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.

 

Experts: 'Explosives Did Not Destroy Skyscraper in Sept. 11 Attack'

page: 1
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Experts: 'Explosives Did Not Destroy Skyscraper in Sept. 11 Attack'


www.foxnews.com

Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology say their three-year investigation of the collapse of the 47-story building was the first known instance of fire causing the total failure of a skyscraper.

The investigators also conclude that the collapse of the nearby twin towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in WTC 7 without water
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Here it is... Here is the proof! For any of you doubters, they back it up with a full 2 paragraphs!

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 11:52 AM
link   
The sad thing is that someone got paid to do that "article"... No evidence, just a theory that the sprinklers broke in building 7, yeah, great studying there.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 11:52 AM
link   
I don't this will keep "truthers" from making things up with false science...there was enough proof already, but this will be buried I'm sure...



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by hikix
 



'Explosives Did Not Destroy Skyscraper in Sept. 11 Attack'


I agree the fact that there were explosives is immaterial. The fact that they were detonated was just coincidental.








[edit on 21/8/08 by pause4thought]



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 12:04 PM
link   
As a 9/11 fence sitter, I'd be with you on this one if the third building that day was hit with the plane. I guess you've taken their word for it, you can let other people figure what they can on their own.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by yellowcard
I don't this will keep "truthers" from making things up with false science...there was enough proof already, but this will be buried I'm sure...


Proof of what exactly?



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by hikix


Here it is... Here is the proof! For any of you doubters, they back it up with a full 2 paragraphs!

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


Fox News is not a credible source. You will find no facts from their website or Network.

Unless you consider the testimony of "scientists" paid by Rupert Murdoch to be fact.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 12:48 PM
link   
I'll back their two paragraphs
with two letters
BS



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 12:51 PM
link   
So a government agency towed the government line...This is supposed to be some kind revelation to people? I would like to know if anyone is really and truly surprised at what they said. I don't think any of the "truthers" expected NIST to say anything other than they did. No one in their right minds expected this group to come out and and say "Hey, guess what? I guess it is did actually fall because of demolition. We were wrong".

This whole thing is a sham. I am still on the fence about it, but what is going on here is (I am not picking a fight, just using this as an analogy) the same as religious people saying "Jesus was the Messiah/Mohamed was a true prophet, see the Bible/Koran, this is proof of it". If you want any kind of credibility these things need to be done by groups and individuals who have no vested interest in the outcome.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shroomery

Originally posted by yellowcard
I don't this will keep "truthers" from making things up with false science...there was enough proof already, but this will be buried I'm sure...


Proof of what exactly?


The obvious...but if I were to say it I'd be pounced on and told that I'm stupid by the majority of people here, because apparently in most cases if something doesn't fit someone's idea of what 'really' happening on 9/11 they don't want to hear it...even if it's fact. Which is why this story has been posted about 4 times today, all with the exact same results...

[edit on 21-8-2008 by yellowcard]



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by yellowcard
 


Surely your older than 5yrs old.
Truthers?
Dont you feel disgusted in your own intellegence using that as a negative term?

Really?
You cant find anything better to label people demanding an honest government truther?
do us a favour... go sign up!


heres some reality for you.


If indeed the facists pulld this off, what part of your ignorant little brain believes they'd actually let a NIST department release a report saying
'' yes, the government used explosives and heres the proof ''

what a fool.

If indeed the US facists brought them down any report released on 911 will most definately back the facists...

your a fool to believe otherwise.

your exactly the sort of person this report aims for.

c'mon, what was said?

millions was spent investigating JFK,
thousands was spent investigating 911, and they just happened to be Bush's homeboys investigating.

If thats good enough for you, then I suppose 'truthers' is by far an achievement for your abilities.


[edit on 21-8-2008 by Agit8dChop]



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
reply to post by yellowcard
 


Surely your older than 5yrs old.
Truthers?
Dont you feel disgusted in your own intellegence using that as a negative term?

Really?
You cant find anything better to label people demanding an honest government truther?
do us a favour... go sign up!


heres some reality for you.


If indeed the facists pulld this off, what part of your ignorant little brain believes they'd actually let a NIST department release a report saying
'' yes, the government used explosives and heres the proof ''

what a fool.

If indeed the US facists brought them down any report released on 911 will most definately back the facists...

your a fool to believe otherwise.

your exactly the sort of person this report aims for.

c'mon, what was said?

millions was spent investigating JFK,
thousands was spent investigating 911, and they just happened to be Bush's homeboys investigating.

If thats good enough for you, then I suppose 'truthers' is by far an achievement for your abilities.


[edit on 21-8-2008 by Agit8dChop]



Thanks for proving my point...it didn't take long for someone to bite...which again proves my point; the only thing that "truthers" have is calling people who present factual evidence "fools" or "idiots" or "warmongers"...or as you said a 5 year old "fascist." I'm a libertarian, but I do not believe in this nonsense of controlled detonation or planes not actually flying into anything. It's nonsense, it's illogical and there is no evidence what so ever to support such a thing...the only thing you have are hypothetical proposals and no physical evidence.

[edit on 21-8-2008 by yellowcard]



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 10:15 PM
link   
on the contrary,
there's more evidence for the government lying and being complicit, compared to them being honest and unaware.

And again, if your really willing to believe what the NIST says, about the biggest governemnt induced crime in history, then it really matters now what I think.

Because clearly, their target audience for this charade has taken them hook, line and sinker.

You really believe

1. Valerie Plame's outing had NOTHING to do with her husband going against the official wmd lie?
2. A plane caused that minor damage to the pentagon?
3. Both WTC's collapsed on their footprints, in perfect motion because of a plane hitting them at the top?
4. Bush and Co knew nothing about the plans, even though all the intellegence people did?
5. Cheney telling the Air defenses to stand down, LONG after it was aware airborne attacks were occuring was 'SOP'
6. Bush sitting in his chair while America was apparently 'under-attack' wasnt a planned reaction
7. A passport survived the WTC crash, but the blackbox didnt?

Because if you believe NIST, and that WTC7 came down purely becuase of fire, you must believe all the other complex statements about 911..

They US was either in on it, or not.
There's no half measure...



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 10:16 PM
link   
By the way, I only said a fool would believe the NIST,
Because the NIST will never say anything that implicates the government!




posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 10:20 PM
link   
I swear,

If someone showed up one day, with photos, movies and physical evidence of explosives in the towers...

Georgie would turn around and say

'' Yes, we learned today of a presentation/show seminar where all different explosives manufacturers were in the WTC lobby presenting their latest designs, we believe this in no way attributed to the WTC collapsing due to fire, and thats the reason explosive material was found ''



you'd all believe it.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by yellowcard
I don't this will keep "truthers" from making things up with false science...there was enough proof already, but this will be buried I'm sure...


Stop calling them "truthers"! They are liars! Agenda driven liars and not a damn thing else!



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by hikix
Here it is... Here is the proof! For any of you doubters, they back it up with a full 2 paragraphs!

And there's even more experts over here with lots more than 2 paragraphs that state just the opposite. You also have to consider the news source (Faux News has never "proven" anything) as well as understand who the NIST really works for (not the People)...


I'm not saying here whether I believe that the government was in on it or not...There's a lot of experts with years of experience on both sides. So you have to also consider "motive & gain" when gathering any real evidence.

Oh yeah, I trust the government, really I do...NOT!

[edit on 21-8-2008 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 11:04 PM
link   
So help me out here....
Who do I believe, a Govt. agency from an administration that doesn't have that great a record of telling the truth or these guys?


www.patriotsquestion911.com...



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 11:26 PM
link   
What Colonel George Nelson (ret) points out about 9/11 is most interesting.. These are the kinds of facts that make people suspicious. To assume that we have been told the whole truth is delusional.

www.physics911.net...

-ChriS



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join