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.

 

An Interesting Pespective of the collapse of WTC7

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 12:20 AM
link   
I came across this interesting video of the collapse of WTC7.

Check it out:



Notice anything peculiar about this alleged "random collapse"?
Like explosions going off all over the place?

This looks to me like the final nail in the coffin of the Official Conspiracy Theory,

What do you think, anti-truthers?




posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 12:33 AM
link   
I can't see anything but smoke then the building collapse.

Where are the random explosions going off?



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by aethron
 


Looks fake to me..



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by aethron
 


Same little explosions that happened in the twin towers. However when it comes to evidence like this, your either preaching to the choir or your talking to a person who is convinced that is caused by the pressure of the pancake effect


These types of videos will get us nowhere. Actually I don't think the evidence that the so called "anti-truthers" want, physically exists considering the mountains of evidence that has already been dismissed with for the most part, silly and illogical explanations. (don't ask me to source this, look it up)



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 01:19 AM
link   
Hadnt seen that before...thanks for posting!!

Contrary to the views above, I can clearly see the squibs going off as it comes down.
I also think the more footage out there the more chance more people will see it and wake up to the fact that the OS is one big Fairytale.
Nice work Mate!!


How would the person filming know that he should zoom in seconds prior to the demo??

Where does the audio vanish to also just prior to the demo?

Does this not seem odd to you??

How can the squib-like plumes at the top of the building be written off as caused by the Pancake Effect...nothings "pancaking on them, pushing air out??
edit on 9-2-2011 by benoni because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 02:02 AM
link   
reply to post by benoni
 


Thanks. Glad to post some new material.

But I don't think they're 'squibs', because squibs don't shine with their own light.
They seem to me to be explosions, just like are seen in conventional controlled demolitions.

This new footage is visual confirmation of what people had deduced from the previous, widely circulated footage, namely that only a controlled demolition could simultaneously undermine all the structural supports and cause WTC7 to fall vertically at freefall speed into its own footprint.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 02:30 AM
link   
What happened to the sound and why is it in slow motion? It has been edited, not sure how much or how far. There are plenty of other good videos around showing the event, not sure what to make of this one but suspect. I would like to see the full unedited tape before making a conclusion.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by aethron
 


that video makes wtc7 look like a film strip moving along a projector. that was wierd..



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 06:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by aethron
What do you think, anti-truthers?


There is nothing to certify that your views are the truth.

Im not going to comment on the video because clearly from what I have quotedfrom you, you are just spoiling for a fight.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 12:09 PM
link   
How anyone can look at this clip and say, that that building fell down because of fire, and keep a straight face in the process, tells me that this country is in big trouble. Like somebody earlier asked, "where are the adults?". Why hasn't this been addressed? Is there no one left to stand up for truth? This should be the biggest story in the world, and nearly ten years later we're still waiting for someone with the balls to stand up and fight. If just one credible politician would take a stand and ask for a panel be convened, we can get there. Keep the faith.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by aethron
 



Notice anything peculiar about this alleged "random collapse"?
Like explosions going off all over the place?

This looks to me like the final nail in the coffin of the Official Conspiracy Theory,

What do you think, anti-truthers?


Nope, didn't notice "explosions" all over the place. It is peculiar in that it was a result of a terrorist attack on US soil, but other than that, well, nothing.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 
I'll tell you what I find peculiar, the way those 'terrorists' got that virtually un-affected building to fall straight down, unimpeded and not damage anything around it. Now that, that's peculiar! You would have thought that they would want to destroy as much as they could, but that damn thing fell staight down. Guess is was just their bad luck, huh?



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by dillweed
 



I'll tell you what I find peculiar, the way those 'terrorists' got that virtually un-affected building

Well, except, of course, for all that fire. But we all know, all buildings are immune to the affects of fire, only "CD" can affect them.

to fall straight down....

Last time I looked that was how gravity worked - in straight lines.

unimpeded and not damage anything around it.

Prove it.

Now that, that's peculiar!

But, unfortunately, not true.

You would have thought that they would want to destroy as much as they could, but that damn thing fell staight down. Guess is was just their bad luck, huh?

Yep, bad luck.



posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   
There are 2 points that I would like to make:
1 As an engineer, if you were to rebuild WTC7 and offer me a million dollars to create a fire that was so even in intensity that all the support frames at the foot of the building collapsed at the same instant, I would not accept the wager. I doubt that anyone could, let alone with the limitation that the fire(s) have to be started by falling debris as if from the twin towers. Fires, by their nature, spread through a building by burning whatever combustible material that they find and move on, leaving behind a cooling area. It follows that it is impossible to have a uniform fire in these circumstances. on top of this, it is a simple fact that office furniture would not generate a temperatures hot enough to cause the steel frames to deform. And even if they could, physics demands that the deformation would happen slowly, so the building would sag and probably not collapse fully.

2 There is another fact that I have not seen posted, which is that at least one plane subject to the stop order on 9/11 was subsequently found to have box cutters stuffed into some of the seats and was obviously intended to be the subject of a hijack. If that plane was intended to fly into WTC7, then the subsequent collapse would have been more explainable, being in line with the explainations offered for the twin towers. One can imagine the discussions of the perpetrators when the plane did not show up! They could hardly leave all the explosives in place to be found by the builders who would have had to be employed for the repairs to the damage.

I cannot offer a citation for the above plane, but I was told it by a senior RR executive I met who was based at the airfield where aircraft are given their certification checks. This particular plane was nearly 'out of hours', so on the reinstating of air traffic after 9/11, it was flown directly to this airfield. When the knives were found, the FBI were all over it, apparently.



posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


Hello Hooper

So you couldn’t see the flashes of the cutter charges exploding as the building fell?

Can’t say I’m too surprised really. If you could see the explosions then your entire OCT delusion would fall into a rubble pile not much bigger than that of WTC7.

But even though *you* can’t see them, they are obviously there, as of course they had to have been to so completely demolish the building.

The only thing different about the demolition of WTC7 and a standard demolition is that in a standard demolition, most of the explosives are set off simultaneously, whereas in WTC7 the explosions that weakened the skyscraper were staggered throughout the day so they would be less observable amongst the confusion caused by the collapse of the Towers.

I concede you are right to criticize my “explosions all over the place” comment. Most of the explosions in this footage were occurring at or below the original level of the twentieth floor, so that the building’s steel skeleton was broken up before hitting the ground, but the demolition charges were not visible to an observer at street level because the view was blocked by the surrounding buildings.

This footage answered the last of my questions about the demolition of WTC7. I am now 100% absolutely certain the destruction of WTC7 was due to controlled demolition.



posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by aethron
 



So you couldn’t see the flashes of the cutter charges exploding as the building fell?

Nope

Can’t say I’m too surprised really.

You couldn't see them either, huh?

If you could see the explosions then your entire OCT delusion would fall into a rubble pile not much bigger than that of WTC7.

Yeah, that was a tiny little pile - what did it take - two guys with brooms about a week to clean up?

But even though *you* can’t see them, they are obviously there, as of course they had to have been to so completely demolish the building.

Obviously, because we know the whole world has been clamouring for an explanation about them there "cutter charges" for almost a decade now - hold on - now wait, I just checked and apparently the world has changed its mind and are now satisfied there were no cutter booms.

The only thing different about the demolition of WTC7 and a standard demolition is that in a standard demolition, most of the explosives are set off simultaneously.....

I think you need to review Demolitions with Explosives 101. Demolition experts go to enormous lengths to make sure that the explosives are initiated sequentially.

whereas in WTC7 the explosions that weakened the skyscraper were staggered throughout the day so they would be less observable amongst the confusion caused by the collapse of the Towers.

So I guess since the fracture critical members were slowly compromised the building then sank slowly into the ground.

I concede you are right to criticize my “explosions all over the place” comment. Most of the explosions in this footage were occurring at or below the original level of the twentieth floor, so that the building’s steel skeleton was broken up before hitting the ground, but the demolition charges were not visible to an observer at street level because the view was blocked by the surrounding buildings.

So, no one there heard them or saw them, and only you can see them in a youtube video. You may want to revisit your thought process on this one.

This footage answered the last of my questions about the demolition of WTC7. I am now 100% absolutely certain the destruction of WTC7 was due to controlled demolition.

Wow. And yet you have no clue about how controlled demolition works. Just amazing.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join