sais the car was yellow while the other sais the car was red, you have no evidence. But if out of ten witnesses, seven say it was red, two say it was yellow, one says it was black, you will probably keep an eye out for a reddish-colored car with a dent.
This isn't about Alex Jones, or wether or not he is lieing just to line his pockets. This is about the elites lining their pockets and incremantally enslaving us all.
You wanna know why "they" haven't shut him up, and others like him? Because "they" want you to know what they did. The same reason they left so many holes in the official story. Most people just believe what they have been told, and were shocked into believing. But for those who would question, to those who are a real threat to the status quo, to those who dissent, 9/11 is a warning. "Look what we can do, and there is nothing you can do about it. Obey."
Terminal velocity is the same for a one-pond rock and a ten pound rock. The floors would have offered resistance, regardless of the force applied. Even if the cumilative result was only a matter of seconds added to the total collapse time.
I think the obvious motive would have to have been to scare the American people and by that fear use it to get things they normally would have had people in the streets fighting against. All that destroying the WTC for profit is purely secondary and not a good reason to execute such a plan.
Ever heard the term "Lets get our stories straight"?
That happens as a unconscious mechanism as well.
Heavy things do NOT need to reach terminal velocity to be destructive in a fall.
At 9:58:59, the South Tower collapsed in ten seconds
Originally posted by WraothAscendant
The collapse was NOT fast to start it built up speed as it went along.