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 Analysis of the WTC on 9/11 . . .

page: 9
13
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal


I don't see how any person in a sane state of mind could have starred that, but anyhow, what did you expect to happen to a large chunk of building falling and hitting the ground?


Most of the building was blown to bits before it came anywhere near in contact with the ground. The video shows this and the relatively small debris pile after the collapse confirms it.


SO how small was the deris pile you did look at the pictures of it?




posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



The velocity, v2, of the building was ZERO before impact.


You sure? The building was almost always in motion due to wind. I remember almost getting seasick in the observation section, my cousin actually did vomit.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrinchNoMore
reply to post by FDNY343
 


That is a great picture of the building completely exploding and launching what you call "large pieces" off to the side, the dust clouds are amazing, somehow they are going upwards and outwards,

You people are the definition of "insane" to think that this is a collapse of gravity.

Oh wait, the planes energy that hit it an hour ago still exists, that helps it to explode, and man, the super powers of fire too !! How about those damaged girders !! We gotta factor that in as well !!


Well lets see did the planes do no damage?
Did the fires do no damage?
How much of your dust cloud is SHEETROCK DUST!!!!!
A dust cloud going upwards that never happpens Eh!!! Never went past a building site?
Can you explain how the South Tower although hit second fell first!!!!
Now do you think the reason was the fact it had a far larger load above the impact point

Have a look at temp v strength graph for steel and educate yourself!!

Also its just as well you dont design buildings!!!!!



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



The velocity, v2, of the building was ZERO before impact.


You sure? The building was almost always in motion due to wind. I remember almost getting seasick in the observation section, my cousin actually did vomit.


I have seen a weather report for that day. The wind speed varied around 10 mph with 20 mph gusts.

If you want to try to find the direction and speed of the sway of the building at the exact instant the plane hit BE MY GUEST. The more time you spend on the research and the less time you spend bringing up trivial bull# the better.

However, if you followed the link I provided you will find the graph of the oscillation and you can see the data on the building before the impact.

psik



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
Oh! So the high-powered explosives don't make noise but they DO eject material. The smaller explosives OTOH make lots of noise but only only cut "connectors or smaller columns". Most interesting.

That's not what I said. These are just a few of the many people that heard the high-powered explosives being detonated.



Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
And even the most wet-behind-the-ears newb would know that if these explosions were there to be heard as you claim they were, they would've been recorded by even a Fisher Price kiddie camcorder let alone the various consumer, prosumer and broadcast-level cameras that were recording things.

This will be the last time I try to explain to you that many of the microphones at the WTC would not have captured most of the lower-level explosions.

First and foremost, I'm not the one claiming the explosions were there, got it? First responders, by-standers, and survivors were the ones claiming the explosions were there. I produced a video that was recorded across the Hudson in Hoboken about 2 miles away called "9/11 Eyewitness". That video was not diluted with loud city noise, nor the loud roaring of the towers collapsing. It did capture the pre-collapse explosions and the during-collapse explosions and these are heard clearly in the video. I say clearly because one must have a subwoofer to hear and feel the explosions.

In "9/11 Eyewitness", it was shown that there were about 9 pre-collapse explosions before the south tower collapsed:



I produced a firefighter that heard the exact same amount of pre-collapse explosions before the south tower fell. This firefighter thus corroborates the pre-collapse explosions heard in "9/11 Eyewitness" and proves by this fact alone that there were explosions going on at the WTC.

The microphones on cameras that were near the WTC had to deal with loud city noises and then the loud roar of the buildings collapsing, overwhelming the microphones. The video linked here shows all known angles of the second plane hitting the south tower. Some of the angles that have sound have deeper booms when the plane hits than other videos. Many microphones can't pick up the lower frequencies and thus the deeper booms of the impact, thus you can only hear the louder cracks and pops.

If you don't have a subwoofer on your computer to watch the video, then you won't even understand what I'm trying to describe. Some of the videos you can hear the deeper booms, others you cannot because not all microphones can pick up the same frequency of sound.



Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
You are a pretender and not an especially good one at that.

Oohh, way to throw around childish attacks and call names because you can't debunk the evidence. Your credibility has been killed and buried.


This will be my final response to you because I won't associate with someone who deliberately dismisses first responder, survivor, and by-stander testimony because you don't like the implications of what they're describing. Turn off your ignorance and denial and you might actually make yourself a better person and a better contributor to the human race.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by FDNY343

Yes, it does make it moot. There is NO other evidence to support this. No physical evidence, no recorded evidence, nothing.

Really? A firefighter describing a certain number of pre-collapse explosions before the south tower collapses and a video that records the same number of pre-collapse explosions before the south tower collapses, thus corroborating each other, isn't evidence? A firefighter and a video corroborate each other, but there's no evidence to support it?

Witness testimony and a video corroborating the witness testimony is evidence and they both agree with each other. Just like if a witness says you stole something from a store and you are also on video, you don't need any other evidence. Even if you didn't have the physical item on you that you stole, the witness and the video corroborates each other.

If a firefighter says there were a number of pre-collapse explosions, and a video shows the same exact number of pre-collapse explosions, there doesn't need to be any more evidence. Two pieces of evidence is enough to prove it happened. End of discussion.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Are you blind if you actually look at the photo you posted the bulk of the cross bracing is THE TOWER CRANES

I don't know where you got your information from, but I highlighted the actual cranes in yellow:





You're looking at the core of one of the towers. The only part of the cranes is in yellow. Here's a better image of these types of cranes:





I guess you would have to say that all of those columns and cross-bracing is from the cranes because to look at that massive grid of steel and fathom how an aluminum plane and office fires can bring down that massive of a structure does make one think.

Suffice it to say, during the construction of the WTC, those crane towers were bolted to the core columns at certain points for added stability. It was all disassembled after the completion of the construction.



Originally posted by wmd_2008
When you claim something at least be HONEST!

When you claim something, at least do SOME research.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
BoneZ, you seem to accept William Rodriguez' statement at face value that he was aware of an explosion beneath him prior to the plane hitting. Can you direct me to any other witnesses of an explosion in the basement of the North Tower before the plane impact ?

Several witnesses describe the same exact explosion in the basement levels seconds before the plane hit, corroborating William's story. There are also several witnesses that were in the subway that heard and felt the explosion and saw smoke:





To reiterate, there are plenty of witnesses in this video that corroborate William's story that there was an explosion in the basement levels seconds before the first plane hit.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


Dude!!!

I feel for you.....the vertical supports that were the basis for the contruction cranes were removed.....from the final result.

(Or else, those poor slobs with the offices in those particular sections had REALLY, REALLY obstructed views out their windows????)




posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Dude!!!

I feel for you.....the vertical supports that were the basis for the contruction cranes were removed.....from the final result.

(Or else, those poor slobs with the offices in those particular sections had REALLY, REALLY obstructed views out their windows????)



You're hilarious weedwhacker.

For one thing, the cranes were attached to the corners of the core, not the perimeter columns where the windows were.

For another, you can clearly see bracing in the images above separate from the cranes. What a shock.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
(Or else, those poor slobs with the offices in those particular sections had REALLY, REALLY obstructed views out their windows????)

DUDE! Those are the CORE columns that surround the cranes, not the perimeter columns:









Originally posted by weedwhacker
I feel for you.....the vertical supports that were the basis for the contruction cranes were removed.....from the final result.

Feel for yourself. You're either not paying attention to detail, or you're too quick to jump on a topic and attempt to "debunk" it before you even have all the facts.

And I did say the cranes were disassembled after the construction was complete. Please read fully and pay attention to what people have to say before commenting. Makes you look less foolish that way.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


Again....all of that "cross-bracing" was removed....as they only were there to support the cranes, for the effort of construction.

I think you have access to the actual blueprint designs of the "final" structure....of those two skyscrapers, innovatively designed for their day.....

Please don't obfuscate, just to protect that "group" you seem to have pledged to....THINK for yourself, for a change....



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Now you have shown yourself, you have no clue do you ??

All the cross bracing separate from the crane areas are removed ???

Now, be careful here, cause we are all watching !


And if YOU or anyone have the blueprints let us see them, heck let the whole world see them.
edit on 15-2-2011 by GrinchNoMore because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


BoneZ,

You're trying to buffalo others by pretending to have a clue about matters audio (which clearly you don't). You're as knowledgeable about audio as Fetzer and Ace Baker are about video (that is to say not at all). You seem to believe throwing a word salad as a response will be somehow impressive.

It isn't.

And you've yet to enlighten all and sundry about what it is you do that makes you think yourself expert as compared with someone who works professionally with broadcast-quality audio and video on a daily basis and has for 30+ years? Another word salad and hiding behind a scoundrel's refuge isn't going to cut it.

The simple fact is that there weren't any explosions to record because there weren't any explosions. Explosions would've been easily discernible both visually and audibly by any of the camcorders of whatever quality level that were in the area that day.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Again....all of that "cross-bracing" was removed....as they only were there to support the cranes, for the effort of construction.


Still not able to differentiate between the cranes and the core columns I see.

That's alright. At least you already dropped the even more asinine claim that the windows to the outside were inside the core.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
The simple fact is that there weren't any explosions to record because there weren't any explosions. Explosions would've been easily discernible both visually and audibly by any of the camcorders of whatever quality level that were in the area that day.


Another person 10 years behind the times.

Which do you want first: YouTube videos of explosions, or scores of eyewitness testimonies of explosions?

How about a YouTube video of a guy in a hospital bed, talking about how he was injured by a rapid series of explosions? Would that do anything for you at all?



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrinchNoMore
reply to post by FDNY343
 


That is a great picture of the building completely exploding and launching what you call "large pieces" off to the side,


You don't call them large? Some of those debris are as big as city busses.

Maybe you don't consider them large, but here in Reality, we do.




Originally posted by GrinchNoMore
the dust clouds are amazing, somehow they are going upwards and outwards,


Yep. Take a ten pound weight. Hold it 1 foot above a bucket of flour. Drop weight. Observe results.



Originally posted by GrinchNoMore
You people are the definition of "insane" to think that this is a collapse of gravity.


Ok.



Originally posted by GrinchNoMore
Oh wait, the planes energy that hit it an hour ago still exists, that helps it to explode,


Strawman. It's the buildings own potential energy being converted into kinetic energy.


Originally posted by GrinchNoMore
and man, the super powers of fire too !!


Yep. Fire really is amazing, isn't it. Fire can heat our homes, clear land, make planes and cars move, etc. etc. etc.



Originally posted by GrinchNoMore
How about those damaged girders !! We gotta factor that in as well !!


What girders? WTC 1&2 had no girders, except (IIRC) on the mechanical floors.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by psikeyhackr

I have seen a weather report for that day. The wind speed varied around 10 mph with 20 mph gusts.


You sure about that?

From the data that I have seen, it was not even half that.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by Alfie1
BoneZ, you seem to accept William Rodriguez' statement at face value that he was aware of an explosion beneath him prior to the plane hitting. Can you direct me to any other witnesses of an explosion in the basement of the North Tower before the plane impact ?

Several witnesses describe the same exact explosion in the basement levels seconds before the plane hit, corroborating William's story. There are also several witnesses that were in the subway that heard and felt the explosion and saw smoke:





To reiterate, there are plenty of witnesses in this video that corroborate William's story that there was an explosion in the basement levels seconds before the first plane hit.



Again, SAME problem of being about to have a frame of reference. They are in the BASEMENT, and thus, COULDN'T see the plane!!

If there were bombs that you seem to believe, why do none of these people complain of any kind of baratraumatic injuries?

How about the guy who came into Willies office, and had his skin burned. Do explosives leave burns? No. They do not. They damage air-filled organs in the body.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by FDNY343

Originally posted by psikeyhackr

I have seen a weather report for that day. The wind speed varied around 10 mph with 20 mph gusts.


You sure about that?

From the data that I have seen, it was not even half that.


So compute a different initial velocity for the building from the data you have, i don't give a damn.

psik




top topics



 
13
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join