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.
There is no evidence for any demolitions, nuclear or conventional.
The collapses started where the planes impacted, not in the basements.
Building parts were not scattered far.
Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by AntiShyster
There is no evidence for any demolitions,
Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by pteridine
The collapses started where the planes impacted, not in the basements.
That is your “opinion.” as always.
Originally posted by mcrom901
Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by AntiShyster
There is no evidence for any demolitions,
and what makes you think that your opinionated guesstimates don't sound like a joke...
dynamiclist.com...
So your opinion is that the collapses of WTC1&2 didn't start where the planes impacted? Where do you think the collapses started?
You have no evidence of demolition; only speculation.
Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by pteridine
So your opinion is that the collapses of WTC1&2 didn't start where the planes impacted? Where do you think the collapses started?
You have no evidence of demolition; only speculation.
Actually, there is evidence of controlled demolition and there could be much, much more, had it not have been quickly shipped off for scrap metal in an unprecedented move by those in charge. In fact, one of the biggest pieces of residual evidence was clearly pointed out by Prof. Jones and peered reviewed by other scientists. Are you declaring yourself more qualified than these professional scientists?
In fact, you would expect that controlled demolition would have a perceived initiation at the place of impact.
--airspoon
Originally posted by pteridine
They may "sound like a joke" to the uneducable few who wish to believe in CD in spite of the complete lack of evidence. One of your links to a youtube thermite video [why is "evidence" always on youtube?] failed because youtube cut the video due to a T&C violation. Gage, of course, is doing what he always does to sell video discs in spite of the fact that it is completely meaningless.
If you ever find any actual evidence of CD, please post it.
Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by mcrom901
Thank you for your video showing a few windows popping out due to the compression of collapse.
Originally posted by pteridine
You apparently believe that those were explosions, in spite of the lack of any other evidence.
Originally posted by pteridine
Maybe your experience with explosions is limited to Hollywood action flicks which may be why you have no idea what you are posting, other than what some clowns-for-truth website told you.
Originally posted by pteridine
As many posters claiming demolition of WTC spend countless hours watching youtube videos, consider watching a few actual demolitions. You then may be able to see the difference between what happened and a real demolition.
Originally posted by micpsi
No one has said that the destructions of the twin towers were orthodox demolitions. For example, the demolition started from the top instead of from the bottom. This was because the buildings were too tall for conventional demolition, which posed the risk of their falling sideways, as has happened on a few occasions in the past in such demolitions. So a different method of demolition was used. Your argument is invalid because it makes the false assumption that 9/11 truthers claim a conventional controlled demolition occurred at the WTC. They don't. Of course you knew that, and it exposes your desperation in having to misrepresent their position.
You have no evidence of demolition; only speculation.
If you ever find any actual evidence of CD, please post it.
The smooth rate of descent was measured at 2/3 of free-fall. In other words, the building is accelerating (traveling faster and faster) straight down through what should have been the path of greatest resistance – the 80,000 tons of structural steel designed to resist this load. Physicists and other experts agree that this could have happened only if the underlying supporting structures were removed ahead of the falling upper building mass. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) acknowledges that each building was destroyed in fewer than a dozen seconds, and that they “came down essentially in free-fall”.
For many New York City firefighters on the scene, this rapid destruction was simply beyond their prior experience. Sgt. James Canham, in the oral histories of 118 first responders, put it this way: “This changed all the rules. This went from a structure to a wafer in seconds, in seconds. I couldn’t believe the speed of that tower coming down. I heard the rumble. I looked up. Debris was already 50 feet from the ground...”
Other first responders reported experiencing explosions and flashes of light as the destruction commenced. Much of this evidence was also captured on video by multiple cameras. EMT Captain Karin Deshore, in a Nov. 7, 2001, New York Times interview, described the astonishing events like this: “Somewhere around the middle of the World Trade Center, there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. The popping sound, and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building.” There are many similar accounts in this astonishing series of oral recordings effected by NYC Fire Commissioner, Thomas Von Essen, but kept hidden by the city of New York until it was ordered by a federal appeals court to release them to the New York Times.
Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode.
--Karin Deshore, in a Nov. 7, 2001, New York Times interview
As the WTC skyscrapers disintegrated before the eyes of stunned observers, steel framing sections weighing four to nine tons were hurled up to 600 feet away. This required an explosive force capable of ejecting the perimeter wall units at up to 70 mph as if out of a cannon. Some 90,000 tons of concrete and metal decking were pulverized, creating pyroclastic-like flows (hot gases with suspended solids) similar to those observed and filmed during the explosion of the Mt. St. Helens volcano.
Nullifying Newton: Official Story Violates Laws of Physics
Richard Gage's Auckland Presentation Silences The Debunkers
118 Witnesses:
The Firefighters’ Testimony to Explosions in the Twin Towers
Concrete Pulverization Twin Towers' Concrete Turned to Dust in Mid-Air
Forensic Metallurgy Metallurgical Examination of WTC Steel Suggests Explosives
Shredding of Steel
Twin Towers' Steel Frames Ripped to Small Pieces
Since you have so much evidence, it should be no problem for you to post the types and amounts of explosives used in the demolition.
Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by pteridine
Since you have so much evidence, it should be no problem for you to post the types and amounts of explosives used in the demolition.
Just as I thought! you never read a single source that I sent you in the above post.
Your questions have been answered and are in the above post why don' t you read them. As far as what type of demolition that was used we can only "speculate," from the scientific findings and film evidence until a new investigation is done. The evidence of demolition has been proven by science. You think you are being smart ( funny ) when asking me to show the evidence of the exact demolition that was used. Asking me to prove somthing that was compleatly destroyed in the destruction of the WTC and all the physical evidence that "may have" survived in the debri field at ground zero, was carted away to China.
Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by mcrom901
Thank you for your video showing a few windows popping out due to the compression of collapse. You apparently believe that those were explosions, in spite of the lack of any other evidence. Maybe your experience with explosions is limited to Hollywood action flicks which may be why you have no idea what you are posting, other than what some clowns-for-truth website told you.
As many posters claiming demolition of WTC spend countless hours watching youtube videos, consider watching a few actual demolitions. You then may be able to see the difference between what happened and a real demolition.
What Jones did was definitely not science and he did not prove anything.
You pretend to know what happened. What explosives and in what quantities were used to bring down the buildings?