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.

 

What started the fires in 7?

page: 4
1
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 06:42 PM
link   
The fires were possibly started by the great big explosion that took out the core of WTC6.

WTC6 was between the twin towers and WTC7.

Apparently (depending on what you read - and there's so much...), nobody has really given a good explanation of what happened to WTC6.




posted on May, 8 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Some man died recently, within a year or two just happened
upon a youtube awhile back, who worked in WTC 7.

The Lobby had police, he went up to the FEMA level and it
was vacated. Warm drinks, half eaten sandwich and perhaps
a burning cigarette were signs of a quick departure.

He started down and the stairway was not passable and
found a way eventually to the lobby with dead bodies.

So you might have fires and explosions from the Osama people
infiltrated into WTC 7.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Badgered1
The fires were possibly started by the great big explosion that took out the core of WTC6.


Would you mind explaining this statement? WTC 6 was akin to a square donut, with an open air central plaza. It never have a core to "take out" to begin with.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 03:22 PM
link   
WTC 7 fires were set by falling debris from WTC1.
Any explosions were caused by the fires from WTC1 debris.

The building would have been consumed in fires except for
the lucky chance that explosions weakened beams at the right
critical beams to set the building down in a neat pile by demolition
crew standards.

And thats good enough for a show like Master of Illusions and
Magic Mysteries Revealed.

Some youtube poster told me to read real history in books and
not rely on the History Channel and neglected that real history
was only in books by William R. Lyne which ended in 1993.
So 911 must be part of the same gang making history up to 1993
in the real history books.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   
I have been absent for a page or two but I assume that nothing has really changed. I will throw the following photos out as evidence that the fires were started by debris. Pay attention to photos 2, 3, 4, and 5.


Photos truthers don't like



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 06:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Biscuit
I have been absent for a page or two but I assume that nothing has really changed.

Sure things have changed!

Self confessed believer in the official story, Swampfox, has stated that evidence can not be accepted without a chain of custody. Click here to read the thread.

Thanks for raising the bar with regards to evidence claims, Swampfox.



I will throw the following photos out as evidence that the fires were started by debris. Pay attention to photos 2,

Not admissable as evidence, it fails Swampfox's chain of custody test. Besides, where does it allegedly show burning debris from 1 striking 7?



3,

Inadmissable as evidence. It has clearly been tampered with (yellow lettering) and has no chain of custody. Besides, where does it show alleged burning debris from 1 striking 7? All it shows is a portion of the alleged collapsed WTC site.



4,

You guessed it, it's unsourced, so it fails the chain of custody test. Inadmissable. Besides, where does it allegedly show burning debris from 1 striking 7?



and 5.

Serious? You're kidding right? It's an alleged screen capture that fails proper chain of custody and does not show burning debris from 1 striking 7 - yet you want us to think it does?

See what happens when you leave the thread for a couple of pages? You start spreading disinformation and inadmissable evidence!

Thanks, Swampfox - I'm really liking the new chain of custody precedent that you've set. Let's see how the official supports itself!



new topics

top topics
 
1
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join