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.

 

Don't be fooled by ATS' professional debunkers

page: 31
118
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by mike dangerously
 



Nah, Swamp is doing a great job schooling you all. He doesn't need my help.

But I do find it funny that you all are trying the dogpile on him, exactly what good ol' impressme was whining about in his thread.

And Swamp, don't worry about the toolbag that called me a "murdering hypocrite". Just another guy living in his mom's garage (or do you call it a Carriage House?).




posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


So you stop by to lend some emotional support and cheerleading, but nothing of substance to add for yourself huh?

If you're comfortable letting what Swamp has posted (or not posted, more like) roll, so is everyone else here.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65
reply to post by mike dangerously
 

Nah, Swamp is doing a great job schooling you all.

Swampy's brand of schooling is called "propaganda" and "disinformation". We get enough of that from the corporate media.

For some REAL schooling, tune into Jesse Ventura's "Conspiracy Theory", Wednesdays at 10pm on truTV. Last week's segment on HAARP was excellent. Tonight is 9/11.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by bsbray11
 


Not to mention, all of the eyewitness must have been hallucinating when they heard and saw explosions in all three WTC.

LOL, household cleaners blowing out steel beams hundred of feet in the air. LOL



Steel beams were blown out 100s of ft in the air? really when?

Cause the only time I see any beams falling away from the WTC is when the tower is collapsing. Arent explosives suppose to go off first, before any movement? Not after the building begins its collapse?

I mean its pretty pathetic how you folks can't even understand the rudimentary basics of any building demolition. First explosives go off, then the building falls. Not, building begins to fall, and then, as its already underway, THEN the explosives go off.

Also, rather than speculating on the beams being "thrown" by magic explosives", how about providing some sort of a coherent explanation, or idea on just how much explosives would have been necessary to throw any sort of column tree the distances and why they are never heard. You do understand how explosives work right? The heavier the material, the bigger the explosives; the more explosives, the louder the explosions. And why is it that it cannot just be the exterior columns peeling away from the collapse area, and this accounts for the farther distance from the base upon landing? How tall were the WTC again?

And while we are on this topic, why werent any other smaller debris (ie chunks of concrete, smaller bits of solid steel, etc) ejected at distances much much farther from Ground Zero? Another little fact you people like to ignore. In any CD requiring explosives, care has to be made to not have smaller debris be ejected from the building at high speeds from the charges going off inside. This is so that people and surrounding property wont get injured or damaged by the blast fragments. So explain how these "super dooper, ultra powerful explosives" which can throw large heavy steel sections hundreds of feet, not eject smaller heavy fragments farther away and kill people or damage buildings a 1/4 mile away or more? after all a big blast produces noticeable fragmentation and rain of debris that would be found much farther away. Why is this lacking at WTC?

See? Its easy to make an unsubstantiated claim about something, its quite another thing to try and iron out all the realities and difficulties of said speculation.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
Steel beams were blown out 100s of ft in the air? really when?


When the buildings collapsed.

There were multi-ton sections of column blown about 500 feet laterally (not considering the vertical/total "diagonal" distance) onto the Winter Garden between the WFC buildings. Also the WFC buildings themselves were hit with heavy debris.


Arent explosives suppose to go off first, before any movement? Not after the building begins its collapse?


"Suppose[d]"?

No offense but you ask really stupid questions. Do you know how explosives are detonated? Because if you do, then you'd know you can set them off whenever the hell you need them. There are no rules here, despite what you ignorantly claim.


I mean its pretty pathetic how you folks can't even understand the rudimentary basics of any building demolition.


Right back at you.

I'm surprised you aren't asking where the guys in hardhats were, with a little controller in somebody's hand with a button that said "Detonate!" I mean, EVERY demolition has to have that or it isn't a demolition!



First explosives go off, then the building falls. Not, building begins to fall, and then, as its already underway, THEN the explosives go off.


Maybe you missed the fact that the buildings didn't entirely collapse at once, that floors were blown out in regular intervals descending down the building. It's a pretty damned hard thing to miss but I certainly wouldn't put it past you.

Btw, even in conventional demolitions, they explosions ARE staggered. They do not happen all at once.

For (stereotypical) example:




Now that I have demonstrated it is common for explosives to be set off at different times during the demolition, please stop asking this asinine question as if it's impossible or impractical to do it, when it clearly is not. Every single explosive demolition is a unique situation anyway. You can't make broad generalizations and expect them to always hold true. They will not. The actual physical laws are the only things that will never change, and when/where you set off explosives is not bound by physical laws here on the surface of the Earth like you apparently think it is.



Also, rather than speculating on the beams being "thrown" by magic explosives", how about providing some sort of a coherent explanation, or idea on just how much explosives would have been necessary to throw any sort of column tree the distances and why they are never heard. You do understand how explosives work right? The heavier the material, the bigger the explosives; the more explosives, the louder the explosions.


First you try to tell us how demolitions can and can't happen (and were wrong), now you are trying to tell us how all explosives work by describing only the most conventional and common types, ie C4 and TNT. Why do you think conventional explosives were used, Gen? Are you an explosives expert, yes or no?


And why is it that it cannot just be the exterior columns peeling away from the collapse area, and this accounts for the farther distance from the base upon landing? How tall were the WTC again?


Because their connection to the building was severed. They were not simply leaning over. They were sent laterally considerable distances. Have you had physics, or am I going to have to try to break this down so a child could understand it? If an entire wall fell over all at once then it would make sense that some columns would be 500 feet away. But when they come loose and just sail out 500 feet without anything else touching them the whole way, then in physics, that means the force was imparted before it was sent out, and it was a significant amount of force considering the mass involved.



And while we are on this topic, why werent any other smaller debris (ie chunks of concrete, smaller bits of solid steel, etc) ejected at distances much much farther from Ground Zero?


There were.


There was concrete dust all over that part of Manhattan. All I can tell you is go look at photos of Ground Zero and surrounding streets. Maybe you should actually check before you post crap like this.



Another little fact you people like to ignore. In any CD requiring explosives, care has to be made to not have smaller debris be ejected from the building at high speeds from the charges going off inside. This is so that people and surrounding property wont get injured or damaged by the blast fragments.


Again you are talking about conventional, commercial/legal demolitions. Those rules do not apply to illegal military operations.


So explain how these "super dooper, ultra powerful explosives" which can throw large heavy steel sections hundreds of feet, not eject smaller heavy fragments farther away and kill people or damage buildings a 1/4 mile away or more?


I have a question for you: how many more questions do you have based on incorrect assumptions? I guess you're going to keep them coming.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 
I guess moral support and crying about being dog piled is really all you can do for swampy since he's done so many about faces that it's hard to keep count.



[edit on 103131p://0726 by mike dangerously]



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
So you stop by to lend some emotional support and cheerleading, but nothing of substance to add for yourself huh?


Yeah...yeah. You pretty much hit the nail on the head with that post. That's all I really came here to do.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


That's great, because it keeps the thread moving along AND continues to demonstrate that you guys have no logical response. Only emotional banter and trash talk.


Police hallucinating vans full of explosives in real time, and reporting it over radio?

Nope, not buying it.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

When the buildings collapsed.

There were multi-ton sections of column blown about 500 feet laterally (not considering the vertical/total "diagonal" distance) onto the Winter Garden between the WFC buildings. Also the WFC buildings themselves were hit with heavy debris.


So there is no way it could have gotten there from just falling away from the building as they collapsed?




"Suppose[d]"?

No offense but you ask really stupid questions. Do you know how explosives are detonated? Because if you do, then you'd know you can set them off whenever the hell you need them. There are no rules here, despite what you ignorantly claim.


Oh I know very well how they are detonated. and I also know that for a building to collapse from explosives, the explosives are supposed to explode FIRST. Don't you know that?



Right back at you.

I'm surprised you aren't asking where the guys in hardhats were, with a little controller in somebody's hand with a button that said "Detonate!" I mean, EVERY demolition has to have that or it isn't a demolition!


sorry, but i know there wasnt any "Controlled Demolition" at WTC until well after the collapses.



Maybe you missed the fact that the buildings didn't entirely collapse at once, that floors were blown out in regular intervals descending down the building. It's a pretty damned hard thing to miss but I certainly wouldn't put it past you.

Btw, even in conventional demolitions, they explosions ARE staggered. They do not happen all at once.

For (stereotypical) example:




Now that I have demonstrated it is common for explosives to be set off at different times during the demolition, please stop asking this asinine question as if it's impossible or impractical to do it, when it clearly is not. Every single explosive demolition is a unique situation anyway. You can't make broad generalizations and expect them to always hold true. They will not. The actual physical laws are the only things that will never change, and when/where you set off explosives is not bound by physical laws here on the surface of the Earth like you apparently think it is.


So they didnt need explosives to get the building moving down? Oh ok, well, umm, then how did the Tower start to collapse silently? and where oh where were the standard loud cracks and reports of the sounds of demo charges going off? You know, PRIOR to collapse or any movement? Oh unless this is where those magic nano-thermites come into play right?
also, the only thing I see during the collapse is the debris inside the Towers crashing down inside and outside. The external columns just peeled away after the interior floors collapsed first. THAT is what I see. I dont see any "explosive charges" going off at all. Say, just how many explosives were packed into those towers? Hundreds and hundreds of tons?




First you try to tell us how demolitions can and can't happen (and were wrong), now you are trying to tell us how all explosives work by describing only the most conventional and common types, ie C4 and TNT. Why do you think conventional explosives were used, Gen? Are you an explosives expert, yes or no?


No I am not a certified "expert", heh, but I do know enough about explosives through research and a little something called common sense that doesnt require a PhD in. and no, I am not wrong on them. I'm asking the basic questions you all are dodging. Where were the characteristic sounds of the det charges going off PRIOR to any movement of the building? Conventional explosives? Ah so mean there ARE some sort of superdooper secret explosives that A) Leave no trace, B) Cause the building to collapse without a sound prior to collapse; C) Dont throw chunks of debris for miles away, but can still magically launch debris weighing hundreds of tons hundreds of feet. Very special those magic explosives.



Because their connection to the building was severed. They were not simply leaning over. They were sent laterally considerable distances. Have you had physics, or am I going to have to try to break this down so a child could understand it? If an entire wall fell over all at once then it would make sense that some columns would be 500 feet away. But when they come loose and just sail out 500 feet without anything else touching them the whole way, then in physics, that means the force was imparted before it was sent out, and it was a significant amount of force considering the mass involved.


Ok I see where you are going with that. Yes the connection was broken, but not by "explosives" as you claim. You forget what happened to the floors inside. As I recall, you can see them collapsing inside on the way down, severing the connections to the exterior. Those are the clouds of dust getting launched out. THEN we see the column trees tilting away and breaking off well after the internal collapse goes by. If those were "explosives" going off, then those exterior columns should have been ejected laterally immediately after detonation, not well after the blast. Also are they really being ejected laterally? Cause I see them tipping over away from the Tower. Not moving horizontally in one piece. That shows me that it is peeling away. Like a tall tree falling over. The top falls over and tumbles down. That doesn't look like explosives to me. And where would they have been planted to do so?




There were.


There was concrete dust all over that part of Manhattan. All I can tell you is go look at photos of Ground Zero and surrounding streets. Maybe you should actually check before you post crap like this.



I'm afraid you missed what I was talking about. I am talking about the debris that gets forcefully ejected out of the tower on detonation. heh before you go running your mouth posting crap, do a little research into what exactly I am talking about. People have been injured and even KILLED by debris that is launched from improperly prepared "implosions".
en.wikipedia.org...

Notice, its not the collapse, its the detonation that flung the debris pieces 500 meters away. And those were with "conventional" explosives. And now you are saying that the "explosives" at WTC that were powerful enough to laterally launch tons of steel, didnt launch smaller pieces farther? Like steel pieces or large chunks of concrete or even a bloody exterior panel more than 500ft? Something isnt adding up here.





Again you are talking about conventional, commercial/legal demolitions. Those rules do not apply to illegal military operations.


Ah yes, the "super-sekrut-sooper-dooper, silent but deadly powerful wrapped with magic nano-thermite that can cut on all angles with a layer a milimeter thick" explosives. Yes THOSE explosives that no one knows about except the special secret military forces, and uses them to blow up buildings. So I take it these new magical explosives (powered by pixy dust) are immune to the laws of physics and reality, and operate on a totally different existence? What'll they think of next?




I have a question for you: how many more questions do you have based on incorrect assumptions? I guess you're going to keep them coming.


Incorrect assumptions? Me? heh, ok whatever you say pal!

[edit on 12/9/2009 by GenRadek]

[edit on 12/9/2009 by GenRadek]



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 07:44 PM
link   
"So I take it these new magical explosives (powered by pixy dust) are immune to the laws of physics and reality, and operate on a totally different existence?"

Wait a second! I thought the date September 11, 2001 was the only thing immune to the laws of physics and reality? Now you've really have me confused.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


Oh really? and what, pray tell, laws of physics were violated? and please, if you are going to repost the same garbage from the 9-11 deniers sites, then dont bother. The only violations of the laws of physics are seen when the "truthers" open their mouths with their "ideas" of what should have happened. Nope, no real laws of physics were violated.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


Well thank you for your “opinion” because that all you have given. Sciences proves your “opinions” are wrong perhaps, you might want to reconsiders your position, and start listening to people who are experts in the field of Architects and Engineers that blows away the government pseudo sciences fraudulent reports, that you continue to ignore.





975architectural and engineering professionalsand 5470 other supporters including A&E students
have signed the petition demanding of Congress
a truly independent investigation.



www.ae911truth.org...







[edit on 9-12-2009 by impressme]



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 09:53 PM
link   
How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)

One way to neutralize a potential activist is to get them to be in a group that does all the wrong things. Why?

1) The message doesn't get out.
2) A lot of time is wasted
3) The activist is frustrated and discouraged
4) Nothing good is accomplished.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
I mean its pretty pathetic how you folks can't even understand the rudimentary basics of any building demolition. First explosives go off, then the building falls.

That's exactly what happened, for those of you who missed the last 4-5 pages of discussion.

NBC News:


Just moments ago, I spoke to the Chief of Safety for the NYC fire department, Chief Albert Turi. He received word of a secondary device -- that is another bomb going off. He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could, but he said there was another explosion which took place and then an hour after the first crash that took place, he said there was another explosion in one of the towers here. He thinks that there were actually devices that were planted in the building. The second device, he thinks, he speculates was planted in the building...

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Statement recorded by FDNY on 12/10/01:


Chief Turi arrived at the WTC just prior to and witnessed the second airplane impact. He entered the North Tower lobby shortly after the second impact, where a temporary command post was located.

Q: Let me stop you there for a second, chief. When you were in the lobby of 1 World Trade, can you describe the interior and the condition of the lobby?

Chief Turi: Yes. I was surprised that all the glass was mostly out. I wasn't sure how it got out. I didn't think we took it out. I just assumed that it was the vibration of the aircraft hitting it. And I did notice some pieces of marble that looked like it was dislodged from the core area. ... [Editor's note: At this point, Chief Turi was in the lobby of the North Tower, approximately 1,100 feet below the airplane's impact point at floors 93 to 98.]

And as my eyes traveled up the building, and I was looking at the south tower, somewhere about halfway up, my initial reaction was there was a secondary explosion, and the entire floor area, a ring right around the building blew out. I later realized that the building had started to collapse already and this was the air being compressed and that is the floor that let go. And as my eyes traveled further up the building, I realized that this building was collapsing ..."
graphics8.nytimes.com...


Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 

Oh really? and what, pray tell, laws of physics were violated?

What laws of physics were violated? Are you f'ing kidding me? Ever hear of the Laws of Conservation of Energy and Momentum? This is Physics 101.

Or have you been studying at the Swampy Government Institute of Debunking?


[edit on 10-12-2009 by GoldenFleece]



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
So there is no way it could have gotten there from just falling away from the building as they collapsed?


How about instead of asking me, you go find some evidence to back your theory and come back and talk to me about it?


Oh I know very well how they are detonated. and I also know that for a building to collapse from explosives, the explosives are supposed to explode FIRST. Don't you know that?


Yes, but you have yet to show where the problem is. Explosives don't have to be set off all at the same time.


So they didnt need explosives to get the building moving down? Oh ok, well, umm, then how did the Tower start to collapse silently?


According to lots of witnesses it was not silent at all.


and where oh where were the standard loud cracks and reports of the sounds of demo charges going off? You know, PRIOR to collapse or any movement? Oh unless this is where those magic nano-thermites come into play right?


You really are ignorant about 9/11 if you think there weren't many, many reports of explosions all during the time period between the plane impacts and the collapses. You just pretend they have a different explanation than bombs/explosives, with no evidence.


The external columns just peeled away after the interior floors collapsed first. THAT is what I see. I dont see any "explosive charges" going off at all. Say, just how many explosives were packed into those towers? Hundreds and hundreds of tons?


I wouldn't know because I didn't put them there. But if you aren't seeing massive multi-ton sections of columns flying through the air trailing dust behind them, then you must be blind. Look up the sections that hit the Winter Garden. They didn't just lean over 500 feet.


No I am not a certified "expert", heh, but I do know enough about explosives through research and a little something called common sense that doesnt require a PhD in.


So in other words, no, you are not an explosives expert.

Unless you are from the military and are confident that you are familiar with every available type of explosive, bomb, and/or eutectic material, I don't care what your little personal opinion is. Because a real military expert isn't going to give a damn about how little you know about explosives when he's planning what to put where to best fool you.


Conventional explosives? Ah so mean there ARE some sort of superdooper secret explosives that A) Leave no trace, B) Cause the building to collapse without a sound prior to collapse; C) Dont throw chunks of debris for miles away, but can still magically launch debris weighing hundreds of tons hundreds of feet. Very special those magic explosives.


You are lying about each of those points.

A) No one even LOOKED for residues in the debris. NIST didn't look, FEMA didn't look, WHO LOOKED? You can't claim they didn't leave freaking traces if nobody even looked for them, genius.

B) There were plenty of sounds.

C) There was small debris and dust all over Manhattan. You could see the dust cloud from space.


Ok I see where you are going with that. Yes the connection was broken, but not by "explosives" as you claim.


No, you don't at all see where I'm going. Columns don't "tilt" hundreds of feet. Tilting is rotational motion. Unless the column itself is 500 feet long, it's not going to rotate 500 feet.


Also are they really being ejected laterally?


No, they fell onto the Winter Garden vertically.




I'm afraid you missed what I was talking about. I am talking about the debris that gets forcefully ejected out of the tower on detonation. heh before you go running your mouth posting crap, do a little research into what exactly I am talking about. People have been injured and even KILLED by debris that is launched from improperly prepared "implosions".


I honestly can't comprehend where you think you are going with this. There was multi-ton debris sent out hundreds of feet laterally, and this is demonstrable and to deny it is to try to take a massive back-step against something that has been accepted by all parties for years.

There was also smaller debris, sent out even further.

Even FEMA has diagrams illustrating this in their report, in the chapters dealing with the Twin Towers.


And now you are saying that the "explosives" at WTC that were powerful enough to laterally launch tons of steel, didnt launch smaller pieces farther? Like steel pieces or large chunks of concrete or even a bloody exterior panel more than 500ft? Something isnt adding up here.


You're right, and it's how completely ignorant you are about this. Are you seriously trying to say no debris made it farther from the towers than the Winter Garden?



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 
Don't you know that AE for 911 truth are frauds,impressme!! you want to upset the sensitive nature of the OS supporters? they can't be bothered to read qualified expert opinions on what really happened besides,they have the Kean/Hamilton commission the Building Performance reports and FEMA and NIST all reputable and responsible government officials.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 
But,but,Fleece swampy gave his word that Chief Turi was a flat out liar at worst or was just confused by the heat of the moment and thought he was in the first floor of the TWC at best.You know how all these first responders exaggerate!



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by mike dangerously
 



Originally posted by mike dangerously
reply to post by impressme
 
Don't you know that AE for 911 truth are frauds,impressme!! you want to upset the sensitive nature of the OS supporters? they can't be bothered to read qualified expert opinions on what really happened besides,they have the Kean/Hamilton commission the Building Performance reports and FEMA and NIST all reputable and responsible government officials.


LOL, so true,
that is what separates intelligent posters from the ignorant one’s. LOL
We know it is easier to believe in a lie, if one chooses to be ignorant.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 
I must ask,do these guys even bother to read what they are defending? it's not that hard to find the official reports online.But some people just have such a belief in American exceptionalism that it blinds them and a good amount of others it makes cover ups possible just look at the Warren Report for a classic example of this.

[edit on 013131p://3226 by mike dangerously]



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:45 AM
link   
reply to post by mike dangerously
 





But,but,Fleece swampy gave his word that Chief Turi was a flat out liar at worst or was just confused by the heat of the moment and thought he was in the first floor of the TWC at best.


Nope, not once did I say he was a liar, nor did I say he was confused. I said that during major events, false stories and rumors abound and are repeated. I also pointed out that in his after action reports, he clearly states that he believes it was the air being compressed by the start of the collapse that gave the appearance of an explosion. In addition, I pointed out that he does not once mention a secondary device being found. Nor do the transcripts reflect the bomb squad being called to defuse a secondary device.

Only those in the truth movement who think that during a crisis, everyone is perfect and accurate in their actions and words, think that Chief Turi is a liar.



new topics

top topics



 
118
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join