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 jthomas
Originally posted by dariousg
It doesn't matter my friend. I have said the same thing along with MANY others over and over and over. The one's that have faith in the 'official story' will not answer this. They will give you simple one liners or come back with a stupid question about your expertise in demolition and so on.
It doesn't matter to you that our friend has simply made an unsubstantiated assertion with no facts to back it up.
But that is the nature of you believers in the "Official 9/11 Truth Movement Fairy Tale."
[edit on 26-8-2008 by jthomas]
Originally posted by jthomas
Originally posted by jimmyx
... if thermal expansion happened, all columns would have had to reach the same temperture, thus expansion, at the same time or you would have seen one side partially collapse, followed by other parts of the columns supporting floors that physically run out horizontally for hundreds of feet, to be pulled down by the first columns, much like in a "wave". [edit on 26-8-2008 by jimmyx]
You're free to back up your assertion but just making an assertion without evidence is just an opinion that doesn't demonstrate anything at all.
Originally posted by dariousg
Originally posted by jthomas
Originally posted by dariousg
It doesn't matter my friend. I have said the same thing along with MANY others over and over and over. The one's that have faith in the 'official story' will not answer this. They will give you simple one liners or come back with a stupid question about your expertise in demolition and so on.
It doesn't matter to you that our friend has simply made an unsubstantiated assertion with no facts to back it up.
But that is the nature of you believers in the "Official 9/11 Truth Movement Fairy Tale."
[edit on 26-8-2008 by jthomas]
You see, you did exactly what I told everyone you would do. First you simply come right back at us with the 'no facts to back it up' line when you have yet to present ANY FACTS to show that it would create a uniform and complete collapse of this building along with the towers.
Originally posted by jimmyx
to gather the evidence you say i need, you need an independent investigation.
...i readily agree i am not qualified to pass judgement on any technical aspects of the NIST report....
but at the same time those that ARE qualified and happen to disagree with the NIST reports conclusions are not given the forum to ask questions.
so my question to you is....why would you NOT want this to happen...
Originally posted by GriffMaybe I wasn't clear enough? I'm talking about using thermite to sever the connections of the girders to the columns (actually according to NIST only one column is needed). This would be acting in the vertical direction exactly like we see everyday when they weld railroad tracks together in the vertical direction using pottery (terra cotta)...i.e. no evidence left after used. After all, who's going to see bits of terra cotta and scream "conspiracy"?
NIST's theory is the horizontal bracing of 9 floors "walking" off their connections brought the building down.
My theory is that the horizontal bracing of 9 floors was severed.
Mine has precedence. NIST had to come up with some "new phenomenon".
So tell me. Did NIST or is NIST really taking all credible alternatives into account? I say no because obviously my thermite theory would work.
Just remember. If NIST's theory is true, we all work in deathtraps.
Maybe we should write our congressmen and demand that all government buildings be upgraded as per NIST's suggestions?
BTW, I'm only 51 pages into the report, and so far, I'd be ashamed to have my name associated with it.
Originally posted by jthomas
I already told you. They had other evidence. Don't pretend you don't know that.
Originally posted by jthomas
NIST did that already. YOU have to refute it if you disagree.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
BUT THEY STILL FAILED TO RECOVER ANY STEEL FOR TESTING.
WHICH MEANS THEY DID NOT DO A PROPER INVESTIGATION AND HAVE A PROPER REPORT.
Originally posted by exponent
FEMAs steel however is other than being from WTC7, unidentified.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
You should read the FEMA reports, they did have steel from Building 7 and tested it.
Originally posted by theability
Now your saying that the sun, has heated that train track to enthalpy?? or close enough for the tracks to warp shape, Heated enough to become malleable, and change shape??
Try again soldier...... seriously try looking into what thermal-dynamics is.....convection, conduction, radiation... and how the effects are plausable in fluid dynamics of earth....
Originally posted by exponent
Well lets be fair, maybe terracotta would not leave any evidence, but the large amounts of clearly melted iron surrounding the end of a failed beam and similar damage on the column's seat would be significant evidence. Also you have to consider pre-attack, I imagine that seeing a hole dug in several inches of concrete as well as the removal of the metal decking and a device (would a single pot melt through an entire beam? It would have to be a large volume) attached to the beam would be extremely suspicious. Nothing of this sort was reported.
It isn't, although you're not far off.
It's entirely plausible of course but it's not enough to say "it's plausible, therefore it's probable".
R Mackey pointed out that bridges have collapsed because of this on different occasions.
Thermite can only add to the complexity, because there is no evidence for it. Becuase of this reason Occams Razor cannot by definition support your theory.
Can you point out some specific problems? Perhaps it would be appropriate to move to another thread, I don't think there are any specific threads on this subject but i'm very much an ATS newbie.
Originally posted by GriffHave you calculated how much volume of thermite this huge beam would take? Or have you taken into account that beams/girders do not just go magically into a column. There's connections. Usually done with bolts and plates. Tell me: how much would it take to melt the plates/bolts?
Someone posted a photo (I think it's on Judy Woods' site somewhere) that showed something suspicious with a connection. How hard would it really be?
Can you explain it then? Because from what I've read so far and saw in the video, that was my impression. If I'm incorrect, please show me my error because I really hate walking around saying incorect things. No sarcasm, a real request.
And yet, you defend NIST?
Bridges are much different than structures. For one, structures are fireproofed. I'm not saying they would last forever, but I'd image that with all that was going on in that builing, it was heavily reinforced. Just my guess based on experience.
Only if you believe this new phenomenon of thermal expansion felling buildings.
I'm going to keep my promise and be back in a few with some calcs.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by jthomas
I already told you. They had other evidence. Don't pretend you don't know that.
BUT THEY STILL FAILED TO RECOVER ANY STEEL FOR TESTING.
WHICH MEANS THEY DID NOT DO A PROPER INVESTIGATION AND HAVE A PROPER REPORT.
End of story, now grow up and move on.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by jthomas
NIST did that already. YOU have to refute it if you disagree.
I have proven NIST failed to recover steel for testing.
Originally posted by theability
its so pathetic.....I wonder how we can ever trust NSIT ever again!
Information on the specific connection details used is
unavailable at this time.