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.

 

Worst case of 9/11 sheeple I've seen yet

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:06 AM
link   
Ok here is the actual CNN video then since I see you want it more:

www.youtube.com...

scroll to 3:00 and there is your proof.

As far as the evidence link I provided, that is far more convincing then the governments story, and btw, please reply to the evidence of nano thermite please?



[edit on 27-7-2009 by prepare4it777]




posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by prepare4it777
reply to post by QweeQwa
 


Yes it has!

www.youtube.com...



Please!

Really, is that all you can do to back up your theories?



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by prepare4it777
reply to post by QweeQwa
 


BTW here is the actual document of scientific proof

www.bentham-open.org.../2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM



Lot of info there.

Please inform me, in your own words, what it is saying. You know, I believe you when you give the impression that you have actualy read the whole thing.

In your own words will you please elaborate.

[edit on 7/27/09 by QweeQwa]



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:20 AM
link   
reply to post by QweeQwa
 


I think it has become pretty obvious to everyone in these forums that you cannot refute anything here and you come back with sad comebacks as if they make you look like you got the best of us when you really just make your ignorance of the 9/11 issues very evident, as you did in the other thread where you said the government shot down flight 93 (This being your argument against a government conspiracy. Still trying to figure that one out). A theory the government has denied from the beginning.

Please try to understand the whole issue before trying to come against the people here who do have much more extensive knowledge then you on the subject, as you have made painfully aware in your post.

You just make yourself look silly when you do. I'm just trying to look out for you man.

[edit on 27-7-2009 by prepare4it777]



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by prepare4it777
and btw, please reply to the evidence of nano thermite please?



[edit on 27-7-2009 by prepare4it777]


Here is my reply.

A You Tube video produced by We Are Change L.A. can hardly be called "evidence".



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:23 AM
link   
Uh, guys, you really have to be aware of the new member phenomenon. Many new members are joining this month and attacking every single thread with no evidence of their own, no logic or reasoning, and are nothing more than trolls.

You will not be able to convince them of anything, just as you cannot convince a stone. Qweqwa is only 4 days old and has done nothing but derail threads since joining.

It's become apparent that this sudden, recent rash, is no coincidence. The reasons for such actions are varied, and quite frankly could never be proven. But, the actions and writing of these members proves that their intentions are not genuine.

Hence, don't waste your time. And if they really are just that blissfully ignorant to reality, natural selection will get them some day.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by prepare4it777
A theory the government has denied from the beginning.



Hmmmm......less than an hour ago you claimed that we can not believe anything that the Government states but yet here you are believing the claims from the very same Government that at all cost we should not believe.

Make up your mind already!



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:26 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by prepare4it777

I think it has become pretty obvious to everyone in these forums that you cannot refute anything here and you come back with sad comebacks as if they make you look like you got the best of us when you really just make your ignorance of the 9/11 issues very evident.......

You just make yourself look silly when you do.


Very obvious! Totally agree, well said



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by king9072
Uh, guys, you really have to be aware of the new member phenomenon. Many new members are joining this month and attacking every single thread with no evidence of their own, no logic or reasoning, and are nothing more than trolls.

You will not be able to convince them of anything, just as you cannot convince a stone. Qweqwa is only 4 days old and has done nothing but derail threads since joining.

It's become apparent that this sudden, recent rash, is no coincidence. The reasons for such actions are varied, and quite frankly could never be proven. But, the actions and writing of these members proves that their intentions are not genuine.

Hence, don't waste your time. And if they really are just that blissfully ignorant to reality, natural selection will get them some day.


What are you scared of? If the facts are on your side you would be providing them instead of insulting me.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by QweeQwa
Not only have you refused to answer my very simple question you have yet to provide any evidence to back up your theories.



please provide the evidence to back up the 'official story'....what is there?

ALL YOU have is the weight of the Gov. behind the report...there are NO facts

lol...the 'ONLY' fact is that the NIST reports are a HYPOTHESIS,

a 'HYPOTHESIS' that STOPS it's investigation when the IMPACT areas were "poised to collapse".

average temp of the steel examined was 450F

NO floors collapsed from the heat and fires present

Proven that Bazant MISCALCULATED the stiffness of the columns, with his 71 GN/m estimate. The actual stiffness, calculated here using the actual column cross sections, is approximately 7.1 GN/m. This error of Bazant’s caused him to significantly overestimate the potential amplifying effect of the impulse or jolt he claims occurred after a one story fall of the upper block.

On one tower, WE SEE the antenna, which is supported by the core columns, drop straight down about 9 stories, before there is any movement BELOW the impact area....no block there

The other tower, WE SEE the 'tipping top', STOP it's forward momentum and crumble to pieces......WE SEE this.......no block there.....oh..and, WHAT WOULD, stop the momentum of that massive structure since it is obviously past it's fulcrum point

Where is the testing for explosives and accelerants that should have been done with NFPA 921: "Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations" is the national fire code published by The National Fire Protection Association.
This is standard for fire and explosion investigations.

It clearly states that if there is a crime scene that involves fire, tests must be conducted to determine whether residues from any pyrotechnic or incendiary material can be found...instead, someone from NIST decided that it would WASTE taxpayers money if they tested..ONE persons opinion.....VERY scientific

The towers were 1350 and 1360 feet tall. So how long it should take an object to free-fall from the towers' former height.

Distance = 1/2 x Gravity x Time(squared)
or
2 x Distance = Gravity x Time(squared)

Time(squared) = (2 x Distance) / Gravity

Time(squared) = 2710 / 32 = 84.7

Time = 9.2

in order to reach the ground in 9.2 seconds, the free-falling object's velocity must be about 295 ft/sec, which is just over 200 mph, which can only occur in a VACUUM.

and HOW long does it take a 1lb. ball to fall from the height of the towers traveling through the atmosphere....around 17 seconds

towers fell in....10 & 12 seconds......

hmmmm...so the towers fell FASTER than an object free falling through the AIR, but slower than an object falls in a vacuum.....Symmetrical collapse, through the path of greatest resistance, the columns gave no resistance...1400 foot diameter field of equally distributed debris outside of building footprint, crushing all 287 massive columns of steel on each floor while maintaining a CONSISTENT, near free-fall speed as if the 100,000 or more, tons of supporting structural-steel framework underneath don't exist....horizontally ejecting pieces weighing as much as 200 tons, hundreds of feet, INTO other buildings


This was one of the worst crime scenes in American history, and 99.44% of the evidence was removed and destroyed.

Who would benefit from removing and destroying evidence?

When have you ever heard of all the evidence being removed and destroyed from an ongoing crime scene?

Who could get away with getting rid of all the evidence from an ongoing crime scene, and not face any consequences?

It's common sense that if you have a ton of evidence pointing in your direction...and your "innocent"....why wouldn't you welcome any opportunity to get it out in the open to prove your innocence?


they still have the 3 balls of molten metal that were under each building, along with the steel that was examined in a hanger at JFK Airport......why not test them for explosives and accelerants?..........oh yea.....it would WASTE taxpayers money



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by prepare4it777
reply to post by QweeQwa
 


I think it has become pretty obvious to everyone in these forums that you cannot refute anything here ...


you have failed to provide any documented evidence to support your theories. So therefor it is impossible to respond to something that has never been offered. Remember, I understand that this might really cause you fits....but I do not read BLOGS!



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:37 AM
link   
Attention: Any further trolling, rude remarks or off-topic rambling will result in penalties and/or Posting Bans.

REVIEW THIS THREAD!



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:41 AM
link   
Nice little calculation there.
Proves one thing: your numbers are wrong
Faster than freefall?
Impossible

As for the cavemen: that is less racism than confirmation bias. See, cavemen fit the narrative, therefore they must be true. There is more evidence of atta spending time in a University than of him spending time in a cave, but that doesn't fit the narrative. Therefore it must not be true.
Same with the living highjackers. They fit the narrative, therefore the BBC piece must be true, and the BBC piece saying "oops, remember that alive highjacker story, we screwed up" must not be true.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:42 AM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:48 AM
link   
I'll catch you all later. Time to go to bed and get ready for work ( 2'nd shift)).

Be back early in the morning.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by debunky
Nice little calculation there.
Proves one thing: your numbers are wrong
Faster than freefall?
Impossible


then maybe YOU should get past your GED and learn a few things...the numbers are not wrong.......just shocking

[edit on 27-7-2009 by hgfbob]



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:49 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:51 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by QweeQwa

Originally posted by prepare4it777
reply to post by QweeQwa
 


I think it has become pretty obvious to everyone in these forums that you cannot refute anything here ...


you have failed to provide any documented evidence to support your theories. So therefor it is impossible to respond to something that has never been offered. Remember, I understand that this might really cause you fits....but I do not read BLOGS!




YOU have FAILED to provide ANY kind of physical evidence to support the 'official story'



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join