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.

 

Yep, It's Thermite! So Much for the "Oxygen" Excuse

page: 44
172
<< 41  42  43    45  46  47 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:11 AM
link   
reply to post by turbofan
 


More like ignored.
And let me guess eye witness testimony was part of the "debunking"?




posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:12 AM
link   
addition reply to post by turbofan
 


And I never said floors were "trapping air as falling" I said the collapse was pushing air down, as it naturally would.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Seventh
 


And the ad hom begins, I am not trolling sir, just seeking discourse though it's telling that you would start attacking me after a few posts of disagreement. Each floor was interconnect via ways air could travel with the collapse pushing air down those ways and the power of pressurized air is not to be scoffed at as you obviously do. And I know that which I am talking about but I approach it from an angle of not trying to prove my preconceptions.


Again if you look at the videos you will see that the explosions which began above the initial collapse sequence vaporised everything including steel to dust, and expelled away from the building hence no weight = no downward pressure..



I think that picture nips the air pressure theory in the bud.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


All that psychology you posted is only relevant to some cases, not all, or else eyewitness testimony wouldn't still be allowed as legal evidence in court rooms.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


Didn't vaporise anything. And that is the first amongst many problems with your reasoing and it is to late for me to articulate them all at the moment.
But I will say just because stuff is falling over the edge does not mean explosion or dust is being expelled upwards. Sorry.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seventh
you may want to do research here on how 1 such explosion vaporised a 50 ton hydraulic press.


A 50 ton hydraulic press does not weigh 50 tons. Thats how mutch pressure it can apply. It was not vaporised it was knocked over.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:17 AM
link   
Also, there are a few key points here.. the arrow showing an explosion way down, but look at the top of the building it has just started to collapse thus agin debunking air pressure theory, also look at the dust clouds around the top many depicting individual explosions...




posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:18 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


It is largely argued that it shouldn't be. But we are creatures of habit after all. So thusly not widely disavowed. Read the science, it's all right there. One in particular is from a legal journal.

[edit on 21-7-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by Seventh
you may want to do research here on how 1 such explosion vaporised a 50 ton hydraulic press.


A 50 ton hydraulic press does not weigh 50 tons. Thats how mutch pressure it can apply. It was not vaporised it was knocked over.


I know it does not mean weight hence I mention hydraulic, it was vaporised, nothing of it remains along with a door weighing in excess of 300 lbs.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


Do you honestly believe that the outward signs of a collapse would be at the exact same time of the actual collapse *IE when stuff started falling inside*?



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Seventh
 


Didn't vaporise anything. And that is the first amongst many problems with your reasoing and it is to late for me to articulate them all at the moment.
But I will say just because stuff is falling over the edge does not mean explosion or dust is being expelled upwards. Sorry.


/sigh

Here we go......

8. A press weighting 50 tons disappeared from a basement floor of Twin Towers and was never recovered from debris. Not possible with collapses or controlled demolitions. The press was vaporized or melted totally.

Source...

www.thetruthseeker.co.uk...



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


My point is that eyewitness testimony is not ALWAYS flawed. You really think we can't remember ANYTHING we experience correctly?



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:29 AM
link   

But I will say just because stuff is falling over the edge does not mean explosion or dust is being expelled upwards. Sorry.


In the picture there is debris hundreds of metres above the spire, which is the highest part of the building, how much proof do you want/need?.

[edit on 16/07/2009 by Seventh]



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


My point is that eyewitness testimony is not ALWAYS flawed. You really think we can't remember ANYTHING we experience correctly?


He`s a troll.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


Bad terminology. We cannot remember anything completely correct as to what and how they happend. Particularly in high stress situations and over time. As I pointed out even accessing a memory will change it and that has been proven. And we are talking about a legal system that still locks away innocent people that are later shown to be innocent right?

[edit on 21-7-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


No I am someone who disagrees. You bring attack into it. Not I. I can't help that my honest disagreement frusterates you so much as it obviously does. I find it truly regrettable but also truly beyond my power to prevent. Short of bowing down and being dishonest by saying I agree with you. Which I will not do.

[edit on 21-7-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


I see dust above the building not debris. Sure some of it looks a little paradoilicly like debris but not really.

[edit on 21-7-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


You send me to a twoofer site that has ;

Evidence of advanced fusion devices at the WTC

printed at the top of the page and expect me to believe it's a reliable source?



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne
reply to post by Seventh
 


You send me to a twoofer site that has ;

Evidence of advanced fusion devices at the WTC

printed at the top of the page and expect me to believe it's a reliable source?


Oh i`m sorry, didn`t mean to scare poor ikkle duhbunker....

www.rinf.com...

There`s plenty of sites.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 04:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


You hurt your case with such an additude and langauge. Even if you had a point. Which I do not think you have *obviously*.



new topics

top topics



 
172
<< 41  42  43    45  46  47 >>

log in

join