It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by LordBucket
Personally, when I've read about the thermite theory, it's been proposed that shaped cutter charges were used. The standard picture they like to show is this one. Which does appear to show a column with a highly angled cut and re-solidified metal drippings at the bottom.
Again, poor delivery system. Mythbusters likes big, shiny explosions and things. Their motivation was to put on an impressive show, not acheive a result as efficiently as possible. If you had bothered to watch either of the videos I linked, you'd see that much smaller quantites needed to get much more efficient results.
It'd be ridiculous to suggest that they'd need to be sneaky about it when they could simply have acquired a security pass by pretending to be repair crews.
...wait a second...are you suggesting that conventional explosives were used to demolish the towers, or are you simply throwing random stuff out there to try to create a smokescreen?
So shall we dismiss the official story because of that? Shall we dismiss the official story because of the reports of explosions, or because of the molten steel?
Originally posted by theability
I never said to chose my point of view, but you deny others points of view by saying their debunked before they speak.
Exactly why there is nothing to discuss.
Originally posted by LordBucket
No. It's only dawning on me that conversation with you is unproductive.
Have a nice day.
Originally posted by PersonalChoice
Reading through the threads, people arguing back and forth about the pentagon footage, and thought you know what would make a great 9/11 Mythbusters that would clear up one gigantic argument...
Take the same two cameras that the security gate was using on 9/11 and get some pilot to fly a 757 with a AA paint scheme on the same flight path (distance from camera, altitude, and speed) as f77 on a bright sunny day and see what the videos look like. Maybe attach a smoke streamer for even more accuracy and see if it all matches the original 9/11 security gate videos.
What do you think? Would we get the big myth BUSTED or myth CONFIRMED?
i was curious as to why mythbusters wont touch 911.
i dont think it was thermite that was used. didnt a professor from texas demonstrate a substance called therMATE?
Originally posted by polaris666
i just signed up acctually to respond on this because i was curious as to why mythbusters wont touch 911.
im am not a truther or debunker i hate labels like that. I am a person of science. there are many scientific problems of the events of 911 most notably building 7. and correct me if im wrong.... i dont think it was thermite that was used. didnt a professor from texas demonstrate a substance called therMATE?
anyone who doesnt see all the of obvious scientific and common sence issues with 911 needs a reality check. do a google search on what ANECDOTAL evedence means with regards to people seeing an airliner at the pentagon. anecdotal evidence does not apply here. the wreckage and hole in the wall at the pentagon simply dont support a 747 jetliner ramming it. there would have been 10 times more damage jesus.
science people. not anecdotal evedence or who done it talk. just PURE SCIENCE.
Originally posted by Pilgrum
reply to post by Six Sigma
Ah yes, but it's not the extra super nano-thermite paint
There was also a better related test of thermite more recently (National Geo?) where they piled thermite around a steel column to see if it could possibly sever the column which, of course, it didn't. People are too entrenched in their conspiracy ideas by now to ever change their minds regardless of the quality of testing procedures.