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.

 

Do we really need to dissect every little thing about 911

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



The facts that skyscrapers must hold themselves up against gravity and withstand the wind should have allowed EVERYONE to figure out that a single airliner could not TOTALLY DESTROY buildings that big within a matter of weeks.


Noting, of course, that the airliner strike did not destroy the builidng.


Skyscraper designers must carefully determine how to distribute the steel.


Nope, engineers must carefully determine how to distribute LOADS, steel, concrete, etc. are simply a means to that end.


But after NINE YEARS most of the experts on both sides of the issue are not going into any detail on that issue.


Except, of course there are not experts on "both" sides of this issue. In fact, this isn't even an "issue" except in truther world. Sorry.


Look at pictures of the CN Tower in Toronto. How did they decide on that shape? The tower is not a building so it doesn't have lots of empty space inside and its structure is exposed. But gravity works the same way everywhere on the planet. The support steel in the WTC had to have a similar distribution. But because the WTC did not get narrower toward the top it had even more serious wind problem than the CN Tower.


How did they decide on the shape? The tower isn't a building? Do you read what you write?


So talking about an airliner destroying one of those buildings in less than two hours without accurate data on the distributions of steel and concrete is absurd.


Again, the plane did not destroy the building, gravity did the work.


We are being handed a colossal snow job.


Or, someone here is living in a fog of his own self importance.


The engineering schools have made themselves look silly by letting it drag on for more than a year.


And yet, they manage to carry on.




posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 08:39 AM
link   
Do we have to discuss every aspect of 911?

Nope - all you need to realise is that no group of high level people would sit around a table and arrange to have planes fly into a building, wait an hour for the world's media to show up and film it from every angle, then set off explosives that had somehow managed to survive the fire, on every single floor so that the building could fall at 'freefall' speed.

Nor would they plan to fly a cruise missile in broad daylight into the Pentagon - and then say to themselves ooh we'll just pretend it was a plane!

The 911 demo theories are so ludicrously silly...........and yet so long lived - it tells you something!

The NWO faction inside the CIA, might however look the other way when they knew what AQ was up to, they might even have weakened one or two of the Support columns beforehand, maybe even with super-nano- thermate.

Just to stop people asking questions - to make sure the whole subject is so tainted with complete looniness that no public figure can risk being associated with it - they might start a whole whirlwind of insane thoeries about dancing Israelies, cruise missiles and bombs in the basement.

And for the record my guess is that this was a NWO operation - delegated to the KGB as revenge for Afghanistan, who used AQ to carry it out.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 08:44 AM
link   
You ever know a person that has a sibling or parent get really sick, and the person you know devotes their entire life to the sick person? At first it is care out of love, but then it becomes something to fill a void in their otherwise healthy life?

911 was bad for many reasons. learn from it. Move on.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bluesquid
You ever know a person that has a sibling or parent get really sick, and the person you know devotes their entire life to the sick person? At first it is care out of love, but then it becomes something to fill a void in their otherwise healthy life?

911 was bad for many reasons. learn from it. Move on.


Thats the point. Moving on. It has been established that planes do not explode buildings. Qualified people I talked to who werent payed by the people who payed for their official report confirmed this. They also confirmed that planes do not cause a building to explode floor by floor.

We now know that explosives were involved, evidence of thermite was found. Why go into every little detail and come up with "no planes theories" or the like when nothing suggests this was the case?

How about moving on investigating the claims of officials that Alquaeda was an invention and finding out who was actually involved?



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 09:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 



So you are basically saying you want to believe what you want to believe instead of what you see. Which means you can not be convinced with arguments and reason.

Trying to convince that kind of people is a mood point, for they will not aknowledge anything you present them. .

They cant be convnced because they do not want to be convinced. They wont aknowledge any arguments you make, but will jump on anything that turns out to be untrue

Sounds like you are describing a typical truther . Furthermore , you come across as the typical truther does . Saytan75 gave you his opinion and this is how you responded , Be honest , you weren't really looking for opinions that differ from your own , now were you ?

And , why must some of you people always bring the holocaust into a 9/11 thread ? Where is the relevance ?



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Why not?? The Murderess that did this dissected the people that died in the towers collapse into little pieces... they reckon they will be finding bone fragments for upwards of 80 to 100 years!!

Until the real criminals are prosecuted and the OS bull is upheld we will pick apart every last thing that happened down to the molecular level and possibly even sub molecular level.

Nothing will be let to rest until the truth is out.

Is that plain enough for you?

Korg.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 



Either a couple of cavesquatters highjacked airliners during the very same day Norad was conducting related wargames and therefore unaware that what they were seeing was not part of a wargame and caused 2 buildings to explode and one to collapse into its own footprint without a plane impacting, or there is more to it and explosives were involved.

Then the 2 airliners impacted both towers at exactly the same tilt angle, quite a feat for 2 amateurish pilots.
The official tale is of such a low probability to have unfolded as described it cant be taken into consideration. The notion that you can conduct a controlled demolition of a skyscraper by starting a couple of fires on the upper floors is ridiculous. The only way it can be achieved is to take out all supporting columns at the same time.

So far all you had was namedropping of supposedly smart engineers, but they did not even talk about tower 7 in the official report. And that nice animation of theirs, that showed one floor pancaking unto another and the steel core standing, did not explain either what caused the steelcore of the building to desintegrate.


1) Most of the "cavesquatters" were more than slightly educated , and came from families of above-average wealth .
2) The towers did not "explode" , they collapsed .
3) WTC7 did not collapse " into it's own footprint " ., several surrounding buildings suffered from it's collapse , as well as debris from it crossing a 4-lane street .
4) The airliners did not impact the towers at "exactly the same tilt angle" . This is nothing but a lie .
5) " The notion that you can conduct a controlled demolition of a skyscraper by starting a couple of fires on the upper floors is ridiculous. " This is true , so why do truthers persist in calling the destruction of the towers controlled demolitions ?
6) NONE of the steel in any of the buildings "disintegrated".
7) You have shown yourself to be a typical uneducated truther , simply by repeating lies you have gleened from other truthers .

Do your own research , instead of just following the herd and feeling good that you are part of the herd .



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
Do we really need to take apart every little thing about 911? Just look at this video.

Tell me you do not see and hear a sequence of explosions turning the building into fine dust floor by floor. I am curious how anybody is going to explain a plane impacting a building and fires doing THAT.

What do we need threads about "no planes theories" or other theories that cant be backed up for and will only be used by "debunkers" to make the claim that the official tale must be true, if it turns out one little thing the opposition said turns out to be false.


Well what do you expect? The truthers don't have even a microbe of any actual tangible evidence of any conspiracy...no insiders coming forward, no evidence of any steel destroyed by explosives, no suspicious electronics found in the rubble, not even a gum wrapper left behind by any of these secret agents... so they have no choice but to argue over every flipping nut, bolt, and door hinge to find proof of the conspiracy they're "so sure" is there somewhere. Go look at the "Shanksville witness Viola Sayer" thread and you'll see a guy arguing over the exact measurements of how high flight 93 was in feet as each witness along the flight path saw it in turn. I've even seen one guy here demanding to know the exact name of the photographer who took the photos of the wreckage at the Pentagon. Like it's going to mean anything to them even if they knew?

When it gets so ridiculous that the truthers are even arguing over the differences in the definitions of "aircraft" vs "airplane"...and if a certain truther is reading this, you'll know I'm referring to you...this ISN'T research, It's a sign of grasping at straws out of desperation from not wanting these conspiracy claims to be false. If you don't believe me, the next time you're at a bar and you try to convince someone of these conspiracies, go ahead and start arguing over the definitions of aircraft vs airplane, and see whether or not they'll think you're just a crackpot.

Accept or decline this at your own cost.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


to be perfectly honest. we dont need any attention whatsoever on 911. the actual exact way it was carried out is irrelevant. any discussion on the topic is a waste of time and perhaps even a staged distraction by paid disinfo agents.

it is absolutely obvious the building fell by xplosions, no way a top floor area fires would collapse a structure supported by pyramid strength. the internal steel frame is pyramidal in structure so as to support the massive weight which increases as the building rises. at the top the supports are the smallest. its vapouristatoin. well who knows nukes thermite what the fuk ever. Its gone. it was done by the same people who wanted to create fear, destroy liberty. and enter iraq.

no benefit is gained from debating how it fell.

911 posts imo should be ignored. the focus should be on how the earth and individuals can spiritually awaken, and how to do the same to others. the prevention of disease and how to maintain optimum health. etc

discussing how 911 went down now, 9 odd years on, is closely equivalent to discussing how hitler attempted to win the world wars. its pointless.

focus on now. and the future, and how to improve life.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by predisposed
 


It's obvious that you know absolutely nothing about the design and construction of the towers .

And , you post in a 9/11 thread just to tell people to ignore 9/11 threads ?



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Again, the plane did not destroy the building, gravity did the work.


Yeah sure, so we end up with endless idiotic delusional physics analyses.

The designers had to figure out the distribution of steel so the buildings stood for 29 years but we can ignore that and say gravity did it. YEAH RIGHT!

The nation that put men on the Moon is the most idiotic on the planet.

Gravity alone can't overcome what was designed to resist gravity.

www.youtube.com...

The paper loops were as weak as possible and the structure stood for 3 days. I did two drops and most of the loops were still intact. The top of the north tower could not possibly have crushed the rest of the building.

Let's see you build a physical model that can support its own weight and then have the top 15% crush the rest. The house of cards tricks where the cards are not damaged doesn't count.

psik



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666

I wasnt takling so much about science, but about truths. Either a couple of cavesquatters highjacked airliners during the very same day Norad was conducting related wargames and therefore unaware that what they were seeing was not part of a wargame and caused 2 buildings to explode and one to collapse into its own footprint without a plane impacting, or there is more to it and explosives were involved.


You ignored everything I said.


It's more than science, it's psychology, human nature, feasibility, logic, and Occam's Razor that act to support that conclusion. The simple truth is, a government-planted bomb is a lot harder to pull off and keep secret than what happened on that day and plus it defies so many logical happenings that would have occurred had it been a government bomb.

And with all those experts I linked, I wouldn't be so presumptuous to say it's impossible for a building to collapse due to a jet liner crashing into it and burning for a while. Reality can often be stranger than fiction to those who don't understand the science behind what is happening.


Originally posted by Cassius666Then the 2 airliners impacted both towers at exactly the same tilt angle, quite a feat for 2 amateurish pilots.
The official tale is of such a low probability to have unfolded as described it cant be taken into consideration. The notion that you can conduct a controlled demolition of a skyscraper by starting a couple of fires on the upper floors is ridiculous. The only way it can be achieved is to take out all supporting columns at the same time.


You reiterate the same points whilst ignoring all of the logical flaws I asked you to resolve. Take those last questions I had at the end of my previous post and apply them to your theory.

To sum it up (though there is a lot more to it that I did discuss): You think it's impossible for a couple of people to fly planes into the sides of buildings while it is possible for the government to plan to destroy, sneak explosives into a building, then bring jetliners (or holograms of them) into the picture for no obvious reason, make bomb-shaped holes in the sides of the building, then proceed to cover all that up flawlessly?

Can you see why even amongst most academics there is not much debate as to what happened that day? It just doesn't hold up under rigorous analysis.


Originally posted by Cassius666So far all you had was namedropping of supposedly smart engineers, but they did not even talk about tower 7 in the official report. And that nice animation of theirs, that showed one floor pancaking unto another and the steel core standing, did not explain either what caused the steelcore of the building to desintegrate.

Ill trust the people the Americans trusted to send them to the moon on this one.


Well obviously. You have made up your mind and hence no matter how much evidence is brought to your attention, you will not believe otherwise. I don't expect to convince people otherwise here, but I try.

And yeah, I forgot to bring up WTC 7 because I was too busy writing a dozen paragraphs that wouldn't be read on the main towers. But there is also support for the official cause of WTC 7. But I won't address it until you can answer my previous points. Honestly if the bomb theory in those two buildings is debunked, it's hard to find any reason behind WTC 7 being bombed.

It's not just a few experts. It's the entire field pretty much supporting the official conclusion. Again, I did post reaffirming information if you had read it.

I find it incomprehensible that you don't believe raging fires could cause steel to weaken and buckle. It's in the official report and many structural engineers find it completely feasible. Some don't, but like most of academia, they do hold diverging opinions from the otherwise silent majority. Not to mention you focus ONLY on that aspect while ignoring the whistleblowing, feasibility, logical, pyschological, etc. implications of WHY the government would do it, HOW they could do it, WHY planes were involved, etc.

If you solely analyze the collapse and think bombs could be involved, that's one thing, but to think that bombs were involved when it's generally accepted they were not PLUS all the other complicating and illogical factors of a bomb being used, then you have something that defies any semblance of critical analysis and like was said is a "reverse scientific method" whereby you draw your conclusions first then look for supporting evidence.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



Yeah sure, so we end up with endless idiotic delusional physics analyses.


Its really simple. The planes hitting the buildings causing sufficient damage to cause the buildings to collapse. If someone falls asleep in bed while smoking a cigarette and the house burns down we don't say that one cigarette burnt the whole house.


The designers had to figure out the distribution of steel so the buildings stood for 29 years but we can ignore that and say gravity did it. YEAH RIGHT!


Again, the designers figure out how to distribute the loads, not how to distribute the building materials.


The nation that put men on the Moon is the most idiotic on the planet.


If you live in that nation, like I do, then GET OUT! If you don't, well, THANK GOD!


Gravity alone can't overcome what was designed to resist gravity.


Did you miss the part where the plane crashed into the "design" and kind of altered the "design" in the process?


The paper loops were as weak as possible and the structure stood for 3 days. I did two drops and most of the loops were still intact. The top of the north tower could not possibly have crushed the rest of the building.


You put together crap like that then have the nerve to insult engineering schools?


Let's see you build a physical model that can support its own weight and then have the top 15% crush the rest.


Fine - please Google 9/11 and World Trade Center towers.


The house of cards tricks where the cards are not damaged doesn't count.


In other words - here is the challenge and the only things that don't count are those things that prove you are wrong.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
Do we really need to take apart every little thing about 911? Just look at this video.

www.youtube.com...

Tell me you do not see and hear a sequence of explosions turning the building into fine dust floor by floor. I am curious how anybody is going to explain a plane impacting a building and fires doing THAT.

What do we need threads about "no planes theories" or other theories that cant be backed up for and will only be used by "debunkers" to make the claim that the official tale must be true, if it turns out one little thing the opposition said turns out to be false.


911 is a weapon of mass distraction... f 911 and look at the NWO being implemented right before your eyes.... maybe you think it is a good thing.... but if 911 was staged then all those ppl died to begin the NWO.... how can a system be just if it was built on murder?



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
The way i see it is like this: if 1 part of the story contains a lie, then the whole story must be a lie, as well. There is OVERWHELMING evidence, that something, other than 2 planes hitting the towers, caused 3 buldings to collapse. The collapse of building 7, should be enough to have justice served....and I'm still waiting!

Here's the thing that REALLY trips me out: George Bush is being treated like some kind of hero; eventhough he's permitted torture, admittedly LIED about Iraq and WMD(eezNuts)...admitted Iraq had NOTHING to do with 91+1=11... I mean, do i REALLY need to continue?

At this point, it doesn't matter what happened on Sept eleventh...or how much evidence we have to convict the culprits who planned and executed that day (and we all know who they were) because PEOPLE won't take a stand. They didn't take a stand on that day; they didn't take a stand when Katrina happened; they didnt take a stand when the oil spill happened; and they won't take a stand when the next catastrophe hits; simply because they're scared!

But, you know what, you know when we'll all take a stand for our neighbors, when a natural event occurs that will cause people to stop living their selfish, petty lives. That's when! We'll all take a stand, when NATURE shows us who's boss! WE are nothing but a breath on this planet. And there are TREES older than our species so....can we come back down to earth...and get off the delusional pipe BEFORE the wrath is unleashed???

Where do we start? We start by UNDERSTANDING that WE ARE ALL GOD'S CREATION...and EVERYONE deserves the BEST that EARTH has to OFFER, because God made earth for all of HIS children; whether they be black, brown, yellow, white; speak in a different tongue; or live in a different culture/society.

The BIBLE says..."RIGHTEOUSNESS EXALTS A NATION"....and the nation could use some exalting, and that is only going to happen when PEOPLE take a stand for what's RIGHT!



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Its really simple. The planes hitting the buildings causing sufficient damage to cause the buildings to collapse.

If you live in that nation, like I do, then GET OUT!


Physics is incapable of giving a damn about NAZI morons. Nationalism is irrelevant trash to physics.

So try building a physical model that can collapse. Call it unAmerican if it will not collapse.

ROFLMAO

psik



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
As I have said in other 9/11 post.it does not matter what side of the arguement one finds themself, We all can agree that a COMPLETE, OPEN investigation of what happen on 9/11 has NEVER been done, even the 9/11 Comission stated this Fact.

I, for one would like the people who hold that bombs brought the towers down in a controled detonation explain how explosives can turn concrete to dust. Don't think that I hold to the OS, NEVER have from day one. But the amount of common explosives it would take to destroy these buildings would fill a hundred tractor trailer trucks. What we witness here is a weapon that we in the public have never seen before, and as the human mind works we try to make sence of it from our own knowledge. Bomb theory is a distraction, a diversion from the real answers of how could this happened.

The First Question to be answered is HOW?

This will lead to Who.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



Physics is incapable of giving a damn about NAZI morons.


OK then. That almost makes sense.


Nationalism is irrelevant trash to physics.


Not much unlike your paper wheel models of skyscrapers.


So try building a physical model that can collapse.


I think just about any "model" is capable of collapse. Do you have a building design that cannot collapse? If you do I think the proper term for it would be a solid.


Call it unAmerican if it will not collapse.


So we are dealing with unAmerican Nazi moronic building model collapses.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Cassius666
Do we really need to take apart every little thing about 911? Just look at this video.

Tell me you do not see and hear a sequence of explosions turning the building into fine dust floor by floor. I am curious how anybody is going to explain a plane impacting a building and fires doing THAT.

What do we need threads about "no planes theories" or other theories that cant be backed up for and will only be used by "debunkers" to make the claim that the official tale must be true, if it turns out one little thing the opposition said turns out to be false.


Well what do you expect? The truthers don't have even a microbe of any actual tangible evidence of any conspiracy...no insiders coming forward, no evidence of any steel destroyed by explosives, no suspicious electronics found in the rubble, not even a gum wrapper left behind by any of these secret agents... so they have no choice but to argue over every flipping nut, bolt, and door hinge to find proof of the conspiracy they're "so sure" is there somewhere. Go look at the "Shanksville witness Viola Sayer" thread and you'll see a guy arguing over the exact measurements of how high flight 93 was in feet as each witness along the flight path saw it in turn. I've even seen one guy here demanding to know the exact name of the photographer who took the photos of the wreckage at the Pentagon. Like it's going to mean anything to them even if they knew?

When it gets so ridiculous that the truthers are even arguing over the differences in the definitions of "aircraft" vs "airplane"...and if a certain truther is reading this, you'll know I'm referring to you...this ISN'T research, It's a sign of grasping at straws out of desperation from not wanting these conspiracy claims to be false. If you don't believe me, the next time you're at a bar and you try to convince someone of these conspiracies, go ahead and start arguing over the definitions of aircraft vs airplane, and see whether or not they'll think you're just a crackpot.

Accept or decline this at your own cost.


What are you talking about. Truthters presented plenty of evidence. Traces of Thermite have been found for example. They showed that the fashion WTC 7 collapsed is nearly impossible to have been due to chance alone. It is just not being aknowledged by people who dont want to hear any of it.

It is the official tale that sounds like a wild conspiracy theory, with special science and a lot of holes in the story not to mention plenty of "unique events", that were, well, special. They did not even put a lot of effort into it. The animation of the "pancaking effect" another 911 first I assume, showed the steele core left standing. But if you want to keep on wearing your tinfoil hat, and believe in superfires that though tiny took out all the support structures simultaneously for a neat collapse, go right ahead. But you would be more at home in a thread discussing reptillians I guess. Its quite fitting you chose the avatar of an actor.
edit on 16-11-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-11-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   
The arguments over wether there were explosives etc have been going on forever - note, being personally convinced that what you saw was explosives, and not say compression effects due to pancaking does not constitute proof!

Proof would be explosive residue all over the rubble - or an admission from a perp.

Personally however I find far more convincing, considerations about planning and motivation - unless one of you truthers can reasonably answer the question:

Do we have to discuss every aspect of 911? Nope - all you need to realise is that no group of high level people would sit around a table and arrange to have planes fly into a building, wait an hour for the world's media to show up and film it from every angle, then set off explosives that had somehow managed to survive the fire, on every single floor so that the building could fall at 'freefall' speed.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join