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 mthgs602
Frankly, the second tower should havestarted to tilt on account of the plane never hit dead center.
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by mthgs602
collapse from what? You do realise how PERFECT demo has to be to cause the almost free fall into its own foot print?
What does that have to do with 9/11? None of those buildings collapsed at almost free fall and into their own foot prints.
Originally posted by -PLB-
Originally posted by mthgs602
Frankly, the second tower should havestarted to tilt on account of the plane never hit dead center.
Just a wild guess, you are unable to back this assertion up with any study that includes the actual physics, and it is based either on a conspiracy website or your gut feeling?edit on 7-6-2011 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by mthgs602
Don't need to youtube or anything else. Saw the photos. Those buildings did not collapse into their own footprints.
Besides, you got to love it. Half the truthers claim it was inside job because all the debris was "ejected' so far from the building lines - obvious (to them at least) sign of controlled demolition and the other half claims that because all the material "fell into its own footprint" that its an obvious sign of controlled demolition. Its a conspiracy win-win.
Also, there are only three speeds - faster than free fall, free fall, and slower than free fall. Can't go faster unless its under power, didn't go free fall so we are therefore left with the last and final option - slower than free fall. That's "almost' free fall to you.
You are correct on the towers, they never collapsed at all but just blew up and tossed there contents to the side somehow, while also apparently turning into pure dust.
It is pretty safe too say that no buildings collapsed on that day, these words are true, not one of them collapsed at all, not even building seven which got its legs cut off suddenly and just turned into a strange looking pile.
Call it what you will, but you're not going to convince anyone that anything happened that did not actually happen.
Building 7 is surely in its own footprint, but any idiot can see that the two towers are exploding in every direction and debris is being turned into small chunks far before it hits the ground, does not a cloud like a Volcanic eruption or a nuclear bomb not trigger anything in your heads ???
Because of its close proximity and the devastating nature of the collapse of World Trade Center Towers 1 and 2, the south face of 140 West Street was extensively damaged, with entire column bays destroyed as high as the 13th story.
How about just find these reports so we can see them, like the OP says.
Instead of rigging those buildings with explosives it makes a lot more sense to me that the buildings were designed in such a way that if they collapse they collapse straight down. Which turned out to be the case, intended or not.
Originally posted by boondock-saint
Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer
Do you really think that every building in NY and Chicago is wired to blow just in case?
I don't know.
But to me, an alternate plan to
protect the rest of the dominoes
around you would have been a good idea
especially if you were the tallest 2 dominoes
in NY City...
...Think of it as carrying a condom with ya
to the brothel. Just in case