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.

# Why I Believe the WTC's were Brought Down by C.D.

page: 1
6
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 06:45 PM
World Trade Center Collapses--Controlled Demolition

Although the following facts that I collected are compelling and leave no doubt in my mind about the nature of the collapses of the World Trade Centers, I had one unanswered question. How and when were the explosives planted? By who? I researched this question and, although what I found doesn't give a specific answer, the implication is obvious albeit circumstantial:
I've come across an article on common dreams (Bush-Linked Company Handled Security for the WTC, Dulles and United by Margie Burns) which indicates that "George W. Bush's brother [Marvin P. Bush] was on the board of directors of a company providing electronic security for the World Trade Center, Dulles International Airport and United Airlines, according to public records. The company was backed by an investment firm, the Kuwait-American Corp., also linked for years to the Bush family."
With that said here are the reasons that I believe the World Trade Centers were brought down by controlled demolition:

1. The way the buildings fell violates Newton's three laws of motion.

A. The Law of Inertia
An object that is not in motion will not move until a net force acts upon it. In essence, if there is no net force acting upon an object the object will maintain a constant velocity.
-The reinforced elevator floors (that is reinforced steel frames but we'll touch on that later) for the Sky Lobby and motors directly below the impact points would stop a genuine collapse.
B. The Law of Resultant Force
Force on an object is equal to the mass of the object times its acceleration (F=ma). The object accelerates in the direction it is pushed.
-Therefore, taking into account the way the planes impacted the towers, the top portions and only those top portions should have fallen over, in the direction the planes hit them, instead of straight down as they did, along with the entire building. This also violates the law of inertia.
C. The Law of Reciprocal Action
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Whatever draws or presses another is as much drawn or pressed by that other.
-The force of the planes hitting the towers was thereby reciprocated by the towers to that plane.

2. Seismic records obtained from FEMA's World Trade Center Building Performance Study indicate massive peaks in short diration, typical of high velocity military grade explosives.

A. These peaks registered 2.1 to 2.3 on the Richter scale, three times larger than the initial impact of the planes.
-A magnitude of 1.0 would require 30 pounds of TNT, 2.0 would require 1 ton of TNT, 3.0 would require 29 tons of TNT to produce the necessary seismic energy.

3. In a controlled demolition explosives create a vacuum, "pulling" the structure down faster than the speed of gravity.

A. North Tower: 95 floors collapse in roughly 8 seconds
South Tower: 80 floors collapse in roughly 10 seconds
World Trade Center 7: collapsed in roughly 9 seconds (no plane impacted this building)
B. Instead of the top sections of the buildings above the impact point falling into the street in one piece in accordance with Newton's laws of motion, you can observe fragmented debris ejected horizontally outward followed by clouds of pulverized concrete dust.
-Studying the video of the collapse of the south tower, you clearly see the top portion leaning at a sharp angle early in its collapse. This style of controlled demolition was also seen in Philadelphia in 1999.

4. The towers were made of heavy steel designed for superior strength.

CONTINUED BELOW!!

[edit on 6-10-2008 by Shocka]

[edit on 6-10-2008 by Shocka]

posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 06:47 PM
A. Building cranes were positioned literally on the internal steel framework made of 47 heavy steel supports during the construction of the World Trade Centers, indicating the sturdiness of the internal structure. In addition to the internal framework, the outer walls of the towers carried 40% of the towers' weight.
-Tall buildings use steel frames precisely to resist collapse due to fire and no steel frame building in the world has ever collapsed for any reason besides controlled demolition.
a. At 9:52 a.m. radio communications from Battalllion Seven chief Orio Palmer inside one of the buildings says the fires are under control.
•"We've got two isolated pockets of fire, we should be able to knock it down with two lines"
•This quote is corroberated by the thick black smoke seen eminating from the towers meaning the fire is cooling and the fact that there is no significant fire visible on the outside of the buildings.
B. A Madrid Hotel made of heavy steal burned much hotter and more intensely for 24 hours and did not collapse. WTC 2 burned for one hour and WTC 1 burned for two and both collapsed into their own foot print.
-This is a picture of that building
Notice the flames are visible, and the smoke is white.

If even after this evidence you are not convinced that the collapse of the World Trade Centers was a controlled demolition, there is no way you will be. So I'll leave you with a quote from Edmund Burke: "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 06:50 PM
reply to post by Shocka

I think you are presenting the evidence in a very thoughtful way. However, I found that there are two types of people on this site. Those who will/do believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy and those that don't/can't/won't believe it. This is true when you talk to the "normies" that listen to the MSM. I am not sure if you are a recent enlightened one like myself, but if you are, you will find that its not always best knowing the truth. Its lonely.

posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 07:36 PM
I remember watching the towers fall, and saying how it was a controlled demo. Any one who has watched the 9/11 controlled demolition, even if they are not familar with the dynamics can see it was controlled.

What surprises me is how any one can say it wasn't, when there is absolutely no evidence proving such. All evidence points to it being controlled.

There are a few dozen threads about the towers and the way they came down. Along side all that, two Research Projects have been started about 9/11 Emergency Research Project and another for the 9/11 Evidence Research Project, which none have dared jump into. Reason why I do not know.

How ever those projects and many others are open for ATSers at large to get involved in. All it takes is a little effort and some reading, along with a serious interest to dedicate some time and it can be done.

I don't want to detract from this thread any further, but any one seriously interested in providing serious contributions please feel free to U2U me about the Research Forum. All it takes are more threads like this, to start providing a lasting collaboration of info to make a research project stand above the norm.

posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 10:11 PM
Newton is probably rolling in his grave at being invoked in such an
ignorant manner

2) The seismic events were result of hundreds of thousands tons of steel
and other debris crashing to the ground. The sharp peaks you refer
to are actually only several seconds on a 30 minute strip.

3) Controlled demolitions do not cause a vaccuum to pull buildings
faster than gravity - explosives are used to kick out support columns
and gravity pulls building down.

As building collapsed the outer shell of WTC unzipped, the exterior
panels were bolted togather in sections 30 feet high. Covering the
exterior panels were aluminium cladding - it is this cladding which
you see being ejected outwards

The aircraft impact on South Tower tore out the south east corner of
the building leaving it unsupported. As the building failed it fell toward
the unsupported section

4) Building was constructed of hollow columns in center , C shaped
columns of light gauge steel bolted togather into 30 ft sections . These
sections were only 3/8" (bottom) to 1/4" (top) thick.

5) As for Chief Palmer reporting 2 fires on 78th floor - this floor was an
elevator lobby with few combustibles, much of the floor was tile and
marble . It was at the edge of the impact zone - most of the fuel and
resulting fires were several floors above.

As for the Windsor building burning for hours - the building had a
concrete core up to the 17th floor - it survived. The steel core above
collapsed from the fire.

posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 11:14 PM

Originally posted by Shocka

3. In a controlled demolition explosives create a vacuum, "pulling" the structure down faster than the speed of gravity.

A. North Tower: 95 floors collapse in 8 seconds
South Tower: 80 floors collapse in 10 seconds
World Trade Center 7: collapsed in 9 seconds (no plane impacted this building)
B. Instead of the top sections of the buildings above the impact point falling into the street in one piece in accordance with Newton's laws of motion, you can observe fragmented debris ejected horizontally outward followed by clouds of pulverized concrete dust.
-Studying the video of the collapse of the south tower, you clearly see the top portion leaning at a sharp angle early in its collapse. This style of controlled demolition was also seen in Philadelphia in 1999.

you are mostly right on track.
however, a strawman can be dangerous.

the ACTUAL collapse times are not 8 and 10 seconds. the BIG seismic activity lasts 8 and 10 seconds, respectively, the actual duration of collapse is not accurately measurable, due to smoke and dust obscuration, BUT clearly lasts over 12 seconds for both towers.

and, also, the lack of air resistance does NOT make something fall "faster than freefall". it only allows the rate of acceleration due to gravity to be unimpeded by air resistance, meaning, in short, nothing can FALL "faster than freefall".

all that said, it is good intuition to notice that the towers seem to fall virtually unimpeded by themselves. BIG SCIENCE to PROVE it. this is an ongoing debate i've been having with qualified experts for six years, and NO TWO PEOPLE are unanimous on what happened on 911.

the towers were demolished, fer sure, but waving strawmen around doesn't help the cause.

posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 11:54 PM

Originally posted by thedman
Newton is probably rolling in his grave at being invoked in such an
ignorant manner

2) The seismic events were result of hundreds of thousands tons of steel
and other debris crashing to the ground. The sharp peaks you refer
to are actually only several seconds on a 30 minute strip.

Although I would love to hear where you got your information from because I do not believe it since I researched this subject on both sides of the argument and left out a lot of facts that people sometimes use that could be disputed, I'll just respond with this: the seismic records were recorded before the towers collapsed.

 Google Video Link

Not to mention this:
 Google Video Link

These videos corroborate my findings so that I don't have to explain it to those that are to lazy or narrow minded to do a little research for themselves...

[edit on 7-10-2008 by Shocka]

posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 11:57 PM
reply to post by thedman

True I shouldn't have put it in such exact words. I'll edit it right now.
But when you time the buildings' collapse it does not take more than twelve seconds for them to fall.

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 12:30 AM
if you watch closely, you'll see that in both tower collapses, there were two phases(not including the plane induced damage).
there was a remaining core(the 47 column 'SUPERCORE' that housed the elevators and carried the majority of the load(60% , allegedly) that stood briefly after the initial EXPLOSION of the majority of the exterior and the floors.
these cores were like sixty storeys high, and SHOULD have registered a signifigant trace.

this is a hinge pin argument. the OFFICIAL REPORTS!!! repeatedly quoted collapse times of 8 and 10 seconds, yet, it is clear that the traces must be MUCH longer, BECAUSE of these visible phase two demolitions.

and, in the case of WTC7, there was a 17 second trace for an event that had the majority of the mass of the building fall in less than 7 seconds.
and that IS the rate of acceleration due to gravity. so, all four corners, which were a good part of a city block away from one another, "failed" at EXACTLY the same moment in time, as did all the other vertical support columns that ran from the ground up.

info disconnect. disinfo dipped in misinfo peppered with truth and lies.

tough maze to navigate, eh?

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 05:17 AM

Originally posted by thedman
4) Building was constructed of hollow columns in center , C shaped
columns of light gauge steel bolted togather into 30 ft sections . These
sections were only 3/8" (bottom) to 1/4" (top) thick.

I suggest going through this page to see the core column modeling used by NIST.

wtcmodel.wikidot.com...

As you can see, the core columns in some areas were as thick as 8-inches.

5) As for Chief Palmer reporting 2 fires on 78th floor - this floor was an
elevator lobby with few combustibles, much of the floor was tile and
marble . It was at the edge of the impact zone - most of the fuel and
resulting fires were several floors above.

But, I thought that you and others claim that most of the fuel dumped down the elevator shafts to explode at different points within the towers? How can most of the fuel be above and below?

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 06:12 AM

These videos corroborate my findings so that I don't have to explain it to those that are to lazy or narrow minded to do a little research for themselves...

Spoken like a "truther" - everything I know I got from watching
video on Youtube...

Notice you did not challenge any of my points.

Suggest you read this. You can read?

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 06:54 AM
I must agree with other posters and say "poor, poor newton"

Of course you are forgetting gravity in your ideas how the towers should have fallen according to newton. Its a force. quite relevant in this case actually, accelerating everything towards down with almost 10 meters per second squared.

At least you got one part of the marvin bush stiry correct. Member of Board of a Security Subcontractor. He left the position in .... 1999 i believe. The contract ran out in 2000. (or was it the other way round?) Anyhows there is no way that subcontractor could have rigged the building for CD even if it was still working on site in 2001.

What actually *does* speak for a CD?
Speed? nope. In a CD the supporting structures are destroyed, they fail, it falls. In the 9/11 event the supporting structures were damaged to the point they failed its falls. Speed doesnt differ significantly since in both cases the same thing happens.

The Way it fell? Well... down is pretty much the only way to go here

The "squibs"? In CD squibs initiate the collapse. the WTC "squibs" happen during and are obviously air and dust being blown out of windows.

What else do truthers usually bring up?

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 12:21 PM

Originally posted by thedman

Spoken like a "truther" - everything I know I got from watching
video on Youtube...

Notice you did not challenge any of my points.

Suggest you read this. You can read?

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

That's not what i said is it? i said they coroborate my findings i didnt say that all the evidence i found i got from youtube. i actually did research i'll site my work if you'd like but i'd like the same from you
where'd you get your info; Fox News?

have you even gone to that site? All thats on that site is ways to argue with people about the WTCs theres hardly any info that makes sense.
plus it's called WTC 7 lies. what lies are they referring to? There was only fire a few floors no plane hit it and larry silverstein ADMITTED he told them to pull it!! Besides I would much rather believe the professors, scholars, architects, pilots, rescue workers, eyewitnesses, ex-government officials, military workers, etc. than a bunch of people writing in their blogs about how "they used to be truthers but saw the light of god" BS
why dont you go watch some hannity & colmes and leave this thread for some people who actually care about making a rational argument.

[edit on 7-10-2008 by Shocka]

[edit on 7-10-2008 by Shocka]

[edit on 7-10-2008 by Shocka]

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 12:44 PM

Originally posted by Shocka
you are seriously retarded.

Well, if you ever wonder why people most likely won't take you serious, just refer back to this comment.

why dont you go watch some hannity & colmes and leave this thread for some people who actually care about making a rational argument.

See above.

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 01:37 PM

Originally posted by Shocka
i actually did research i'll site my work if you'd like but i'd like the same from you
where'd you get your info; Fox News?

Can you please show us your work.

I return, I will show you mine.

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 02:42 PM
reply to post by ADVISOR

What surprises me is how any one can say it wasn't, when there is absolutely no evidence proving such.

I'm not going to say anything other than this is an argument from ignorance. Watch it. We need quality on these forums.

Also the "looks like a duck to me therefore must be a duck" is flimsy.

Coming from a research "tsar", I am surprised.

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 04:08 PM

ADVISOR
I remember watching the towers fall, and saying how it was a controlled demo. Any one who has watched the 9/11 controlled demolition, even if they are not familar with the dynamics can see it was controlled.

What surprises me is how any one can say it wasn't, when there is absolutely no evidence proving such. All evidence points to it being controlled.

Exactly. I too knew they were controlled demolitions as soon as I saw them way back in September 2001. Much of the early TV footage and first photographs which I remember from that day are long gone. Censored to keep the sheeple ignorant. But still we have enough material to convince the open-minded.

WTC 7: Watch the penthouse collapse and the classic kink in the center as the central columns are taken out, and the four corners fall perfectly synchronized in a classic perfect demolition.

CBS News anchor Dan Rather commenting on the collapse of Building 7 - September 11, 2001 at approx 5:30pm EST.

"Amazing, incredible, pick your word. For the third time today, it's reminiscent of those pictures we've all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down."

FBI Thought Bombs Brought Down Towers On 9/11
www.bcrevolution.ca... - - - - skeptosis.blogspot.com...

These video analyses by David S Chandler show heavy steel pieces being hurled out from the North Tower alleged gravity collapse at 70 mph. Further analysis identifies the origin of the ejection as about the 82nd floor, where the vertical motion of the building was no more than half that speed

High Speed Ejection from WTC1 - An Analysis
by David S Chandler - Physics-Mathematics Educator - BS-Physics (IPS); MS-Mathematics

High Speed Ejection from WTC1--Further Analysis - Result: over 70 mi/hr
Further analysis identifies the origin of the ejection as about the 82nd floor

Another High Speed Ejection from WTC1 - Result: over 70 mi/hr

These photos show heavy steel pieces being hurled up and out and away from the towers with explosive force. Some very heavy steel pieces were hurled 400 feet into neighboring buildings in different directions. A gravity induced collapse would not produce this effect.

North Tower Top-down Explosive Demolition
Explosive Demolition
A Different Viewpoint

In this famous South Tower photo, the floors are still intact above the explosive wave proceeding down the tower. Look at the lowest explosive puffs on the left and several floors at the corner are still intact above it
South Tower Top 30 Floors Starts Toppling Then Disintegrates Into Pulverized Dust

South Tower Top-down Explosive Demolition
Explosive Demolition

[edit on 10/7/08 by SPreston]

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 05:39 PM

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 07:04 PM

Originally posted by debunky
I must agree with other posters and say "poor, poor newton"

Of course you are forgetting gravity in your ideas how the towers should have fallen according to newton. Its a force. quite relevant in this case actually, accelerating everything towards down with almost 10 meters per second squared.

And of course you are forgetting resistance, and a few other laws of physics.

The whole CD theory hinges on the fact that the buildings, all 3, fell at a speed that indicated there was no resistance hindering the collapses.

It's really convenient to the official story to forget that fact.

So why has neither the official story, or you, been able to explain this lack of resistance?

How did thousands of tons of steel, welded and bolted, just give way without slowing down the collapses?

Have you even looked into WTC2 and the tilting of the top section? How do you explain angular momentum being defied when according to NEWTON, who you claim to know so well, angular momentum cannot be changed without an external unbalanced force acting on it?

I don't think you understand Newton as much as you think you do.

See this thread, your chance to prove me wrong. I'd love to hear your expert opinion... www.abovetopsecret.com...

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 08:35 PM

Originally posted by Shocka
If this isn't enough I have more that I can give you...

Works Cited:

Pilots for 9/11 Truth

Scholars for 9/11 Truth

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice

9/11 Truth Europe

Revolution

Patriots Question 9/11

Fire Fighters for 9/11 Truth

DC TruthColumbus

Boston 9/11 Truth

Victoria 9/11 Truth

........ more and more.... etc.....9/11 Ripple Effect

Ok, you listed an abundance of websites. You have Kevin Barret the holocaust denier in there...

You have PFFFT there...not sure what a bunch of Pilots know about Structural Engineering and Physics.

you have Scholars for 911 truth that list Theater specialists and Dermatologists as their "Scholars"

You have Richard Gage of A&E for 911 truth that ADMITTED that he is in over his head. HE also doctored videos that were on his site.

You also have Boston 911 Truth. The average person at their meetings.....

a whopping 2 that's right 2. And they have contributed what exactly to your being convinced of a CD?

Firefighters for 911 Truth? Really? How many of those firefighter on that website were at Ground Zero? At the Pentagon? At Shanksville? Did oyu happen to see how many have signed their petition?

At the present time, 39 confirmed Firefighters have signed the petition.

Just to let you know there are 1.5 million firefighters in the United States. So, at present, only 0.0026 % of United States Firefighters have signed this petition.
www.gwu.edu...

Victoria is about the 911 Report... nothing to do with the investigation into the collapses.

Pandora's BOX... is Rob Balsamo's No Plane Hit the Pentagon stuff from PFFFT. Again... nothing to do with CD of the WTC.

Your Columbus site was taken down for some reason.

If you REALLY looked at both sides, you wold NOT have come close to posting that mess you did in your op.

new topics

top topics

6