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.
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by earthdude
Originally posted by Ketzer22
Idk if this has been brought up yet, but in the footage right before the plane hits you can see a bunch of plumes of smoke shoot out of the other tower. What makes them look like charges as opposed to fire smoke is they appear suddenly and dissapate quickly. Also, the timing is quite suspect, considering it happens right before the plane strikes so people think the explosion is the sound of the plane hitting.
A shock wave from the impact changed the pressure around the building, pulling smoke out for an instant. I see no time problems. Why is there only one video that has a frame with a plane half in the building? It happens to be the one that looks like the nosecone comes out the other side.
LoL.
Why dont you see the smoke that is already out side the building move by the shock wave? You dont see that until after.
If you know so much about shock waves: why is most of the debris on the right side of the building. The shock wave blew out most of the side of the building where you see the big fire ball. There is only two small holes close to the edge of building two. And that edge is not even lined up with building 1.
A shock wave must first pass through building two,, cross the open space before it can enter building 1. Ant this shock wave must be strong enough to generate the pressure needed to eject the puffs of smoke we see at different floors all around the building simultaneously.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Stuship
* * * * Any major event in history has conspiracy theories attached to it, unfortunately the most obvious reason is usually the correct reason.
Originally posted by dubiousone
Well said. Occam's razor at its best.
Originally posted by dubiousone
When will the true perps be brought to justice and stripped of their positions of power, comfort, and privilege? It's long overdue. Those who aid them in diverting and delaying the search for truth in this matter deserve the same consequences that will eventually come to them.
Originally posted by Varemia
I love the way a post I made and put a lot of time into just goes ignored by the ATS'ers posting here. Instead of reading it and thinking about it, then responding, every person has simply continued bickering over pointless tidbits surrounding the video.
Originally posted by CynicalM
reply to post by kiwifoot
Agreed, and then when asked who should we attack, they said Israel...
Why??? What would make them think that??
Originally posted by JohnJasper
reply to post by Varemia
Originally posted by Varemia
I love the way a post I made and put a lot of time into just goes ignored by the ATS'ers posting here. Instead of reading it and thinking about it, then responding, every person has simply continued bickering over pointless tidbits surrounding the video.
Perhaps they've added you to their ignore list and just don't realise that you're even making a contribution. I might as well do the same because there's no point trying to discuss 9/11 with someone who believes that a steel building can dissolve into a cloud of dust because of one plane hit and a couple hours of oxygen-starved fire.
Originally posted by Conluceo
Yeah I saw that. In that case, wouldn't it mean that most of the jet fuel would have escaped through the fire ball at the end side that the plane was angled at? and if so, I really can't understand why that would be the first tower to fall.
Less jet fuel due to angle of strike, less burning time, though first one to fall??
The other one was burning much longer. Common sense would have that one falling first no?
Originally posted by Bugman82
reply to post by dubiousone
When you start with a preconceived notion it is very easy to build a case around tiny things that don't amount to a shred of empirical evidence. The truther movement won't stick because there is no heavy evidence to support it. Here are some of the arguments I've seen here.
Earthquake during the towers falling: Of course the ground is going to rumble as 500000 tons of concrete and steel crash to the ground in a matter of seconds.
A picture of smoke blowing out from a lower section of the building as the top collapses: Of course the down force of air being compressed is going to push out smoke/dust from lower areas especially if parts of the interior of the building are falling at different speeds.
Trade center 7 falling. Four other buildings were also destroyed from fire/destructive forces that day. The fire department couldn't control the fires so they pulled out and fortunately saved their own lives.
If there was evidence enough the truther movement would gain ground and gain support. Many experts would talk. After 9 years videos like the one posted today only enhance the evidence of how destructive these two planes crashing into the trade centers were.
The best argument for truthers to focus their efforts on is that the government failed to prevent an attack that they had evidence for.
edit on 15-9-2010 by Bugman82 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Varemia
So I complain about not being heard in my argument, and because it does not agree with your view you think it's just as well that I be set on ignore? I have not slandered anyone or posted lies, so what have I done that would prompt this?
As for the building dissolving into dust, all I can say is "no it didn't." And oxygen-starved fires? If that was true, then how in the heck was there so much smoke? Smoke=Fire, right? Or is my logic not functioning correctly?
I will not bow down to the pressures of the masses who believe in the conspiracy of the building destruction here at ATS. I am denying ignorance by looking at the facts and finding a conclusion based off those facts. In choosing to ignore those that disagree with you, a person is by definition "embracing ignorance."
Google Video Link |
Originally posted by Bugman82
Earthquake during the towers falling: Of course the ground is going to rumble as 500000 tons of concrete and steel crash to the ground in a matter of seconds.
Originally posted by Bugman82
A picture of smoke blowing out from a lower section of the building as the top collapses: Of course the down force of air being compressed is going to push out smoke/dust from lower areas especially if parts of the interior of the building are falling at different speeds.
Originally posted by Bugman82
Trade center 7 falling. Four other buildings were also destroyed from fire/destructive forces that day. The fire department couldn't control the fires so they pulled out and fortunately saved their own lives.
Originally posted by Bugman82
If there was evidence enough the truther movement would gain ground and gain support. Many experts would talk. After 9 years videos like the one posted today only enhance the evidence of how destructive these two planes crashing into the trade centers were.
Originally posted by Bugman82
The best argument for truthers to focus their efforts on is that the government failed to prevent an attack that they had evidence for.