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 pteridine
If it should look like the towers, it could show that there was no demolition and all the CTer's would have to admit defeat.
Originally posted by pteridine
Now if buildings cant collapse from fire why do they teach FF from day 1
that structural collapse is the greatest killer of FF?
Originally posted by pteridine
With all the evidence you claim to have and all the study you have done, you should now be able to say what explosives were used.
You should be able to state where the explosives were placed.
You should be able to estimate how much explosive was used.
You should be able to postulate how the explosives were placed against the building components.
posted by pteridine
With all the evidence you claim to have and all the study you have done,
you should now be able to say what explosives were used.
You should be able to state where the explosives were placed.
You should be able to estimate how much explosive was used.
You should be able to postulate how the explosives were placed against the building components.
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Originally posted by adam_zapple
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Demo companies wire buildings from top to bottom and it wouldn't matter if a jetliner destroyed a few floors or a demo company destroyed a few floors, if the rest of the building wasn't wired, there would only be a local collapse of the damaged section only.
Argument from personal belief.
I find it unfathomable that you take something that's factual and try to say that it's someone's personal beliefs.
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
I'm truly floored. You've just shown that not only do you know absolutely nothing about controlled demolitions or how they work, you will make up any excuse in the book to deny anything factual.
Originally posted by lycopersicum
adam_zapple
do none of the videos of witnesses count as evidence ??
do the explosions recorded not count as evidence??
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
911research.wtc7.net...
i would call this evidence hands down
Originally posted by lycopersicum
i would like to hear thesee guys explain this
they always seem to know more that even physicist and Thermodynamists do
so this should be great!!
pteridine
adam_zapple
can any of you guys explain to me why this building didnt collapse until they blew it up during clean up
would this damage and fire be considered worse then WTC7??
www.youtube.com...
wouldnt this make WTC7 collapse not from just fire?? but added help from explosions??
Originally posted by esdad71
Why can you not make estimates of what, where and how many explosives were used? NIST did as well as a few other professional CD firms. The amount of material to bring down a building that size would require months if not years of preparation before planting the first charge.This is a fact that no one can deny or prove different with physics.
Also, I did not shoot myself in the foot with that video. It is a steel structured building that shows complete structural breakdown at the point of the fires. It was only a few stories high. If you take that up 80 floors, put another 20 floors on top, you can see that if there is weakness to the structure then there is no support and a collapse is inevitable.
Also, this was not a fire investigation, it was and still is a criminal investigation by the FBI.
Originally posted by Griff
According to you, only one level needs to drop on the rest. I can't really see there needing to be months and years of prepwork just to bring down one story.
Originally posted by thedman
Originally posted by ANOK
Originally posted by thedman
Whatever you saw collapse I can guarantee didn't globally collapse in a matter of seconds...