Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

WTC Detonations Finally Revealed (Video)

page: 25
104
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Why am I a truther?

Because how many professional standards and professional testimony has to be ignored in order to believe the deceptions of the POLITICALLY CORRECT version of events that disregard multiple professional standards and multiple professional standard operating proceedures?

Why weren't FIRE INVESTIGATORS permitted to do the job they do, which was long adopted for decades in the NFPA?

This is not about TRUTH and the professional standards, this is about what is POLITICALLY CORRECT and the neccessities and matter of National Security and International Global Securities.

At what point during September Eleventh was MARTIAL LAW OVERTLY announced simultaneously to hundreds of millions in America, and Billions across the globe? When was Martial Law unrevoked? Who could fly in the airspace over America for the weeks after 9-11?

Non-Truthers participate either passively or aggressively against 343 firefighters that became collateral damage that day, and also slap their profession in the face for being proponents of those who were not allowed to be the fire investigators they are, and follow their professional guidelines for such an event.



edit on 22-9-2010 by Esoteric Teacher because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by canadiansenior70
reply to post by Varemia
 


Did you not see all the dust that fell as the Towers disappeared from the top down....DUST! Everything pulverized. Even steel beams. None were shopped off to china... all those trucks coming and going were covering up the ground, with frest earth, and then hauling it away and replacing again, as people's boots were disintigrating.
Check out her Website, which appears to be in transition from one server to another, but there is still plenty to see...about fuming, rusted steel. lathering---and did you ever see a controlled demolition take off up into the stratosphere?

www.drjudywood.com...


So far nothing she has there is credible to me. At first glance, without thinking about it, her assertions seemed compelling with the image of the tower part appearing to evaporate. HOWEVER! Upon closer inspection, I discovered that the steel did not, in fact, become dust. Look super duper carefully, k?

www.drjudywood.com...

The opaque part visible is clearly lower in height on the third slide, and the second shows the steel bowing inward, implying a failure to support itself below. The part of the building fell. It did not turn to dust. Also, most of the stuff in the air that she is calling dust... it's smoke, dude. The towers were burning severely for an hour with miles of smoke. A lot of the dust is also blown concrete.

Another point! A pancake collapse cannot look the way she says it should. It's simply impossible for the floors to flatten themselves on top of each other in such a neat fashion. There happened to be a steel mesh on the outside and girders below that made this impossible. Now, if the floors were held up by only a central beam with no walls on the outside, as well as being super strong to withstand the force of a progressive collapse, you would see that. However, there is a lot of crap in the towers, to put it bluntly. The steel that is not being pulled down by gravity to smash the floors below is being ejected off the sides and up with air pressure. The concrete is blowing all over the place and a cloud of smoke, dust, and ash from the fire is mixed and spread over the area.

Absolutely none of the steel transformed into dust. This theory is completely ridiculous.



posted on Sep, 25 2010 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


The steel that is not being pulled down by gravity to smash the floors below is being ejected off the sides and up with air pressure.

so the air pressure blew the up to fifty ton pieces of steel 600 feet?
the length of two football fields, RIGHT?

the parabolic ejection of steel is noe the result of air pressure.
I hopw you do not also believe that the hot steel from the fire caused by the kerosene kept the debris pile hot for months do you?



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 06:37 AM
link   
reply to post by slugger9787
 


You are offering no better explanation in that post. Please, post something that is constructive to the conversation.

The air pressure I felt accounted for the horizontal ejection of smoke and dust, as well as smaller things like glass and some concrete. It was the force of the floors collapsing and the debris taking the course of least resistance that led to the serious ejections. Especially with the thick concrete and dust thickened smoke, the steel was being carried somewhat through the air. As for the shooting straight up, yes, obviously it happened, and even with the truther explosives it couldn't have done that magically.



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by St Udio

any 'popping' can be subjectively described as an 'explosion'

has anyone listed or counted the actual number of these explosions...

has the explaination that beams & columns and outside wall panels being thrown from the building are not the cause of these preceived explosions


were there explosions at regular intervals and of about the same decible

remember there could not be any more than 60 seperate explosions pretty much in regular intervals to bring down a 114 storey structure

floor slabs pancaking, columns snapping, metal shear wall panels being snapped off and flung some distance from the collapsing building...
all these incidents would create the 'bangs' 'explosions' heard from witnesses, all at different locations


poking a dead horse ain't going to change things


No, you obviously have never heard an explosion. I have. I heard the explosion of a building which was bombed by terrorists. I was two miles away. As soon as I heard it I knew without any doubt it was an explosion. I knew that when I heard it. It was immediately confirmed by the news on TV.

A building collapsing would make noise, even a lot of noise, but the sound of an explosion is totally different.

edit on 26-9-2010 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 07:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


parabolic travel of debris is characteristic of thermonuclear demolition,
thermonuclear explosive ejected the fifty ton steel panels 600 fet, 200 tards, two football fields away,

there is no way air pressure from a gravity collapse will propel fifty ton steel panels 600 feet, 200 yards, two football fields.

yes a truther explosive is a more intelligent, logical explaination of steel velocities that air pressure.



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Just watched this for the first time very interesting.


And this one just released.


edit on 26-9-2010 by remymartin because: (no reason given)



edit on 26-9-2010 by remymartin because: (no reason given)



edit on 26-9-2010 by remymartin because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by remymartin
 


Man these guys really grind my gears. There were seemingly explosions heard from WTC 7 seconds before complete collapse for the simple reason that part of the building on the inside was collapsing before the rest of the building.

As for the other video, the ejections were clearly from the floors inside collapsing before the outside began to warp and fall. The fire was still going on the higher floor because not all the floors above had been compromised. It would have been suspicious if the fire had gone out right away.

The arguments are flimsy at best for these conspiracy theories.

As for nukes, there would surely be more evidence than a trajectory of steel? I would like to see a source that explains tiny thermo-nuclear blasts and how they react inside a building at least slightly similar to the WTC.



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


we are talking about twenty tons.
40,000 pounds being moved 600 feet here.

2,400,000 foot pounds of energy.

that is a piece of steel the size of some ARMY TANKS.

You tell me i offer no better exxplaination that your explaination of air pressure.

You could not put enough TNT under a tank to move it that far.



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by slugger9787
 


I did not say it was just air pressure. I claimed that air pressure explained any ejections of smoke and other debris. The steel was most likely ejected due to the transfer of energy from the collapsing floors and walls.

Posting large numbers does not a credible argument make. You must prove that such numbers are impossible under the circumstances of collapse before saying that they had to happen another way.



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


tell you what.
I will not go do research for you about how large the steel is, how far it was blown, or how it got propelled there.
you can do your own investigation, and thereby be absolutely certain that it is quality.

you did not reflect on the amount of energy needed to move a tank 600 feet.
gravity collapse explaination does not include propellng 40 ton pieces of steel 600 feet, two football fields.

you go find out for yourself if gavity can do that.

good place to start is a controlled demolition web site, then look up "4th generation nuclear + 911"

i posted several links, and will not go back and find them and repost them.

you already believe the OCS (official conspiracy theory) so i am quite certain you will not even make the effort in any other direction.



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by slugger9787
 


So instead of giving me information that could potentially change my mind and lead me into the conspiracy group, I am instructed to go search for information tailored to fit the idea of a miniature nuke that no one seemed to have detected, all on the basis that steel was projected from a very tall, very collapsing building? As for saying I simply "believe the OCS," that is not true. I am willing to disbelieve it if anyone can prove it to me. I just haven't found any evidence that proves it wrong. Only misconceptions, stuff taken out of context, blown out of proportion, or meant to be taken on faith because of emotional ties to something or another.

Also, it was not just gravity, but mass, and pressure, and a few other forces that are very active. If there was a nuke detonated, would it not stand to reason that only part of the building would eject far outward? There would have to be a harmonious detonation sequence in order to create the constant ejection of debris down the tower as it collapsed. OR.... it could just have happened like it did.



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


This article describes a general concept of nuclear demolition of skyscrapers - particularly in connection with known thermo-nuclear demolition schemes of the World Trade Center in New York and that of the Sears Tower in Chicago. Though, the current article does not deal with any exact details of implementation of this concept in regard to these particular structures, but provides rather general knowledge on this subject. Besides, this article does not consider any conspiracy behind nuclear demolition of the WTC on 9/11, neither does it consider any moral aspect of this issue - such as ground zero clean-up works and so on - it aims to explain its purely technical aspect. However, there are other articles available in the Internet that describe the WTC nuclear demolition scheme in more or less exact detail, as well as articles that describe particular conspiracy in regard to the actual WTC demolition - links to these articles are available at the end of the current description.

Nuclear demolition of skyscrapers was patented by " Controlled Demolition Inc." - the most renowned demolition company that deals with controlled demolition of buildings, and especially with controlled demolition of skyscrapers. The same company was a primary designer of nuclear demolition projects of the World Trade Center in New York and of the Sears Tower in Chicago.

www.nuclear-demolition.com...



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by slugger9787
 


But see, the fact that it is possible for it to be a demolition plan does not make it what really happened. One must determine with certainty that the said technique was actually used. Everything that I have learned and observed since 9/11 shows no conspiracy afoot in the collapse of the towers. I personally feel a relative conspiracy with the planes and/or hijackers is a possibility, but that the collapse itself was not a conspiracy.



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


okay.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by remymartin
 


Man these guys really grind my gears. There were seemingly explosions heard from WTC 7 seconds before complete collapse for the simple reason that part of the building on the inside was collapsing before the rest of the building.

the ejections were As for the other video, clearly from the floors inside collapsing before the outside began to warp and fall. The fire was still going on the higher floor because not all the floors above had been compromised. It would have been suspicious if the fire had gone out right away.

The arguments are flimsy at best for these conspiracy theories.

As for nukes, there would surely be more evidence than a trajectory of steel? I would like to see a source that explains tiny thermo-nuclear blasts and how they react inside a building at least slightly similar to the WTC.


I find the pancake theory hard to believe when ejections happen at the point of collapse and about 10 floors below at the same time.









Source video


edit on 27-9-2010 by remymartin because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by remymartin
 


If you are even looking at your video you would see that there is a delay on the "squib." It does not go off immediately when the tower begins to collapse. It starts after the top is going down. This would imply, obviously, that the floors on the inside were failing and collapsing before the outside walls of the towers.

Does it need to be made any more clear? The building wasn't falling as a unit. That would have suggested CD like crazy. The building was falling in separated parts, the inside going first. Also, if it wasn't just the weight of the floors and debris collapsing and being ejected, it could have been thermite reactions caused by the plane and/or aluminum cladding on the towers reacting to the oxides present. I have a link in my signature that goes into great detail on this.

Seriously though, the official story (investigation) found that the trusses in the wall were beginning to sag before the collapse. This has been proven by the asymmetrical warping observed in multiple videos. When they gave way, the floors went first, then the load bearing outside walls of the towers were overcome by the sudden weight of the tower without the floors and fell as well within about a second.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


So youre saying the floors at point of collapse hit each other then ejected debris one floor at a time.Then they stopped ejecting debris untill at least ten floors lower?
I thought pancake meant one floor at a time all the way down. well thats the OS.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by remymartin
 


If you are even looking at your video you would see that there is a delay on the "squib." It does not go off immediately when the tower begins to collapse. It starts after the top is going down. This would imply, obviously, that the floors on the inside were failing and collapsing before the outside walls of the towers.

Does it need to be made any more clear? The building wasn't falling as a unit. That would have suggested CD like crazy. The building was falling in separated parts, the inside going first. Also, if it wasn't just the weight of the floors and debris collapsing and being ejected, it could have been thermite reactions caused by the plane and/or aluminum cladding on the towers reacting to the oxides present. I have a link in my signature that goes into great detail on this.

Seriously though, the official story (investigation) found that the trusses in the wall were beginning to sag before the collapse. This has been proven by the asymmetrical warping observed in multiple videos. When they gave way, the floors went first, then the load bearing outside walls of the towers were overcome by the sudden weight of the tower without the floors and fell as well within about a second.



Nothing has been proven the nist report is a theory.
sl

edit on 27-9-2010 by remymartin because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by remymartin
 


good video .
can you post the link of that video for me please.


pancake theory if true does not repeat not explain how the core columns 47 each were brought down iin sections.

the core columns should be sticking up in the naked NYC skyline like teeth in a hillybilly's mouth.

if the floors sagged and broke off of the outer columns and pancaked down inside the outer walls then it stands to reason they did exactly the same where they were attached to the core columns.






top topics



 
104
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join