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.

 

Does Anyone Know Who These Men Are Yet?

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 01:49 AM
link   
Great video i hadn't seen it either i shall archive that and use it in future debates nice find starred and flagged fo sho




posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 03:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Karilla
 


Engineers make certain set of assumptions

They assume that the 110 story skyscraper next to you is not going to
fall on your building and cause severe structural damage

That the water supply will not be cut off by said collapse so can fight fires
aka the sprinkler system is functioning to contain the fire and that
water is available for the standpipes for FF to extinguish fires

That FF will be able enter building to fight fires and building systems
such as elevators and water supply are available

Show me building where all those handicaps are present and building is still
standing

Most building fires are fought - WTC 7 was not. The fires were allowed free hand to burn...



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 





Show me building where all those handicaps are present and building is still standing




[edit on 11-9-2009 by ChemicalSubstance]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by ChemicalSubstance
 


Good job. It's amazing how many people forget about Madrid. That fire was scores more terrible than Building 7's. Yet it still stands, but Building 7 miraculously falls into its own footprint at freefall speed.

Thedman is expecting us to believe in magic.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Kojiro
 


No its called different construction

Windsor Building in Madrid was built mostly of reinforced concrete - that
part survived. The steel sections collapsed from the heat

www.mace.manchester.ac.uk...

Notice in pictures where highlighted steel buckled from heat

have to understand different buildings will react differently to fire
based on how constructed and what materials used in construction

Or is that complicated to understand?



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 09:50 PM
link   
check out a video call 911 missing links. I think it
sums it up fairly well -- and after them, the organizations
Rockfeller and then the FCC and Media outlets...
Polygraph is about the most effective way of figuring
this thing out... so, what else do we need to figure this
murder mystery out.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


How much of that buckled steel in Madrid was found still literally molten in the debris a full month later, dman? Buckled, sure the fire burned for a LONG time throughout the entire structure. Molten steel a month later at all three sites of the WTC is a completely different issue. Regardless of the different construction types, steel framed high rises do not universally and symetrically collapse from fire, it is unprecedented and regardless of your acknowledgement of this fact, anamolous.

Anyways, I remember one of the newscasters at the Pentagon saying that there wasn't any wreckage from the 'plane' that was larger than what could be carried by hand. A jet liner leaves sizable debris, a missile, which Rumsfeld admitted to later by the way, would leave little or no debris.
Also interesting and something to bear in mind is the MIT guys that were working on designs for missiles that would resemble commercial aircraft. I wish I had found an original source for that tidbit.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by Kojiro
 


No its called different construction


Codeword for "magic."


Windsor Building in Madrid was built mostly of reinforced concrete - that
part survived. The steel sections collapsed from the heat

www.mace.manchester.ac.uk...

Notice in pictures where highlighted steel buckled from heat


And are still standing, by the way. Also, stone is weaker than steel. That's one of the reasons why we use steel more often in our construction these days.

An office fire also isn't hot enough to melt steel, which is one of the quirks we witnessed on 9/11. Thermite; however, can and we've found the thermite in the remaining material of the WTC buildings.


have to understand different buildings will react differently to fire
based on how constructed and what materials used in construction

Or is that complicated to understand?



No it's not, but what is impossible to understand is a steel building that was on fire for only a few hours just simply fell into its own footprint at freefall speed. Steel doesn't work that way. There should have been resistance as it fell, a slower collapse that cause sections or maybe the whole structure to topple sideways. That's how buildings of any sort naturally collapse, their construction be damned.

Also, this building still stands and its fires were far more severe than WTC7. Also, no stone was used in its construction.

wtc7.911evidence.com...

[edit on 12-9-2009 by Kojiro]



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join