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 Chinesis
reply to post by roboe
And just HOW long did it take for any part of the Windsor building to collapse?
Did its collapse take longer than 9/11? Why and how?
Where is the entire collapse pulverising the concrete of the Windsor tower?
Hell, show me ANY high rise to have collapsed in the SAME manner as
any of the 3 on 9/11
I'm sure you can't but avoiding my post is:
Tacit agreement you're FOS
1 person to get the sugar
1 person to get the eggs
1 person to bake it
1 person to put frosting on it
and 1 person to "oversee" the procedure.
of the 5 people have no idea what the final outcome is, but they know its baking related and they know its "top secret and very important." They are simply instructed to do something.
After the cake is baked, it is shown to the entire world over television.
Its a "super secret cake" that nobody knew about but now its out in public. Hey, just like the cake that those 4 people made.
Except now, this cake ends the lives of 3000 people. You think our cake makers would just sit there idly going "well uh it seemed like i was making a cake but whatever, i doubt it..."
It sounds really silly, but it is if you compare it to a freaking cake!
Imagine a company is hired to put explosives inside a high-rise skyscraper. Then a week later that skyscraper gets hit by an airplane and the explosives are detonated.
Your telling me that the company who put the explosives in, even if they had no idea why they where hired for the job, would just sit there and allow the government to get away with it?
Not ONE person has come out saying they put explosives anywhere around the WTC towers.
Nobody was on lunch break during the incident and managed to escape. The government is so diabolical and perfect that it was the perfect crime.
Apparently because some scientists did a blind study of some of the rock found off of the walls of the concentration camp there where no traces of gas. This means that Auschwitz never had gas chambers. Its PROOF i tell ya! PRoof!
After reading that they find Aluminum and Iron on the microscopic level. Wait... your telling me that the rubble of a collapsed skyscraper contains microscopic amounts of Aluminum and Iron?
Did you actually READ the link you posted? Or did you just assume it as fact because some Steven Jones is 100% qualified?
I really dont want to sound as harsh as i am right now, but your demeanor leaves me no choice. If you are going to go about this in a condescending way calling your links facts and me a "paid disinfo agent" i see no other choice..
I should have just not responded to your first post like i told myself before hand because i knew exactly where this was gonna go.
Originally posted by Chinesis
Are you trying to tell me that an ordinary fire wouldn't have collapsed the buildings but
BECAUSE of the planes hitting the buildings? THIS somehow warrants your mind
to now think the Jets hitting the buildings + Jet fuel coupled to the fires=near free fall
collapse and pulverisation?
peer review:
en.wikipedia.org...
"Peer review is a generic term that is used to describe a process of self-regulation by a profession or a process of evaluation involving qualified individuals with the related field."
Scholarly peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field, before a paper describing this work is published in a journal. Peer review requires a community of experts in a given (and often narrowly defined) field, who are qualified and able to perform impartial review. Impartial review, especially of work in less narrowly defined or inter-disciplinary fields, may be difficult to accomplish; and the significance (good or bad) of an idea may never be widely appreciated among its contemporaries. Although generally considered essential to academic quality, and used in most important scientific publications, peer review has been criticized as ineffective, slow, and misunderstood (see anonymous peer review and open peer review). Recently there have been some experiments with wiki-style, signed, peer reviews, for example in an issue of the Shakespeare Quarterly.
Source: en.wikipedia.org...
Pragmatically, peer review refers to the work done during the screening of submitted manuscripts and funding applications. This process encourages authors to meet the accepted standards of their discipline and prevents the dissemination of irrelevant findings, unwarranted claims, unacceptable interpretations, and personal views. Publications that have not undergone peer review are likely to be regarded with suspicion by scholars and professionals.
This isnt a professional peer review or a scholarly peer review. Peer review alone could either stand for a group of professionals agreeing on something or you and your science buddies agreeing on something. Its not like Steven Jones has to include anyone who he debated in his "peer reviewed" paper.
Why isnt his "peer reviewed" paper "PROFESSIONALLY" Peer reviewed? By construction workers? By demolition crews?
Because they wont peer review it. Let me guess, they are scared of losing their job(s).
Now come 5 more paragraphs of "you have no facts and are using flawed logic" robot speech.
Im done arguing with you because you are either mentally unstable or just a total Dbag. Either way, im done responding to you.
Originally posted by Varemia
Yes, pretty much. By the way, near free-fall is not free-fall at all. If the collapse was going slower, there wouldn't have been enough momentum to keep it destroying itself, and we would have a much less tragic event, though still severely terrible.
Originally posted by nightbringrI mean, you can't just say "fire can't bring down buildings" whilst ignoring structural damage. Structural damage is one of the BIGGEST things people should focus on. The fires were a secondary result that just allowed the structural damage to take effect. The buildings were, in fact, built quite well for withstanding damage, but not for the fires that were unable to be fought. I guarantee you that if somebody had flown a plane into any of these chinese flaming buildings, that they would have surely at least partially collapsed (considering they weren't built as a huge unit square, naturally a collapse like 9/11 couldn't happen. I mean, the structure is entirely different).
Originally posted by nightbringrThen you'll probably bring up WTC 7, saying, "but it wasn't hit by a plane." But, it was hit by debris from WTC 1, however much you may want to deny it. There is picture evidence of much of the damage, and unfortunately for us, the damage started a lot of fires and obscured the majority of the South face of WTC 7, so we can't see what was described by firefighters around the center/base of the building. If you think about it, with all the damage around the base of the building, it's only natural that it would have a couple seconds (around 18 floors, which is about how high the damage stretched from the base) of free-fall.edit on 22-11-2010 by Varemia because: typo
Do you know how the WTC towers 1 and 2 were built?
Originally posted by Chinesis
Let's if you can do some simple math...
The 9/11 attacks were carried out by 19 hijackers...(some of which are STILL alive today) k.
Within minutes...(not days) Osama Bin Laden (who never claimed responsibility) is the prime suspect
YET his entire family was allowed to be ushered out of the U.S. while all other planes were grounded.
Originally posted by Chinesis
So to recap:
9/11 attacks + Osama Bin Laden= Iraq, Saddam, and W's of MD (that were never found)
Yep, you're right!
Air tight Logic with an abundance of light
I think your cookies weren't cleared by prop 19 pal...
Originally posted by Chinesis
In conclusion:
You don't seem to have street smarts (which can detect BS) from within hidden extensions...
Book smarts means you are a "good boy" and simply are able to repeat (like a broken record or a parrot)
and be happy you got an A....I should know, I used to believe everything my Gov't and University told me.
Originally posted by Chinesis
This is the CORE fundamental reason why you and everyone else who simply beLIEves
9/11 was carried out by a 6ft 5 Afghan who isn't wanted by any of our Gov't Agencies...
Originally posted by Chinesis
The better you were at a mind depraved education the more you rely
on what to think. As you stood there in awe while these attacks were carried out
you patiently waited for your daddy, the U.S. Gov't to tell you what happened.edit on 21-11-2010 by Chinesis because: (no reason given)edit on 21-11-2010 by Chinesis because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by benoni
One BIG disinformation thread demonseed....thats my take on this tripe......
Recently, on another thread demonseed, you said.....
"......I've been saying UFOs/Aliens attacked us on 9/11 for a while but no1 took me seriously......"
So, you seem to have gone from believing the OS, then changing your mind to become a "truther" then decided aliens were to blame then you changed again back to your Official Fairytale position....
Certainly an interesting rollercoaster of ideas regarding 9 /11
Glad you have swopped sides again(and again and again..) demonseed....
You'll have a way better time with dave and Co in the disinfo division...afterall, youve earned your stipes with this thread mate...
Do you have the same problem choosing your breakfast cereal or which colour of socks to wear every morning??
That might make interesting reading too....for those who care how unsure you are when it comes to making a decision and sticking to it...
Not for me thanks....
edit on 22-11-2010 by benoni because: (no reason given)
Changing ones heart suddenly....on a public forum and attempting to tell everyone when in fact they dont give a sh*t?