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.
If making buildings fall perfectly on their footprint straight down was as easy as causing an explosion anywhere on the mid section of a building... then why have all these demo experts been spending millions and months to rig buildings to do this? Wrapping each support beam with explosives etc. Seems like now we should just start imploding buildings by rigging jet fuel explosions on the sides of them. I mean I know this has never brought down a building before, in the history of humanity, and was previously considered a horrible idea, but 3 buildings went straight down on 9-11 like this. Why aren't we investigating this new cheap way of implosion? Doesn't make sense eh?
Originally posted by hdutton
reply to post by Perseus Apex
* * * *
Maybe we should start reminding them who they work for; who pays their salary; and who can put together enough votes to take away their powerful jobs and big pay days.
There will have to be a concerted effort put forth in a very deliberate manner to wake these clowns up and get their attention as to what we expect them to do in order to keep their jobs.
* * * *
What's important though, if you wanna be honest and aren't just doing this to argue, is that claiming that they look like demos is FALSE. And claiming they look SO much like demos that it is a kinda of "proof" is especially false.
An interior failure would explain the appearance of a "controlled" collapse with a relatively small debris field, as seen with WTC 7.
Originally posted by aethron
Sorry pteridine, but it's not that the "collapse-didn't-look-right."
It's that the"collapse-exactly-mimicked-a-controlled-demolition."
You know when they demolish a large building, engineering and explosive experts carefully case the building out. They determine where to place explosives, the quantity of explosive needed, and a timing pattern of detonations that will cause the building to fall in the desired manner, which is a rapid collapse into its own footprint.
How are we supposed to believe a randomly collapsing skyscraper could so closely mimic an event that we know takes a great deal of expert planning and preparation to accomplish?
Of all the ways WTC7 *could have collapsed, it just happened to collapse according to the stages of a flawlessly executed cotrolled demolition?
Originally posted by MickC
Good post _BoneZ_ , Thank you.
Reply to post by pteridine who invites posters to:
'Pick your best area to investigate and state what exactly you would investigate.'
'best area'?... you are kidding right!
There are so many obvious lies that choosing a 'Best' is going to be difficult.
Originally posted by gaslaugh123
All this evidence of lies and (very piss poor) deception by idiots that believe their so important. Your not you bunch of "dick heads". Your quite pathetic or is it demented and sick. You whores of evil that live in this white or is it BLACK house of evil. Now answer the dam question. This building that fell from what (?)...a fire...I saw it. He who contends to follow his ignorance...are they blind or possessed with evil (?) The facts and truth has spoken our congress and our president (small p) are simply obvious (to those that see) LIARES in chief.