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.

 

Weird occurrence(s) in 9/11 video

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by TaZCoN
 


There WAS a big event inside that building, a jetliner fully of fuel was crashed into it and was burning. I think a few thousand plus gallons of burning jet fuel would do a lot of interesting things to a building that you wouldn't normally see happen.




posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by JKersteJr
 


great Great find man.

thats definitely the reason for the smoke anomaly, no question. the second video you posted is virtually identical to the OP.

but the ebate still continues about the flashes. i proposed earlier that if I were trapped in the buildings that day, i would use camera flashes to let people outside know there are people up there. I tend to think its either that, or the fire alarm system like anonymous said. but who really whos.

also, for those who asked about why the buildings fell into their footprint, i believe i have something to add. I heard that in the design of these buildings, much of the vertical structural load was carried in the actual outer shell. I still see fishy things going on that day, but it seems possible that a strong shell could contain the floors as they pancakes downward and would result in what we saw.

as for how WTC 7 fell in ITS footprint, fughet about it. That one seems like the smoking gun in this case.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Hi,
I think what youa re seeing is a backdraft. Ive seen it a few times,
a backdraft occurs when oxygen-starved fire suddenly receives oxygen. The sudden rush of oxygen causes all of the super-heated gases to ignite which push out smoke and then usally fire. If this is happening in different compartments within the building then all you may see is smoke being pushed out without the flames. This is the best video i could find.



From a firefighter in London.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by wi1shire
 


Could be backdrafts or flashbacks. Watch the videos of them on youtube. Could explain the explosions.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 11:26 AM
link   
NIST scientist Dr. Shyam Sunder, has responded to this video today stating, "uneven thermal expansion of the flooring buckled internal columns - thereby pushing office furniture toward the perimeter of building.

(ie.) Copy machines blocked the smoke holes. Back to sleep!



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by wi1shire
Hey everybody!

I'd first like to say that I have been scouring the site all summer and really enjoy and am intrigued by alot that I see here. Keep up the good work.

Enough of the pleasantries tho...

I saw the below 9/11 video on youtube, and although it doesn't offer any new ideas, i did notice weird smoke behavior at 1:02 into the vid. The shot is of one of the main towers billowing smoke and it appears that the smoke is sucked in or stopped for a moment, then starts back up again very quickly.

Also, as many replies have pointed out, there are some questionable flashes in the first minute of the video that are also worth further investigation.

here is the vid


I could speculate that an implosion or explosion inside the building caused this but I want to see if anyone can provide a reasonable explanation like a sharp shift in the wind or a lull in the blaze.

It would be very interesting if this turned out to be more than mundane. Lets see what you guys can come up with.

edited to add comment about flashes

edited for spelling

[edit on 26-8-2008 by wi1shire]

[edit on 26-8-2008 by wi1shire]



There are so many conflicting stories about 9-11. Like the fact that the owner of the Twin Towers Larry Silverstien stated that it was a controled demolition or he "pulled it" and then he shut up.




Or the police telling reports that there were bombs going off inside.

letsroll911.org...

Or that it was Bin laden who did it though if you read new 9-11 reports it doesn't say Osama Bin Laden was the mastermind anymore.

www.september11news.com...

Bush won't allow anyone to be questioned and those who are forced to be questioned, leave the country.
The eye witnesses who saw the "flying object" crash into the pentagon say it looked like a scud missle.

Blah. The whole thing is irritating.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Look closely at the flashes of light. You can see puffs of gray smoke/dust float away after the ones that are hi res enough to see clearly



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Irritating and confusing, It was obvious there was something up after watching loose change a few years back. However, I have to admit that the theories now with there actually being no planes and that all the 'amature' footage being faked is getting a bit much for me to comprehend. I am looking at them and with all the vids about trajectory and saying it cant be possible with the velocity and angles, also with the computer images where buildings are on the right or the left is too much its hard to focus.

Some bugger better come out one day or confess on his/her death bed, because its all bang out of order. Its one thing killing thousands of people but then to lie, cheat, deceive and manipulate is all way too much. Doesn't matter what the reason was, Iraq, popularity, martial law, Afghanistan, money. Someone needs to pay for this, all of it, there must be someone in the know willing to spill the beans and fess up names.

It will happen, until then the best of luck to all the 'truthers' out there trying to make sense of it all

Peace



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin
 


I've spent hundreds of hours going through 9/11 news video. I definitely saw at least a few of those flashes. I forgot just how damning they look until I saw that clip. One problem is that its difficult to know the difference between debris glinting in the sun and flashes. However, when the flash occurs below the cascading explosions it makes more sense (at least to me) to claim they are flashes from explosions.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 12:30 PM
link   
I think it is very hard to make a definitive assessment of what happened to the towers because of the special circumstances. When planes collide with a building, and jet fuel leaks, there are just too many variables for us laymens to just say that it could never have happened the way it was told to us. Don't get me wrong, i believe that pure evil was perpetrated that day by our gov't just for power and money, but we have to accept the complexity of what happened to those towers. I like to concentrate on WTC 7 and the pentagon, because these incidents are much more simple and easy to speculate on.

I hope everyone here has seen this thread (North Side Flyover). It is a perfect, thorough, complete investigation that proves a conspiracy in my opinion. Please take a look there and read the whole thing or watch the video on their site. It is well worth the realization that something really did, 100% get pulled on us.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by LestatG
 


Someone will come out one day. This whole thing will be uncovered, even if its in 50 years. And when that happens, the United States of this time period will forever be looked at as the ultimate lesson in stopping modern imperialism before it dives into the absurdity we see today. I hate living in a country in which I have no trust to fight for my individual well being. I see the dollar going down, and I know what it is being replaced with. US citizens and their freedoms. I can't help but feel that we are all a commodity feeding a government that acts as if it is playing a video game of World Domination, not dealing with real peoples lives. I'm only 20, and I KNOW i will not be living in this country if i can help it after I graduate college. The more I think about this, the more I am flabbergasted that this is actually the world that I am living in. I'm waking up more and more all the time.

I haven't ranted in a while. Feels good.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 12:55 PM
link   
That's not the only videos that show flashes coming from the South Tower. There's also ABC footage that shows flashes.

The NBC footage of the South Tower collapse(shown in the OP) is by far the most damning evidence of CD. People are saying the video is 'doctored', but you can download the same video from their archives.


Originally posted by monkeybus
those flashes are not explosions they are sparks from elctrical wire, possibly an electric deotanor?


They occur in sequence, so it's not just electrical wire. The flashes on the facing corner of the South Tower(on the NBC footage) clearly prove that.

The flashes featured on the North Tower in the CNN and ABC "live" coverage could in fact be some type of electrical damage, but personally I don't think this is the case since white smoke billows from the explosion/s locations until the collapse. It was simply the prep work being done. There are many eyewitness accounts that mention these early flashes and explosion sounds coming from the upper floors.


Originally posted by Leo Strauss
I believe the smoke was pushed by the second plane impacting the south tower. You can see the effect in other videos.


This explanation has been given before, but it's not at all logical. How the hell could an explosion in the South Tower cause explosions in the North Tower higher up? The timing of those explosions are exact(9:03). I don't even think there's odds for the occurrence to be 'natural'.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by wi1shire
 


Yeah its good to let it out once in a while, better exploding than imploding!

Its good to see that at only 20 you are not drawn in to the media and official views, its good that you recognise that the powers that be are truly evil in their tactics.

I wish you the best of luck my friend. Plus there is a great wide world out there and not all of it is bad. Experience it and relish it.

Peace



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by wi1shire
 


The flashes look like pieces of broken glass flying out from the building reflecting in the sunlight. They could be from initial explosions inside the building. But, if you look closely, (2:40-2:50) you still see flashes in the smoke and the settling dust (and to the left, away from where the building stood) AFTER the building had collapsed.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by wi1shire
 


I did not read the entire thread so I am not sure if someone made this comment of not. I have seen this behavior before on the job. I am a Firefighter so I have experience with this.

It seemed to be flashover or as the public knows it backdraft.

The black smoke you see is from the building being starved of oxygen. What happens is the area in question burns hot and uses up all the oxygen and everything in it becomes like coals (red hot embers) in your grill. It then starts drawing hard for fresh air.

Most times someone opens a door or window, but in this case I bet the fire had a breakthrough. Then it suddenly breathes in and feeds the embers and gases that build up (imagine an entire floor glowing red) it then instantly explodes.

I have seen house fire where the house is breathing, you can see the windows bow in and out. You add a sudden oxygen flow and it explodes. The bigger the area the bigger the explosion.

This really does look like texbook flashover on a grand scale.

Edit to add: I see others beat me too it. Hello to the smoke-eater in London.




[edit on 26-8-2008 by LoneGunMan]



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by LoneGunMan
 


The flashover idea makes sense but it seems like what your describing would happen gradually, not instantly like in the video. Correct me if I am wrong. If u look at this video it is clear that the event happens at the same time as the second plane impact. After thinking about how these would be related, it does not make sense that the smoke would act like that even from the shockwave of the plane impact. Wouldn't the smoke be pushed away from the impact, and not pulled back into the tower like we see. This leads me to a theory...

Tower 1 gets hit by a plane. Tower 2 gets hit by a plane soon after. When tower 2 is struck, explosions go off in tower 1 while peoples attention is drawn to the other tower. No one would ever be aware of the explosions in tower 1 while they are in the midst of the horror of a second plane impact, unless they were in the tower 1 at the time. Beyond this point it does not make sense because tower 2 falls first, with no obvious event to disguise explosions to bring it down. Please feel free to expand upon this idea.

also, thanks for the kind words lestatG. Whatever IS coming, i am looking forward to having the opportunity to live through it, fingers crossed about the living part. This is a most exciting time for everyone, whether things go bad or good.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by wi1shire
reply to post by LoneGunMan
 


The flashover idea makes sense but it seems like what your describing would happen gradually, not instantly like in the video. Correct me if I am wrong.


No its instant. I saw a Firefighter open a basement door that was an egress to the outside. The second he opened that door it exploded and he was thrown more than 50 feet. Its just like the video.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by wi1shire


Tower 1 gets hit by a plane. Tower 2 gets hit by a plane soon after. When tower 2 is struck, explosions go off in tower 1 while peoples attention is drawn to the other tower. No one would ever be aware of the explosions in tower 1 while they are in the midst of the horror of a second plane impact, unless they were in the tower 1 at the time. Beyond this point it does not make sense because tower 2 falls first, with no obvious event to disguise explosions to bring it down. Please feel free to expand upon this idea.



I agree that it seems to be an inside job. Its just that this video part seems to be flashover. Its why the fire service calls it flashover. It flashes over.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by LoneGunMan
 


maybe i am just not understanding what your saying, but what it sounds like your describing as a flashover is that a fire dies down over a period of time as it loses oxygen and starts to smolder. Then it instantly starts up as fresh oxygen is entered into the area via some new source. What I see in the video is a fire going strong for a while, then momentarily, over half a second, dieing down then instantly resuming where it left off, not getting worse or becoming more intense. The fire does not flare, it just stops and starts it seems. If you tell me i'm wrong i'll believe you because you know what your talking about, but i just wanted to be clear on this.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by wi1shire
 


Go to youtube and search for flashover and backdraft. It looks like this is exactly what it is. Of course the video is from far away and the videos on your tube are up close, but you will get the general idea. Would also explain explosions people heard in the buiding. Could have been flashovers or backdrafts and not bombs. Just an idea!



new topics




 
14
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join