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.

 

WTC Detonations Finally Revealed (Video)

page: 20
104
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


DId you even bother to look at the links i posted...the picture show the north tower tipping very clearly....

and so that is a hack job....and Clifton is absolute...right.

and yes gravity is a down force but if a partial area is removed the it leans to that void.

so tell that to all others who are denying the fact

crack pots right all hack jobs

the movement grows.

your loss my friend...shame too.. and your great MIT prof...paid by NIST.

nothing to do with things that dont go my way. i have been going through your links deeply...and you still quote the same papers.

cheers.




posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by plube
 


Also one more foot note....cause you presented a reply by someone from CDI who are also by the way being looked at as the suspects as strangly enough they were on site 2hrs before WTC7 collapse...so here is another perspective in case you care to look...think i have countered most your points fairly well.

but another one who has no idea what they are taling about.

but hey you might find me on that website...if your fairly perceptive.


Telephone interview with Jeff Hill 2/22/07:

Jeff Hill: I was just wondering real quickly, I know you had commented on World Trade Center Building 7 before.

Danny Jowenko: Yes, that's right.

Jeff Hill: And I've come to my conclusions, too, that it couldn't have came down by fire.

Danny Jowenko: No, it -- absolutely not.

Jeff Hill: Are you still sticking by your comments where you say it must have been a controlled demolition?

Danny Jowenko: Absolutely.

Jeff Hill: Yes? So, you as being a controlled demolitions expert, you've looked at the building, you've looked at the video and you've determined with your expertise that --

Danny Jowenko: I looked at the drawings, the construction and it couldn't be done by fire. So, no, absolutely not.

Jeff Hill: OK, 'cause I was reading on the Internet, people were asking about you and they said, I wonder -- I heard something that Danny Jowenko retracted his statement of what he said earlier about World Trade Center 7 now saying that it came down by fire. I said, "There's no way that's true."

Danny Jowenko: No, no, no, absolutely not.

Jeff Hill: 'Cause if anybody was -- Like when I called Controlled Demolition here in North America, they tell me that , "Oh, it's possible it came down from fire" and this and that and stuff like that --.

Danny Jowenko: When the FEMA makes a report that it came down by fire, and you have to earn your money in the States as a controlled demolition company and you say, "No, it was a controlled demolition", you're gone. You know?

Jeff Hill: Yeah, exactly, you'll be in a lot of trouble if you say that, right?

Danny Jowenko: Of course, of course. That's the end of your -- the end of the story.

Jeff Hill: Yeah, 'cause I was calling demolitions companies just to ask them if they used the term, "Pull it" in demolition terms and even Controlled Demolitions, Incorporated said they did. But the other people wouldn't -- didn't want to talk to me about Building 7 really because obviously 'cause they knew what happened and they didn't want to say it.

Danny Jowenko: Exactly . www.pumpitout.com...


source


edit on 063030p://f04Thursday by plube because: spelled a word wrong by typo



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by Wolfenz
 


Jesus Christ... if there was not a massive fire, then how in the heck was there miles of smoke ejecting from the impact holes?

Sometimes you people.....


Killing Joke - The Death and Resurrection Show

Burn Burn White Heat!! 3,000 F


Yeah Impact hole like the One Edna Critron was in right ! WTC1 North Tower!!! Jesus C.... Sometime You People ...


Black Smoke ok Ill Bite
Burning excessive Leftover Fuel ... (full tank)

Seeing its Jet Fuel Kerosene Even See Black Smoke coming out of a Exhaust of a Diesel Tractor Trailer ? right Veroom Veroom

04 LLY Duramax diesel black smoke!



Whooo whoooo Toot Toot !!
Railtour fantrip train passes through Wembley Park station.


en.allexperts.com...

Wow i don see any building just an Airliner crash alot of black smoke tho jee i wonder why Kerosene (Jet fuel Maybe)

Fed Ex Flight 647 Airline Crash


Im trying to deny ignorance here!


edit on 9-9-2010 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by plube

PLB i have nothing to say to you as you do not help as stated least Nef and ok OKL have presented a little bit of stuff.

but not one SINGLE one of you have even come close to show how the inner core gave way onto itself...and i cant do that because it just does not happen.

as for the progressive collapse none of you listen to the fact about the mass and how the mass would have needed to accerlerate to cause plasticity and buckling in the structure below.


I already suggested two times that both the top section and the floors damaged the central columns. When heavy sold objects crash into a structure at high speed it will be damaged. Why do call that irrelevant? You fail to explain why that is wrong. You say the top section disintegrated. You expect me to believe steel beams and columns disintegrated, while almost the complete top section is visible during collapse?

Ans why don't you want to answer my questions? They are specific straight forward questions that are relevant to the matter. I just don't understand why you ignore them if your case is so strong.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 07:37 PM
link   
Want to know something really interesting? The collapse starts above the impacts - both times - on the same floor - both times.

Coincidence? I think not...



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by mirageofdeceit
 


Provide proof please?

I don't think anyone has ever said that here and I would like to see your proof.

I'm not even going to try anymore with plube. I've offered very logical and reasonable evidence that does not rely on convincing a person what happened with rhetoric, but simply with facts: science, math, mechanics, etc. His reasoning is that he believes what he believes like a religious person, so no matter how much evidence there is against his stance, he will stand by it because he has rhetoric that sounds pretty.



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 02:18 AM
link   
reply to post by -PLB-
 


I answered you exhaustively and you still dont get it but i will try to show you in pictorial from which you my friend will still deny...but here goes



I have no idea what you see...but what i see is a total collapse of the top floors BEFORE any of the lower floors even begin to crumble.....and just to make my point clearer.



but gee....i am so sad that i too have to come done to such childish levels as to pander to someone who mocks my commons sense...let alone my Intelligence.

least there are court cases coming forward ...people are starting to ask alot more questons...architaects and Engineers,pilots,servicemen, and many more respected professionals are demanding the NIST report be replaced with a full public independent forrensic investigation into this CRIME.




edit on 023030p://f19Friday by plube because: (no reason given)




edit on 023030p://f20Friday by plube because: spelling typing to quick...lol




edit on 023030p://f27Friday by plube because: couple crammarical errors



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 02:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by plubeleast there are court cases coming forward


There are? care to show details of these court cases coming forward?



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 02:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


You know you are one of the worst people i can imagine to talk to....you have done nothing and people can read the entire thread and will see who has been doing everything possible to provide ssources and anwers to every question you have thrown at me....and not only that i have countered every thing you have presented and you don't like it....now there is another thread going on and discussing the architects points of views and is much more informative...but i am also answering the questions of four people in here.

Not sure about you but my time is valuble i work all the time and i take the time to try to reply and you say something derogatory like that.

As for Nef that is baffling he is a moderator on probably one of the world biggest conspiracy websites and we are discussing one of the worlds biggest conspiracies and he only quotes things presented through the OS.

I am baffled here....and now i hope he can reply to the pictorial that i gave links too but had to obviously put them in here as PLB could not be bothered to go and look and assess himself.

NOW the ball is in your courts....WHY would the very very top floor collapse...look carefully at the pics...DUE TO MASS. Please explain....cause my feeble little brain is overwhelmed. and not only that, give me ANY mathematical Equation why the top steel floor collapse FIRST and then the 15 FLOORS crash on themselves BEFORE the floor below poin of impact and if you say fires ...if that is the case....THEN where is the HIDDEN mass that would be require to provide progressive collapse.

I WANT FACTS

not rhetoric.


edit on 023030p://f58Friday by plube because: typing to fast yet again



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


go back throught the thread and read the links i have posted...you will find then i am tired of rehashing over and over and over for the four others in here i am not now going to start with you.

also go over the the new thread posted on the yahoo news story...that might help.



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by plube
WHY would the very very top floor collapse...look carefully at the pics.


It does not collapse first - all 15 floors move at the same time when the floor where the plane hit collapsed - have a look at the smoke out the side of the building and you will see that



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by plube
go back throught the thread and read the links i have posted


Yes, I did that and saw your standard "The jews did it" rant, but nothing about upcoming court cases...



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 07:42 AM
link   
reply to post by mirageofdeceit
 


" The collapse starts above the impacts - both times - on the same floor - both times. "

This should be entertaining , please humor us with some sort of what you would consider 'evidence' .



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by plube
Please explain....cause my feeble little brain is overwhelmed. and not only that, give me ANY mathematical Equation why the top steel floor collapse FIRST and then the 15 FLOORS crash on themselves BEFORE the floor below poin of impact and if you say fires ...if that is the case....THEN where is the HIDDEN mass that would be require to provide progressive collapse.

I WANT FACTS

not rhetoric.


Heres some facts. You are wrong in your assumption. Go to 0.47 here.



That does not show the top floors collapsing first. that shows the mass moving downwards first, and then the building collapses and the top floors break up. You can see it happen.

As for me being a moderator on a conspiracy website, its astute of you to notice the fact but being a moderator here does not mean that I automatically beleive in every single conspiracy. I'm here to share my opinions and to learn about new things just like anyone else is.

But what I'm not here to do is agree with people solely for the sake of doing it. Nor am I here to blindly believe something because someone tries to force it at me, and I'm most certainly not here in order to read contradictory statements put forward by anyone and just ignore them.



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 08:19 AM
link   
reply to post by plube
 


You do not answer my questions at all. Lets try a different format, I will ask one question at a time, where you can give an answer to that specific question only.

Quesion: why would the falling of the top section and the collapsing of the floors not damage the central cores to the point of collapse?

Just to be one step ahead: the top section collapsing, or disintegrating as you call it, does not take its mass away. The steel beams and columns are still there doing their damage as they fall down. Please try to answer this specific question only and don't switch to another topic please.



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 08:30 AM
link   
reply to post by plube
 


As for the rest of your post (which I want to keep completely separated from my previous reply, as they are unrelated issues), take a look at this footage:

www.youtube.com...

You can clearly see that where you have drawn the red line is not the point where the plane impacted. In this video you can clearly see the building starts collpasing at exactly the point where the big hole is where the smoke is coming out. So your analysis is misleading. Try it again on this footage, and place the red line on the place of the large black hole with smoke coming out.


edit on 10-9-2010 by -PLB- because: spelling



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by -PLB-
 


That video actually had something else unique and interesting about it. There was a 2-3 second massive vibration, and then 10 seconds later the top of the tower began to fall. I've replayed the vibration a number of times, and when it happens, some chunks of the tower eject from the sides. I think that was the point at which some of the supports failed and parts of the floor collapsed. Then with so much more weight distributed to the other supports, the max weight was passed and the tower started to collapse. If you look carefully at the collapse you will even see that the parts on the sides that are below the damaged area but on the floors, they remain standing straight while the upper part falls down upon them and caused a catastrophic failure.



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by -PLB-
 


At 1.40 in the video you can actually see the point of failure, the outer columns bulge out, buckle and collapse.

Oh yes - something else - no "squibs" either. Did you notice that?



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Oh yes - something else - no "squibs" either. Did you notice that?

If you've studied the collapse videos ad nauseum, you know where the "squibs" are. I can see at least 2 on the right hand side. One of the largest one's being covered up by the bottom of the video and barely visible. The "squibs" are there, just as they are in every other collapse video.



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by -PLB-
 


That video actually had something else unique and interesting about it. There was a 2-3 second massive vibration, and then 10 seconds later the top of the tower began to fall. I've replayed the vibration a number of times, and when it happens, some chunks of the tower eject from the sides. I think that was the point at which some of the supports failed and parts of the floor collapsed. Then with so much more weight distributed to the other supports, the max weight was passed and the tower started to collapse. If you look carefully at the collapse you will even see that the parts on the sides that are below the damaged area but on the floors, they remain standing straight while the upper part falls down upon them and caused a catastrophic failure.


So the strongest part of the building collapses first "the core". how can that be



new topics

top topics



 
104
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join