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.

 

9/11 What evidence would make you believe in a conspiracy?

page: 91
10
<< 88  89  90    92  93  94 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
Sure. Why not? There have been plenty of underground fires that have burned a long time.


Only ones i know are coal fires.

Was their coal at ground zero?

Oh and tree stumps, any tree stumps at ground zero?



1. A underground coal fire is still an underground fire but with coal instead of misc. WTC debris.
2. A few years ago, a building was demolished in Detroit and there were underground fires for months after the demo. Can't remember the name of the building but I'll look it up.
3. Also keep in mind that your question focused around oxygen availability and not type of fuel burning.

[edit on 23-5-2008 by jfj123]




posted on May, 23 2008 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
"ALL" reports!?!!!! Please post your sources as to ALL reports.

Thanks, ULTIMA!!!!

Again.....please post ALL reports!!!! ALL of them!!!!!

Can't wait!


Gee, i already posted this stuff dozens of times.

I guess i can 1 more time. Here is a few for now.

911research.wtc7.net...

Given that the vast majority of the volatile jet fuel was consumed inside five minutes of each crash, the fires subsequently dwindled, limited to the fuels of conventional office fires. The fires in both Towers diminished steadily until the South Tower's collapse. Seconds before, the remaining pockets of fire were visible only to the firefighters and victims in the crash zone. A thin veil of black smoke enveloped the Tower's top. In the wake of the South Tower's fall new areas of fire appeared in the North Tower.


911research.wtc7.net...

In any case, the fuel did not last long, as much was consumed in the impact fireballs, and the rest would have evaporated and burned in under 5 minutes. Thereafter the fires were far less severe than other skyscraper fires (such as the 19-hour One Meridian Plaza blaze in 1991). Few flames were visible, and the black smoke indicated the fires were oxygen-starved. Survivors passed through the WTC 2's crash zone, and firefighters who arrived there described "two pockets of fire".


FEMA report 2.2.1.2 Fire Development

The time to consume the jet fuel can be reasonably computed. At the upper bound, if one assumes that all 10,000 gallons of fuel were evenly spread across a single building floor, it would form a pool that would be consumed by fire in less than 5 minutes (SFPE 1995) provided sufficient air for combustion was available. In reality, the jet fuel would have been distributed over multiple floors, and some would have been transported to other locations. Some would have been absorbed by carpeting or other furnishings, consumed in the flash fire in the aerosol, expelled and consumed externally in the fireballs, or flowed away from the fire floors. Accounting for these factors, it is believed that almost all of the jet fuel that remained on the impact floors was consumed in the first few minutes of the fire.










[edit on 23-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
3. Also keep in mind that your question focused around oxygen availability and not type of fuel burning.


Yes, you still have not explained how oxygen got through the tons of debris to keep the fire hot enough to melt steel and keep it molten.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
3. Also keep in mind that your question focused around oxygen availability and not type of fuel burning.


Yes, you still have not explained how oxygen got through the tons of debris to keep the fire hot enough to melt steel and keep it molten.



How does any underground fire burn?
What about the UNDERGROUND Centralia Penn. coal fire that has been burning since 1962. How does oxygen get underground through tons of dirt to keep the coal burning?? same thing.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
What about the UNDERGROUND Centralia Penn. coal fire that has been burning since 1962. How does oxygen get underground through tons of dirt to keep the coal burning?? same thing.


Maybe becasue of the big holes and the caverns that run underground.

Oh and somethign called MINES

Are thier big holes and caverns or MINES under ground zero?


[edit on 23-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Are thier big holes and caverns or MINES under ground zero?
[edit on 23-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]


Well, yeah...

There was a massive "bathtub" basement underneath several stories deep with subway tunnels and a even a station. Isn't that kind of like a big hole or cavern? lol



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
What about the UNDERGROUND Centralia Penn. coal fire that has been burning since 1962. How does oxygen get underground through tons of dirt to keep the coal burning?? same thing.


Maybe becasue of the big holes and the caverns that run underground.

Oh and somethign called MINES

Are thier big holes and caverns or MINES under ground zero?


[edit on 23-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]


The fires from centralia burnt into the coal veins themselves



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by _Del_

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Are thier big holes and caverns or MINES under ground zero?
[edit on 23-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]


Well, yeah...

There was a massive "bathtub" basement underneath several stories deep with subway tunnels and a even a station. Isn't that kind of like a big hole or cavern? lol


This is just killing him to be wrong
The situation is becoming desperate



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
This is just killing him to be wrong
The situation is becoming desperate


I'm not entirely convinced he's not a giant leg pull making fun of the "truth movement." At first I thought he could only be an idiot -- but maybe he's enjoying himself with super-brilliant satire?



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by _Del_
with subway tunnels and a even a station.


Is the subway right under the debris pile?

Did the subway station have damage to the roof to let oxygen up to the fire ?



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123This is just killing him to be wrong
The situation is becoming desperate


Kind of like you guys that live in a fantasy world and will never admit to the reallity that something other then what you were told might have happened.

I really feel sorry for you if you cannot face reallity.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 11:34 PM
link   
Have you moved into ignore mode Ultima...now that you have been called out?

Step up or shut up.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by scottie18
Have you moved into ignore mode Ultima...now that you have been called out?

Step up or shut up.


Thats so funny, since its the believers that never show anything to support thier claims. I have yet to see anyone post 1 shred of evindece to debate my post or to support the official story.

If anything i call out the believers again to show any evidence to support thier claims or the official sotry.

Lets see if any of the believers are adult enough to answer the questions i posted.

Is the subway right under the debris pile?

Did the subway station have damage to the roof to let oxygen up to the fire ?



[edit on 23-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Is the subway right under the debris pile?


Is the subway right under the debris pile? No, they moved the debris pile months ago.

Do you have a report showing the subway was hermetically sealed? I do not remember the presence of an airlock. Please provide proof the subway was airtight from the rest of the complex if that is your claim.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by _Del_
Do you have a report showing the subway was hermetically sealed? I do not remember the presence of an airlock. Please provide proof the subway was airtight from the rest of the complex if that is your claim.


I asked for evidence about the subway. Are you going to keep showing that believers never answer questions?

Why are you answering a question with a questoin? Because you have no evidence ?


[edit on 24-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 01:01 AM
link   
I guess I was wondering why you would think the subway was airtight from the rest of the complex even if undamaged. I was trying to get you to realize that they weren't -- so even if undamaged, there would still be airflow beneath the collapse. However, you were unable/unwilling to make that leap of logic. It's moot of course, because there was severe damage including collapse to the PATH system and basement levels.

As you choose not to answer for whatever reason, and you appear not to have learned this in all of your extensive research, I will provide you with some elementary diagrams to further your education.


Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Are thier big holes and caverns or MINES under ground zero?



Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Is the subway right under the debris pile?

Did the subway station have damage to the roof to let oxygen up to the fire ?


Not any of these depictions show all the things present, but by looking at all of them we get a good idea of what was under the complex. There were: tunnels for the PATH. Tunnels for the NYC subway system.
Also the old Hudson tubes/station that operated before the WTC was built are not shown. There are sewer systems under it too, but I didn't look for diagrams of them. There may have been old unused subway tunnels in or near the complex footprint as well, but I do not know that to be a fact.





This one shows the footprint of the complex and the PATH terminal, but not the NYC subway tunnels or station. It's too large to display properly.
www.drjudywood.com...


This one shows damage to only the PATH system. Red denotes collapse or extreme structural damage to the tubes and station. I haven't looked for reports of damage to the NYC subway system, but I'm sure they exist.



I'm surprised in all your research you didn't notice these things. I'd have thought you wouldn't need to ask the question because you'd know the answer.


EDIT: one of the images was too large to display properly and I messed up a tag...

[edit on 24-5-2008 by _Del_]



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by scottie18
Have you moved into ignore mode Ultima...now that you have been called out?

Step up or shut up.


Thats so funny, since its the believers that never show anything to support thier claims. I have yet to see anyone post 1 shred of evindece to debate my post or to support the official story.

If anything i call out the believers again to show any evidence to support thier claims or the official sotry.

You said you would answer legit questions. Please keep your word and answer them.


Lets see if any of the believers are adult enough to answer the questions i posted.

Is the subway right under the debris pile?

I don't know but it doesn't matter. Debris piles are not solid masses and are filled with opening that would easily allow air flow. Have you ever seen a large structural debris pile up close? Have you ever demo'd a debris pile? I have and I have NEVER seen a debris pile that turned into a solid mass after collapse. If it's a fire demolition, you need to be very careful because fires can be burning deep in the debris.
So I have ACTUAL hands on experience as I'm a licensed builder. Trust me when I say there would be plenty of air flow in a large debris pile.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by _Del_
Do you have a report showing the subway was hermetically sealed? I do not remember the presence of an airlock. Please provide proof the subway was airtight from the rest of the complex if that is your claim.


I asked for evidence about the subway. Are you going to keep showing that believers never answer questions?

Why are you answering a question with a questoin? Because you have no evidence ?

[edit on 24-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]

I like irony

You're answering a question with a question


What happened to you answering legit questions as you've stated? That didn't last long did it? Trolls live under bridges not on ATS.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
Debris piles are not solid masses and are filled with opening that would easily allow air flow.


Exactly. Tunnels and basements provide even better airflow, damaged or otherwise. The fact he challenged the idea there was anything below the complex showed he was only too eager to pick a fight over your point about the underground fires (or that he didn't know the tunnels/terminals were there). When challenged and told that there is in truth a substructure to the complex he makes the same mistake: he demands to know if they were damaged to provide airflow. In fact, his argument would have been better served had he taken the opposite tack: airflow was hindered because the substructure was damaged. But because he was so eager to start an argument (and or was unable to rationally think it through) he decided to challenge the assertion that the substructure could provide airflow -- because it was not damaged! The truth of course is that it was, showing he was wrong on both his assumptions. It doesn't really matter, because either scenario allows airflow through the debris field. He is picking a fight just to pick a fight and/or because he does not understand that point.



Originally posted by jfj123
Trolls live under bridges not on ATS.


I am in possession of information that leads me to believe otherwise. Please do not offer these wild theories with out any evidence.



[edit on 24-5-2008 by _Del_]



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by _Del_

Originally posted by jfj123
Trolls live under bridges not on ATS.


I am in possession of information that leads me to believe otherwise. Please do not offer these wild theories with out any evidence.


I don't have to provide evidence because you "believers" won't provide evidence that trolls don't not live under bridges and don't not live here on ATS
-Sarcasm inserted for effect



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 88  89  90    92  93  94 >>

log in

join