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: 50
172
<< 47  48  49    51  52  53 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine

Why is this evidence of explosives? The top of the building is intact as the rest collapses under it.
If explosives were used to scatter this amount of material there would have been no question that they were used as the amount of explosive to do this would have been exceptionally large. Did the videos show high explosive shock waves or record the high levels of sound from explosions?


These were there, we were not..

911research.wtc7.net...

There`s a reason they were not asked to give evidence at the commission, there`s a reason John Gross denied all evidence of molten steel, there`s a reason WTC7 wasn`t even mentioned. What is that reason?.




posted on Aug, 2 2009 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seventh

These were there, we were not..

911research.wtc7.net...

There`s a reason they were not asked to give evidence at the commission, there`s a reason John Gross denied all evidence of molten steel, there`s a reason WTC7 wasn`t even mentioned. What is that reason?.


The witnesses are old news. What they heard wasn't explosions that would do what you claimed they would do in your video. To do that would take a an amount of explosive that would be so obvious we wouldn't be discussing this.



posted on Aug, 2 2009 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
The witnesses are old news. What they heard wasn't explosions that would do what you claimed they would do in your video. To do that would take a an amount of explosive that would be so obvious we wouldn't be discussing this.


Yes an explosion of that magnitude would have reduced everything to dust, including body parts and placed them over 400 feet away this big - (16th of an inch), and there would have been no office furniture found, and ofc it would have made the building collapse also.

All those witnesses, all mentioned explosions 19000 pages of testimonies, none appeared at the commission, why?.

Try answering it, not with what you think, but a factual reply, describing the events as they happened by at the scene eye witnesses, by far the most reliable source at any crime scene, completely neglected/overlooked/ignored.

`Something to hide there Sir?`.

[edit on 30/07/2009 by Seventh]



posted on Aug, 2 2009 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seventh

All those witnesses, all mentioned explosions 19000 pages of testimonies, none appeared at the commission, why?.

Try answering it, not with what you think, but a factual reply, describing the events as they happened by at the scene eye witnesses, by far the most reliable source at any crime scene, completely neglected/overlooked/ignored.

`Something to hide there Sir?`.


Why would I hide anything? I have no vested interest in the outcome.

Explosions were mentioned by first responders. Some may have been explosions and some may have been other things. Eyewitnesses under stress are not always reliable so what one describes as an explosion could have been part of the building collapse. I do not know why none of these witnesses appeared at the commission. As I have stated, demolitions on the scale claimed would have been obvious and you would not be spending your life searching videos for flashes and puffs of dust. Regardless, there is no physical evidence of conventional demolitions.

It was my impression that the 'truthers,' in general, had moved on toward thermite demolitions due to a lack of credible evidence for traditional demolitions.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 05:33 AM
link   
Originally posted by pteridine



Eyewitnesses under stress are not always reliable so what one describes as an explosion could have been part of the building collapse.


Would stress have the same affect on seismographs?, prior to both collapses seismic data recorded x2 huge explosions registering 2.1 and 2.3 on the Richter scale, a spokesman.. Won-Young Kim explains in laymen terms just how powerful these are - Seismologist, Won-Young Kim, told AFP that the Palisades seismographs register daily underground explosions from a quarry 20 miles away.

These blasts are caused by 80,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate and cause local earthquakes between Magnitude 1 and 2.

80,000 pounds of explosives and are still beneath both Richter scale readings of the North and South towers.




I do not know why none of these witnesses appeared at the commission.


I think you know only to well.



As I have stated, demolitions on the scale claimed would have been obvious and you would not be spending your life searching videos for flashes and puffs of dust. Regardless, there is no physical evidence of conventional demolitions.


Inner cores destroyed, bodies/furniture vaporised Seismograph readings, damage shown as low as the lobby areas, First Responders accounts including injuries sustained, video evidence, the rate of collapses.



It was my impression that the 'truthers,' in general, had moved on toward thermite demolitions due to a lack of credible evidence for traditional demolitions.


I have my own impressions and Thermite doesn`t figure that great in it, cast your mind back to the beginning of both collapses and the antennas, both can clearly be seen to move, there is only one way possible for the *hats* of both towers to start a descent, the inner cores have been destroyed, Richter scale readings of 2.1 and 2.3 respectively, no rocket science needed here, i`m not saying Thermite did not come into the equation, but I don`t think it played that bigger part. The initial explosions are the key factors here.

[edit on 30/07/2009 by Seventh]

[edit on 30/07/2009 by Seventh]



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seventh

These blasts are caused by 80,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate and cause local earthquakes between Magnitude 1 and 2.

80,000 pounds of explosives and are still beneath both Richter scale readings of the North and South towers.



I can see that you have your own impressions. Are you claiming that 80,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate explosives were used to drop the towers?

How do you know that "there is only one way possible for the *hats* of both towers to start a descent, the inner cores have been destroyed..."



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine




I can see that you have your own impressions. Are you claiming that 80,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate explosives were used to drop the towers?


Nope i`m claiming that 80,000 lbs of A.N. registers between 1 and 2 on the Richter scale something with a higher explosive force initiated both collapses.




How do you know that "there is only one way possible for the *hats* of both towers to start a descent, the inner cores have been destroyed..."


Load bearings and gravity, remove the former and the latter does the rest.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


You may be confusing the collapse with an explosion. The explosives would have had to have been detonated simultaneously to produce such an impact.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


There were explosions around the basement area before the plane hit, read this without prejudice......

web.archive.org...://arcticbeacon.com/13-Jul-2005.html

Then ask yourself a few questions.. are these people lying, if so, why?, but if they are telling the truth, what then?, people like me just want people like these to have that chance, there are no benefits whatsoever for us if this happens, but, what happens to the people who orchestrated this, if the truth never comes out?, who benefits then?.

Cured (hopefully)....



May have to copy paste to browser for link to work.
Grrrrrr cannot get link to work..




[edit on 30/07/2009 by Seventh]

[edit on 30/07/2009 by Seventh]

[edit on 30/07/2009 by Seventh]

[edit on 30/07/2009 by Seventh]



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


The problem with claiming that 80,000+ pounds of explosives brought down the building is one of evidence and method of collapse. The buildings collapsed from the impact areas down. 40 tons of explosives going off in the basement would have had a much different result. First, the blast alone would have been exceptional and most noticeable. Notably, the collapse would have started in the basement area. As neither of these things happened, it is unlikely that the seismic data was related to an explosion intiating the collapse and was likely the actual collapse.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Originally posted by pteridine



The problem with claiming that 80,000+ pounds of explosives brought down the building is one of evidence and method of collapse. The buildings collapsed from the impact areas down. 40 tons of explosives going off in the basement would have had a much different result. First, the blast alone would have been exceptional and most noticeable. Notably, the collapse would have started in the basement area. As neither of these things happened, it is unlikely that the seismic data was related to an explosion intiating the collapse and was likely the actual collapse.


It depends solely on which type of bomb was used and where, now imagine if the whole inner core was damaged and severely weakened by whatever caused that initial explosion/explosions, bombs have come a long way since the ball shaped ones with a fuse attached
, don`t be misled by the amount in weight, explosives are based on equivalent affects of tonnes of TNT, the Tsar Bomba for eg was equivalent to 50 megatons, a megaton = 1000000 metric tonnes of TNT, weighing only 27 tons, and blasts can be structured to cause maximum affect to some areas whilst barely touching others.

We have to look at probable cause and reactions, we are left with nowadays heat from jet fuel warping and weakening the beams, this could have caused some structural failure around the floors of initial impact, but (and you are not a guy of sub-par intelligence) there is no way on earth that jet fuel managed to weaken every single storey to the extent of shearing every bolt/weld/rivet, which was basically what was needed for the time span of those collapses, that theory is so far beyond rational thinking I cannot believe anyone suggested it in the 1st place
.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


For a seismic response of that magnitude, 40+ equivalent tons of explosive are needed. If that amount were set off anywhere in the WTC complex it would be a large event that would easily have been simultaneously captured by many recording sources; seismographs, videos, radio tapes, etc. In addition, the shock wave and debris travelling at high speed would have caused damage to buildings many blocks away.

This did not happen and there is no evidence for such an explosion.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Originally posted by pteridine



For a seismic response of that magnitude, 40+ equivalent tons of explosive are needed. If that amount were set off anywhere in the WTC complex it would be a large event that would easily have been simultaneously captured by many recording sources; seismographs, videos, radio tapes, etc. In addition, the shock wave and debris travelling at high speed would have caused damage to buildings many blocks away.

This did not happen and there is no evidence for such an explosion.


If you look thoroughly with an open mind, there is more evidence of a heavy duty type bomb than you could possibly ever imagine, vaporised bodies/ furniture, cars catching fire with no explanation, Very energetic – hot – dust after the explosions. EMP-type phenomenons.

In the cellar, out of all the 47 ultra strong steel pillars, the steel was melted completely at the length of more than 20 meters (approx. 65 ft). Even cars were melted and burned in the cellar. The pillars were far too thick for Thermite, which some have suggested.

Elevated values of tritium in this area, but not elsewhere in New York. Superheated steel objects, disintegrating into steel vapour. Molten ponds of steel were found in the elevator shafts. There were lots of burned cars in the parking areas of the towers. The fire department did not announce until 12/19/2001 that the fires under the WTC rubble have been extinguished (more than 3 months after the incident).

There`s plenty of evidence bud, like I say though, open mind, something had to cause these collapses that day and it sure as hell was not jet fuel.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


EMP is the result of a nuclear explosion. There is no evidence of an EMP pulse or a nuclear explosion. Tritium is often used in self illuminated signs and, in itself, is not a diagnostic of a nuclear explosion.
Had there been such a device, the effects would have been really noticeable. Thermal pulse and shock waves followed by a bottoms up collapse would be expected and that was not the case.
There was a theory posted a while back on this and the proponent found no believers due to complete lack of evidence of any such device.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seventh
If you look thoroughly with an open mind, there is more evidence of a heavy duty type bomb than you could possibly ever imagine, vaporised bodies/ furniture, cars catching fire with no explanation, Very energetic – hot – dust after the explosions. EMP-type phenomenons.

In the cellar, out of all the 47 ultra strong steel pillars, the steel was melted completely at the length of more than 20 meters (approx. 65 ft). Even cars were melted and burned in the cellar. The pillars were far too thick for Thermite, which some have suggested.


Having an open mind does not mean having an empty head.

People survived the collapses and we have footage from inside the first tower that proved they did not "vaporize". There were also no audible explosions heard, only the rumble of the collapse.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soloist

Having an open mind does not mean having an empty head.

People survived the collapses and we have footage from inside the first tower that proved they did not "vaporize". There were also no audible explosions heard, only the rumble of the collapse.



So all these whom where there whilst you were not, are lying?.....

911research.wtc7.net...

Excluded from the commission that forgot WTC7, empty heads you say? lmfao.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seventh

Originally posted by Soloist

Having an open mind does not mean having an empty head.

People survived the collapses and we have footage from inside the first tower that proved they did not "vaporize". There were also no audible explosions heard, only the rumble of the collapse.



So all these whom where there whilst you were not, are lying?.....

911research.wtc7.net...

Excluded from the commission that forgot WTC7, empty heads you say? lmfao.


Have you watched the video from inside, where you were not? No quotes, but actual footage of the collapse, where noone "vaporizes"? Or do you just plain ignore things that might prove you wrong?



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine

EMP is the result of a nuclear explosion. There is no evidence of an EMP pulse or a nuclear explosion. Tritium is often used in self illuminated signs and, in itself, is not a diagnostic of a nuclear explosion.
Had there been such a device, the effects would have been really noticeable. Thermal pulse and shock waves followed by a bottoms up collapse would be expected and that was not the case.
There was a theory posted a while back on this and the proponent found no believers due to complete lack of evidence of any such device.


How many cars were partially burnt?, in places where there was loads of paper which wasn`t burnt at all, plus none working phones and radios, the guys in the basement whom discovered the 50 ton hydraulic press (and I know it`s not the weight) and the 300 lb plus steel and concrete door vaporised, the heat still there 3 months after, they did try and disinfo this as tons of nano thermite every where lol.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soloist

Have you watched the video from inside, where you were not? No quotes, but actual footage of the collapse, where noone "vaporizes"? Or do you just plain ignore things that might prove you wrong?


I`ve watched many videos, i`ve yet to see one that manages to explain how hundreds of thousands of welds/rivets/bolts securing floor trusses to the exterior frames and inner core (which itself completely fell to bits also) all managed to fail simultaneously 3 times in the same day, maybe there`s a Walt Disney one i`ve missed somewhere.



posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seventh

Originally posted by Soloist

Have you watched the video from inside, where you were not? No quotes, but actual footage of the collapse, where noone "vaporizes"? Or do you just plain ignore things that might prove you wrong?


I`ve watched many videos, i`ve yet to see one that manages to explain how hundreds of thousands of welds/rivets/bolts securing floor trusses to the exterior frames and inner core (which itself completely fell to bits also) all managed to fail simultaneously 3 times in the same day, maybe there`s a Walt Disney one i`ve missed somewhere.



I'll take that as a no then.

Since you've decided to dance around the issue instead of face it. I'm not really surprised.




top topics



 
172
<< 47  48  49    51  52  53 >>

log in

join