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.

 

Another part of the puzzle solved (maybe) WTC2?

page: 1
15

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:08 PM
link   
Before I start I am not a NPT, but I still do not believe that a plane managed to punch it`s way through all that steel and in respect to WTC2 the South Tower, straight through some centre core and out the other side, withought a lot of help, sorry that just does not add up, but if it has never happened before and you make it look like it happened, it happened. Why the importance of the towers absorbing the planes?, well simple - the basis for the collapses surrounds the whole principle of them looking like they have severed half the core to start with, backed up by some random Jet launching some napalm missiles...



If anyone in their right mind think this is aviation fuel exploding then there is no helping them, anyone work out why it has obviously been ejected everywhere but there is absolutely no pools of random fires either all over the North Tower or any of the faces it exited from in the South Tower, but strangely enough it has managed to do this internally of both towers enough to weaken and make them collapse....





Explain also how the entry explosion happened?, again, the laws of physics absolutely broken beyond repair, try this experiment.. Find an old container with lid (that will come off on impact) and half fill it with petrol, put it on an open trailer and take it to a hill with a wooden or similar fence, the other side of the fence about 10 -15 feet, make a fire, let it go and see how much will back blast to where the bath tub just came from.....





posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:08 PM
link   
So how did they weaken the exterior before impacts?, Something to do with this chopper, look at the frames I cut and pasted.....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and the alloy Facade is cut completely different around impact zone to everywhere else, it is normaly like this, each piece is a story in length....



Then, you have this, also I put some lines in to show how many trusses have been damaged already, marked with the yellow line you can clearly see the facade is wider at the bottom, the facade is cut there are short sections top and bottom of where the floor truss seats are marked in blue lines....



Will add more to this thread tomorrow..

[edit on 12-9-2009 by Seventh]



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   
No matter how many times I see the pictures I can not believe how so many people believe planes did all the damage.

Keep up the good work, maybe in you research something will awaken one more person so they will at least keep an open mind.

S & F.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


I think you are on to something, great job.

I have to agree with the other poster it is hard to believe those planes did that much damage it doesn’t make sense dose it.


[edit on 12-9-2009 by impressme]



posted on Sep, 13 2009 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


Good job Seventh; the shots of the "nose cone" have always been strange. I saw the second explosion with my own eyes and if it was just just fuel exploding, most if not all of it had to burn of within minutes of impact. Then it' a furniture fire.

ColoradoJens

[edit on 13-9-2009 by ColoradoJens]



posted on Sep, 13 2009 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seventh
Before I start I am not a NPT, but I still do not believe that a plane managed to punch it`s way through all that steel and in respect to WTC2 the South Tower, straight through some centre core and out the other side, withought a lot of help,


You're right, the planes did have help. It's called "velocity".


sorry that just does not add up, but if it has never happened before and you make it look like it happened, it happened.


You're starting to contradict yourself. If you're admitting that we Can't gauge what should happen because it never happened before then you're Likewise admitting these "no steel skyscraper ever fell from fires" bit coming from the truthers is being intellectually dishonest for the same reason - no jet aircraft ever crashed into a skyscraper of that unique design at 400 mph either. This intellectual dishonesty includes THIS statement, too...


If anyone in their right mind think this is aviation fuel exploding then there is no helping them,


how many times before 9/11 have you yourself seen jet fuel burning after the Jet that had carried it crashed into a building, exactly? If the answer is "zero" then how are you not being guilty of the same fallacy you're using to criticize others with?


Explain also how the entry explosion happened?, again, the laws of physics absolutely broken beyond repair, try this experiment.. Find an old container with lid (that will come off on impact) and half fill it with petrol, put it on an open trailer and take it to a hill with a wooden or similar fence, the other side of the fence about 10 -15 feet, make a fire, let it go


This analogy isn't even remotely comparable to what happened on 9/11. Are you seriously suggesting the towers were on fire before the jets hit them?



posted on Sep, 13 2009 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Hey, come on Dave I done a crap load of work and scaling down etc etc with this thread, for starters look at picture one the initial explosion, the colours of smoke and flames, also notice the shadow of the alleged engine which is still visible when boom - explosion two kicks in, look at.....

1). The colour differences.

2). The amount of debris between the two explosions.

3). The sheer magnitude of it.

4). Identical environments and only one combustible fuel, why are the explosions completely different?.

5). Also the rear explosion South of WTC2 the South Tower is lower than it should be, hence me doing all that work pointing out the storeys, and again I ask, how did it break the laws of physics, travelling over 500 mph and liquid escapes it sure as hell is not going to go back 75 yards where it just came from at that speed, that was the point of the experiment.

How am I contradicting myself?, something made sure those planes embedded in the towers and I just pointed that out, hence the obvious cuts in the facade which are completely different to the overall pattern, I have not checked the South face yet but £$10 says it is exactly the same, as it is a rare occurrence for planes to hit buildings that are say.... constructed to withstand a missile attack, and for eg:- say a plane burying itself, there are two huge pointers there as to how hard these Boeings are, let`s create false scenarios that realy do make it look like these planes are super vehicles, Jeeez they are aluminium and built for lightness, those towers were built to withstand these things hitting them, and hurricanes, catch my drift
.

An all out nuclear war would destroy this planet, none have us have ever seen this, but I can confidently state that 99.99% of the population that is of - able to reason and think common sense status, would agree with this, now all of a sudden if there is a heavy duty nuclear war and 3 people die and one building gets blown up, there will be grounds for a good few questions to be asked.

I just spent a few hours getting some plane crash videos together but haven`t got time atm to convert and edit etc, one hits the sea parallel and isn`t going to fast at at all, soon is it touches down and turns the tail section snaps and the wings break off, I know the sea is hard, but this plane was not hitting 500 mph, and tempered steel is a lot harder than water, x2 planes x2 towers, not one wing, tail section, nose cone, no parts of either plane whatsoever was deposited outside, you think this is down to velocity?.

And come on Dave you said I was contradicting myself - A bug hits your car windscreen and splatters, if the same bug is doing 500 mph, what happens?, a bigger splat, or goes through the windscreen?, also metal V metal, ripping each other to bits = a huge amount of sparks and ruptured fuel tanks, why no explosion until the planes were tucked safely inside the towers?, coincidence again?.

Anyway`s gonna update this thread later today.



/cheers.


[edit on 13-9-2009 by Seventh]



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   
I found the way they edited that quite humorous
He's just out right lying.
I'm not sure if this is the appropriate time or place to say hello
But I've been lurking the topics on here for a couple of years
Definitely got a lot more topics to get my teeth into however
But as far as 9/11 is concerned (in my mind at least)
The official story does not add up
I think 8 years on (very gradually) the transition from 'conspiracy' to fact is taking shape on this one
I mean how many nails can we fit on 9/11's coffin before it's universally accepted as a cover up?
I hope I wasn't too off topic for my introductory post!
Good video though
Thanks for uploading



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by IrnBruFiend
I found the way they edited that quite humorous
He's just out right lying.
I'm not sure if this is the appropriate time or place to say hello
But I've been lurking the topics on here for a couple of years
Definitely got a lot more topics to get my teeth into however
But as far as 9/11 is concerned (in my mind at least)
The official story does not add up
I think 8 years on (very gradually) the transition from 'conspiracy' to fact is taking shape on this one
I mean how many nails can we fit on 9/11's coffin before it's universally accepted as a cover up?
I hope I wasn't too off topic for my introductory post!
Good video though


Thanks for uploading



I started posting on other subjects as well. But when you realize how much work and effort people of all nations put into defending the rights of citizenship, freedom of speech and the threat of tyranny, you can't help but to comment. Thanks for yours. 911 and it's consequences reach world wide.



new topics

top topics



 
15

log in

join