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.

 

Gravity Can't Do This!

page: 2
27
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by coughymachine
 


According to eminent truther Richard Gage the severed top section of the Tower should settle neatly on the lower section :-
www.youtube.com...


and this is he thinks is a valid demonstration of what happen on 911.... is that really THE Richard Gage from AE911TRUTH?




posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by coughymachine
 


According to eminent truther Richard Gage the severed top section of the Tower should settle neatly on the lower section :-
www.youtube.com...


and this is he thinks is a valid demonstration of what happen on 911.... is that really THE Richard Gage from AE911TRUTH?


It certainly is.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by coughymachine

Originally posted by Alfie1


According to eminent truther Richard Gage the severed top section of the Tower should settle neatly on the lower section :-

I think, maybe, you 'misunderstood' the purpose of my post.


Just trying to help out



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by turbofan

This photo shows debris shooting upward, and arcing from the middle of the tower core.


That's a boat.





This series of still frames shows one of many objects shooting laterally, or upward from the
debris cloud against the force of gravity. Furthermore, some of the debris breaks apart
in mid air and changes direction suddenly as D. Chandler explains. Impossible by gravity.


Something that has been on fire can break apart and those constituent parts can change direction. Something with a wide cross section can fall irregularly - think of a falling leaf.








Here is another impossibility and probably the most obvious of the bunch. The top photo shows the
debris cloud descending. The bottom photo shows one of many accelerated pieces of debris shooting
out of the cloud.

Again, IMPOSSIBLE by gravity as there is no additional force available to accelerate individual object
out of the dust cloud.


Do you assume that everything falls uniformly at the speed of gravity?



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Are you guys really going to try and refute this poster? If you do, then I would have no other option but to categorize you as a shill. There are too many anomalies in the official story, yet you defend every detail, even one as obvious as this.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I wish I had a pound for every picture I have seen on here of a WTC Tower collapsing with arrows drawn all over it.

Its nearly 10 years. If anything was proveable from such an exercise it would have been proven years ago.

Its a waste of time and you would be better employed washing the car.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 10:02 AM
link   
.. but therm*te can? Remember, them*te isn't an explosive, so it too wouldn't be able to do what the pictures show



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Do you assume that everything falls uniformly at the speed of gravity?


What does "everything else" have to do with the object that I'm showing in the video?

Do you assume that falling debris can magically accelerate faster than gravity will allow without any other
forces acting upon it?


Just to help you out, I'll circle the debris jetting upward which is indicated by the red arrow...you know,
since you're too blind to see.

edit on 14-6-2011 by turbofan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by turbofan
 


When the government/army removes ALL evidence of this almost immediately and takes it oversees to sell to the lowest bidder, that would mean there is more to the story then just a plane hitting it IMO....



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightSunshine
I think someone should rebuild a tower, and fly a plane into it. Just to see what happens. It would have to fall just like those 2 did, right? I'm sure if it didn't, there'd be a million and one excuses as to why not.
edit on 14-6-2011 by MidnightSunshine because: spelling


Well it needs to be of the same tube-frame structural system, with same construction and properties of the original towers.
Now If the rebuilt tower fell in the same way as they did on Sept 11 2001 then there would be a million and one explanations as to how it was all rigged with demolition explosives before hand!

edit on 14-6-2011 by Logical one because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Now that is FUNNY!


An inanimate object changing trajectory by about 90 degrees in midair.

How is that explained by gravitational collapse?

9/11 is a travesty of science. What kind of fools with college degrees let this crap drag on for almost TEN YEARS?

psik



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by turbofan

What about the object that changes direction in mid air? What force caused that?
edit on 14-6-2011 by turbofan because: (no reason given)


I think this is purely a case of D. Chandler's seeing what he wants to see......rather than what is actually in the video.

I've watched the video several times and honestly cannot see the object that Chandler describes as "rocket projectile" "Stop mid air".......and change directions.

The "Rocket projectile"...........DOES NOT stop mid air!


As for changing directions.......all I see is that the object flips on its side......and yes wind resistance CAN have and impact..........why do you think they use parachutes when jumping out of planes!

edit on 14-6-2011 by Logical one because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Logical one

Originally posted by MidnightSunshine
I think someone should rebuild a tower, and fly a plane into it. Just to see what happens. It would have to fall just like those 2 did, right? I'm sure if it didn't, there'd be a million and one excuses as to why not.
edit on 14-6-2011 by MidnightSunshine because: spelling


Well it needs to be of the same tube-frame structural system, with same construction and properties of the original towers.
Now If the rebuilt tower fell in the same way as they did on Sept 11 2001 then there would be a million and one explanations as to how it was all rigged with demolition explosives before hand!

edit on 14-6-2011 by Logical one because: (no reason given)


How can such a thing be built if we aren't even told the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level? If you search around the Internet you will see anywhere from 90,000 to 300,000 tons of concrete being specified as what was in each tower. Though they all agree on about 100,000 tons of steel in each tower. What sense does that make?

The people that want to believe this nonsense just need to come up with psychological bullsh# excuses.

My model does not come anywhere near complete collapse. So they need to emphasize that it is not a tube-in-tube structure but then they don't want exact data on the cores of the towers.

www.youtube.com...

psik



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   
The image that comes to my mind is an I-beam that maybe acted like a slingshot, see-saw, or catapult and flipped something out of the....wait a minute. That makes too much sense, huh?



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by turbofan
 


When the government/army removes ALL evidence of this almost immediately and takes it oversees to sell to the lowest bidder, that would mean there is more to the story then just a plane hitting it IMO....



What a pity you didn't do any elementary checking before posting that :-

911blogger.com...



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by turbofan
 


There is a lot more going on in the pictures than just gravitational attraction. One thing is that lots of air inside the building is being compressed and heated. This could easily explain why things come shooting out of the debris column in opposition to gravity. Don't you think?



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by trailertrash
 
Let me ask you a question. Would that compressed, heated air pulverize concrete and vaporize steel?



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by trailertrash
reply to post by turbofan
 


There is a lot more going on in the pictures than just gravitational attraction. One thing is that lots of air inside the building is being compressed and heated. This could easily explain why things come shooting out of the debris column in opposition to gravity. Don't you think?


Oh no, it's the bicycle pump bull#. Have you noticed that you have to compress a bicycle pump MULTIPLE TIMES to get a significant amount of pressure in the tires. The pressure would be distributed throughout the lower part of the building before it made things shoot out rapidly from the sides. That is nothing but a STUPID rationalization.

psik



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



How can such a thing be built if we aren't even told the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level?


Have you tried reading the NIST NCSTAR 1-1A? Its set up quite nicely in there. Great reading that report for anyone actually interested in the events of September 11, 2001.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



The pressure would be distributed throughout the lower part of the building before it made things shoot out rapidly from the sides. That is nothing but a STUPID rationalization.


No, there is not. The pressure wave from the collapsing structure would immeadiately affect the floor below it. Thats how things work here on planet Earth.



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join