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 ULTIMA1
Originally posted by _Del_
Citations please.
These are very easy to find, but i will post them all later since i have to go to work.
I wil post sources of photos when others post the infomration for the photos they poste, its the fair and adult thing.
Originally posted by _Del_
Please do not post photos until you can provide it. Someone I know said something like that in this thread.
Originally posted by Ultima
Also photos ... are unsourced so therfore cannot be used as real evindence.
But the photos of the wreckage ... are unsourced, so they are not verifiable evidence.
What was the Photograhers name, where and when were the photos taken ?
So again what was the photographers name, where and when were the photos taken, or admit the photos are unsourced?
When you admit that you cannot post a source of the photos. I have asked several times and you and others have failed to post a source of any of the photos taken. So just admit you have no source of the photos.
So how can you still believe in somthing that you cannot provide proof of?
What is the phtos sourec, Photogrpher, date and time time taken?
If you have no sources the photo is not evidnece.
Becasue i am not the one who claimed to have photos, you are.
So if you cannot support your photos with proper sources that they are not evidecne, simple as that.
Please show me the proper source for the photos you posted.
I have asked this several times, so do you have the proper sources for the photos, YES or NO?
No, you failed to show the time, date and location of the photos as i asked.
Do you have the dates, times and locations the photos were taken, YES or NO?
If your next post does not answer the question then we will all know you do not have the sources and you are jsut making statments and opinions.
[edit on 27-5-2008 by _Del_]
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.
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]
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by jthomas
Provide evidence for your claim. Photos show that fires were raging unfought up until the collapses of each tower.
Well i have reports, several photos and video of the fires buring out before the collapse.
1. Report of fire buring out before collaspe.
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.
"i stated the witness testimonies would be worthless because common sense says they would not hold up in court, any half decent lawyer would tear the witness statements up.
This summary is supported by simple observations of the extent and brightness of the flames and the color and quantity of smoke, using the available photographic and video evidence
2. Photos of no visiable flames (only black smoke) showing outside the building before collapse.
i114.photobucket.com...
i114.photobucket.com...
i114.photobucket.com...
i114.photobucket.com...
3. Video showing some thermite reaction at corner of building BUT NO LARGE FLAMES SHOWING OUTSIDE THE BUIDLING, ONLY BLACK SMOKE (MEANING OXYGEN STARVED FIRE)
www.youtube.com...
Provide physical evidence of "molten metal"
1. Photos of molten metals and steel.
i114.photobucket.com...
i114.photobucket.com...
2. Photos of water being sprayed on equipment and debris pile due to fires burning under debris. Also showing the smoke coming form the fires.
i114.photobucket.com...
i114.photobucket.com...
i114.photobucket.com...
Originally posted by scottie18
I have had enough laughs at your expense, you are a paranoid, tin foil hatted joke.
Originally posted by jthomas
Nothing you provide shows fires going out before the collapse. You provided no evidence of "oxygen-starved fires."
Fires burned for weeks in the debris. Your point?
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by scottie18
I have had enough laughs at your expense, you are a paranoid, tin foil hatted joke.
Yes all my co-workers and i have lots of laughs at immature people like you who still believe the official story.
Originally posted by jthomas
Nothing you provide shows fires going out before the collapse. You provided no evidence of "oxygen-starved fires."
The reports, photos and videos i have been posting are all evidence of fires going out and oxygen starved fires.
Fires burned for weeks in the debris. Your point?
My point is how did the fires get hot enough to melt metal and steel and how did they stay hot enough to keep meatal and steel molten for 6 weeks?
Originally posted by jthomas
What "official story"? Explain yourself
You provided nothing that would stand up in court. You provided no evidence of fires going out. You provided no evidence of "oxygen-starved" fires.
Provide factual evidence of temperatures hot enough to melt steel.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by jthomas
What "official story"? Explain yourself
You knwo the BS story the media has tried to make us believe. You must beleive the official story or you would be looking for the truth like me.
You provided nothing that would stand up in court. You provided no evidence of fires going out. You provided no evidence of "oxygen-starved" fires.
Oh i believe all the reports, the photos and videos would hold up in court better then the Official story, you know the story you cannot provide any evidence to support.
Provide factual evidence of temperatures hot enough to melt steel.
The reports, photos and videos show evidence that the temps were hot enough to melt steel.
Originally posted by jthomas
[No one has ever explained what the "official story" is supposed to be. 9/11 Truthers use it all the time but never can define it or explain what it is. Please explain what the "official story" is in your own words.
Then you should have no trouble showing it. So far, you just claim it. So, provide the evidence to support your claims.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Yes all my co-workers and i have lots of laughs at immature people like you who still believe the official story.
Why are you and the believers so afraid to do research and post sources of photos when asked?
I can post sources for the photos i posted, why can't the believers?
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by scottie18
I have had enough laughs at your expense, you are a paranoid, tin foil hatted joke.
Yes all my co-workers and i have lots of laughs at immature people like you who still believe the official story.
Why are you and the believers so afraid to do research and post sources of photos when asked?
I can post sources for the photos i posted, why can't the believers?
Originally posted by jthomas
Nothing you provide shows fires going out before the collapse. You provided no evidence of "oxygen-starved fires."
The reports, photos and videos i have been posting are all evidence of fires going out and oxygen starved fires.
Fires burned for weeks in the debris. Your point?
My point is how did the fires get hot enough to melt metal and steel and how did they stay hot enough to keep meatal and steel molten for 6 weeks?
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by jthomas
[No one has ever explained what the "official story" is supposed to be. 9/11 Truthers use it all the time but never can define it or explain what it is. Please explain what the "official story" is in your own words.
You know that 2 planes hit the towers and caused 3 buildings to collapse, even though there is no evidence to support this.
Flight 77 hit the Pentagon even though there is no evidence to support this.
Flight 93 crashed in PA. even though there is no evidnce to support this.
You know the theory that the media keeps teeling us to believe. But a little common sense says its BS.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by jthomas
[No one has ever explained what the "official story" is supposed to be. 9/11 Truthers use it all the time but never can define it or explain what it is. Please explain what the "official story" is in your own words.
You know that 2 planes hit the towers and caused 3 buildings to collapse, even though there is no evidence to support this.
Flight 77 hit the Pentagon even though there is no evidence to support this.
Flight 93 crashed in PA. even though there is no evidnce to support this.
You know the theory that the media keeps teeling us to believe. But a little common sense says its BS.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Yes all my co-workers and i have lots of laughs at immature people like you who still believe the official story.
I can post sources for the photos i posted, why can't the believers?