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 _BoneZ_
A white paper released on February 3, 1964 by the firm of Worthington, Skilling, Helle & Jackson contained over 1200 pages of ...
...Analysis indicates that such a collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.
John Skilling, the head structural engineer had this to say:
Same source from above.
"[...] A lot of people would be killed, ... The building structure would still be there."
Originally posted by dodadoom
reply to post by jfj123
Really? Hey, thanks for the reply!
Ya maybe so, its what I gathered. My bad.
Just wondering why its so scary for some to even question authority!
I am glad you feel that way JFJ.
From some of your posts it sounds like you support it.
But your signature tells me otherwise.
I realize it is embarassing to admit you/we voted for them.
For that means you/we are responsible also.
I am not saying you neccesarily JFJ, I'm saying whomever it applies too.
We all have been taken to the cleaners!
I am embarrassed to admit I once had 'some'(carefully crafted)hope for this country.
Wrong again...
[edit on 19-7-2009 by dodadoom]
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Originally posted by jfj123
SUPPOSEDLY overbuilt. SUPPOSEDLY.
A white paper released on February 3, 1964 by the firm of Worthington, Skilling, Helle & Jackson contained over 1200 pages of preliminary calculations and over 100 detailed drawings. The white paper states:
Source
The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707—DC 8) traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such a collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.
This is what I believe the government MAY actually be covering up. The fact that these buildings and many more, were not actually built to design specs.
Originally posted by paraphi
Dear me. I bet you are a laugh to live with - seeing conspiracies around every corner... The postman's late, which must mean "xyz".
It seems to me that all sorts of "evidence", omission or discounted theory gets blown out of all proportion and escalates into so-called fact in the eyes of people who don’t want to believe the evidence before their eyes – or ANY official story.
Every missing comma in a report is "proof". All actions beforehand are reinterpreted to fit the new story hypothesis. Everyone has been fooled, even though they had eyes in their head. Broadcasters got it all wrong. It was all a plot. There were no terrorists. All those who actually take the mainstream view are gullible or brainwashed. All those who take the "quack" view are correct - they know the truth for they are the self professed “truth movement”. Fantasy movement more like.
The Partnair Flight 394 tragedy back in 1989 was first thought to have been a bomb and this was "confirmed" when traces of military grade explosives were found. A bit of digging found that the seas around Denmark are awash with munitions from two world wars and the actual cause was eventually identified as being something else. No doubt, there are still those who believe that it was a bomb and the official explanation was a cover-up.
Regards
Umm..yeah.....
I don't get angry or frustrated with "truthers". Its more a feeling of sadness that they truly believe what they post. You might want to do some research on some of the items that King posted. They are not the evidence of a conspiracy. Over active imagination maybe....
Originally posted by paraphi
Originally posted by Parallex
Off you toddle back to the NSA.
I am not from the US so “NSA” means National Sleep Association to me.
The problem I have is that when people run out of rational justification for their views they fall back on insult, rudeness and brashness often implying the person who has a contrary view is a lackey to some sinister secret service, has been brainwashed or is somehow intellectually inferior because the whole conspiracy is just sooooo complex. Well, at least I can spell.
There have been many reports on the WTC including several on the actual mechanics of the collapse. I tend to believe these over and above amateurs who see conspiracy around every corner, or people who (rightly) have such a distrust of their government they just don't believe anything they say.
I am persuaded by reading the reports etc., that there has NOT been some conspiracy - variously enacted by aliens, Bush, the NWO, the CIA, the Mafia, MI5/MI6, Iran, Israel, Illuminati-reptiles, Wales, the Chinese, Uncle Tom Cobley and all - take your pick!
The facts are a bunch of psycho terrorists decided to kill as many people as they could and they did it quite dramatically. Terrorists have been doing this kind of thing for years and will doubtless continue.
I am happy to debate the rights and wrongs of your theories including the accepted mainstream, but ask that you keep it civil.
Regards
Originally posted by ironbutterflyrusted
It was stated that the buildings needed serious refurbishment, why would someone wish to take them over etc.
To what extent where they in disrepair.? was the outside of the building also requiring work.? had materials dried and cracked with age/weather,would this be a factor in the collapse.?
Originally posted by baboo
READ IT. Don't waste our time because you don't want to spend yours to inform yourself. I can provide you information on any aspect of the bldgs you want if you just ask. I've read and watched a lot on this . I'm not going to insult you by calling you names but I will say you are ill-informed or you have other reasons for being here. If you have legitimate questions then pose them and I and others, I'm sure, will attempt to provide you answers.
Originally posted by paraphi
Originally posted by baboo
READ IT. Don't waste our time because you don't want to spend yours to inform yourself. I can provide you information on any aspect of the bldgs you want if you just ask. I've read and watched a lot on this . I'm not going to insult you by calling you names but I will say you are ill-informed or you have other reasons for being here. If you have legitimate questions then pose them and I and others, I'm sure, will attempt to provide you answers.
Just because I hold a contrary view to your does not mean I am misinformed, mate. I consider myself to be quite well informed, I just don't think that there is the evidence to suggest the WTC was felled by any other means other than aircraft, the resultant fire and building design. What's wrong with that, apart from not fitting in with your belief?
If you cannot articulate - or point me to compelling evidence to the contrary then you just have to live with it. I am open minded to compelling evidence.
You are right not to call me names because when you do, we all know you've lost the arguement. Try to be civil as that helps with debate.
Regards
[edit on 19/7/2009 by paraphi]