Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Controlled Demolition Was Not Needed To Bring Down The Towers

page: 3
23
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:36 AM
link   
One thing that really is a significant fact 1 & 2 were top to bottom demolitions is pretty telling...

Each floor that collapsed onto the floor beneath it should have been enough energy to buckle the lower levels of each structure?...given that the upper floors came falling successively to the ground- all the while, the structure beneath all this energy being COMPOUNDED at each floor remained IN-TACT.

1+1 does not equal the OS or NIST findings. Learn the math in order to learn the physics. 100 tons cannot demolish 700 tons, not without an outside force coming into play.

7 was a bottom to top demolition signified by the penthouse being the first to lose its supports...




posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


It is nice to see some people look at this event different than what they are told. I am very surprised that you thought Judy Wood was interesting yet you still hang on to the building collapsing like a pancake after being hit by a plane. One hour of burning will not cause metal to turn to dust unless the heat was so intense it seperated the molecules of the steel. Judy Wood is top notch. Listen to her a few more times.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by anumohi

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever

Originally posted by VirtualTech
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


"Nobody has came forward to make millions? "

The owner of the twin towers and building 7, Larry Silverstien has made incredible profits from 9/11
Silverstein Makes a Huge Profit off of the 9/11 Attacks



Most of that money went back into rebuilding the towers, you think Larry would go through the whole 911 fiasco just for that? And I asked why nobody from the demo team that planted the explosives has come out to make millions.
edit on 18-6-2011 by SkepticAndBeliever because: (no reason given)


at a rental profit of over a billion a month, verses the cost of renovation and asbestos removal of the twins....SURE WHY NOT....IT WAS ALL FREE



Just because somebody has something to gain doesn't mean they committed a crime. If my mom died right now I would get a crap load of money, does that mean if that some psycho kills her that nobody should believe it because I had more to gain? Not the best logic. And if there is a big cover-up that Larry Siverstein is involved in, then why would admit he "pulled" the building on camera?



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheUniverse
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


You've still failed to Address the Loss of Momentum.



It also explains how a pancake collapse cannot happen. Every-time the weight of the above floors hits floor with undamaged columns the mass above loses momentum because it is met with much more resistance from the bottom floors.



This is incorrect because the weight of the above floors WERE in fact hitting damaged columns. You think the fire only damaged the part of the building that was impacted by the plane? There were fires weakening that steel all over the place.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:41 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


SkepticAndBeliever please go join Geraldo Rivera, Glenn Beck, and the other brain-washed ignorant absent-minded sheeple and go live in Canada or somewhere so America can get back to the way she was.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever

Originally posted by anumohi

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever

Originally posted by VirtualTech
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


"Nobody has came forward to make millions? "

The owner of the twin towers and building 7, Larry Silverstien has made incredible profits from 9/11
Silverstein Makes a Huge Profit off of the 9/11 Attacks



Most of that money went back into rebuilding the towers, you think Larry would go through the whole 911 fiasco just for that? And I asked why nobody from the demo team that planted the explosives has come out to make millions.
edit on 18-6-2011 by SkepticAndBeliever because: (no reason given)


at a rental profit of over a billion a month, verses the cost of renovation and asbestos removal of the twins....SURE WHY NOT....IT WAS ALL FREE



Just because somebody has something to gain doesn't mean they committed a crime. If my mom died right now I would get a crap load of money, does that mean if that some psycho kills her that nobody should believe it because I had more to gain? Not the best logic. And if there is a big cover-up that Larry Siverstein is involved in, then why would admit he "pulled" the building on camera?


because he was under the assumption everyone knew about the pull.......well apparently not everyone


NIST never even mentioned building 7...now do you get the picture....CONSPIRACY



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever

Originally posted by TheUniverse
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


You've still failed to Address the Loss of Momentum.



It also explains how a pancake collapse cannot happen. Every-time the weight of the above floors hits floor with undamaged columns the mass above loses momentum because it is met with much more resistance from the bottom floors.



This is incorrect because the weight of the above floors WERE in fact hitting damaged columns. You think the fire only damaged the part of the building that was impacted by the plane? There were fires weakening that steel all over the place.


Not true, if the upper damaged parts of the buildings had actually failed, they would have slid off not came down through the entire core column assembly. the only way to shock all the core columns to release for freefall in its own footprint is by demolition



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by anumohi
 


You forgot to mention the BBC lady talking about how Building seven had fell while it was still standing right behind her.

Also all the 911 references in TV shows, Movies are put there for a reason. Everything is out in the open but many do not take the time to connect the dots. It is really our fault for being ignorant when the answers are in front of anyone. I am trying my best to figure out the puzzle and they leave hints everywhere. Music, Movies, Companies and every other place. This event was planned to bring in the NWO just like Papa Bush ask for exactly 11 years earlier. Anyone who cannot see this chooses not too. No skin off my back or anyone elses. Some will believe in what the Gov says and others will not. That is how the world goes round.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Buford2
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


It is nice to see some people look at this event different than what they are told



...And how is someone who listens to what they are being told by to video's like "Loose Change" any different? Yes the government have said things that are not true on countless occasions, but so have conspiracy theorists. Dylan and Jason both admitted in their latest debate with popular mechanics that their video has a lot of flaws and false claims and to check out "911
ress for truth" Instead (look it up yourself, the makers of "Loose Change" don't even 100% believe the controlled demolition theory anymore). That video reference was just an example, people are blinded by a lot of propaganda on the net.

These people are believe almost anything that goes along with the current of the 911 truth movement (except for the dumb stuff like the "ball" theory, nobody believes that lol) while saying that people who believe the "official story" believe everything they are told. If I didn't have questions myself I wouldn't have gotten into this conspiracy oh so many years go, the difference was when I got the answers I didn't keep looking on a wild goose chase.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 






This is incorrect because the weight of the above floors WERE in fact hitting damaged columns. You think the fire only damaged the part of the building that was impacted by the plane? There were fires weakening that steel all over the place.


Apparently even the Impact site of the Plane was quite lacking of Fires and to boot a large amount of Smoke was present which implies a starved FIRE. There is no way the fire was hot enough to Weaken Fire Resistant STEEL!





posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Buford2
reply to post by anumohi
 


You forgot to mention the BBC lady talking about how Building seven had fell while it was still standing right behind her.

Also all the 911 references in TV shows, Movies are put there for a reason. Everything is out in the open but many do not take the time to connect the dots. It is really our fault for being ignorant when the answers are in front of anyone. I am trying my best to figure out the puzzle and they leave hints everywhere. Music, Movies, Companies and every other place. This event was planned to bring in the NWO just like Papa Bush ask for exactly 11 years earlier. Anyone who cannot see this chooses not too. No skin off my back or anyone elses. Some will believe in what the Gov says and others will not. That is how the world goes round.


I believe the children are our future and the end is drawing near for our government



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Buford2
 


I am keeping an open mind on what happened until people with far more experience and education than I have get a fair chance to examine ALL the evidence related to it. I think MOST people, by now, have realized there is more than we've been told. What, how or who, is all up for debate and I've shown, I believe, I accept parts of more than one theory..altho my primary feelings are what I have said. Hell.. who am I? I don't have a P.H.D. in physics or material science, right? I'm just an American who smells a real big RAT in the woodpile...

Lets have a TRUE and HONEST investigation of ALL aspects of what happened. All view points either accepted or rejected on merit, not politics. The whole nation could accept those results. The 911 commission isn't worth a wooden nickle though. That was political from start to end.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheUniverse
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 






This is incorrect because the weight of the above floors WERE in fact hitting damaged columns. You think the fire only damaged the part of the building that was impacted by the plane? There were fires weakening that steel all over the place.


Apparently even the Impact site of the Plane was quite lacking of Fires and to boot a large amount of Smoke was present which implies a starved FIRE. There is no way the fire was hot enough to Weaken Fire Resistant STEEL!








Here's a vid for you regarding just that point.





posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


Who said anything about Loose Change. Not I.

I believe Loose Change is propaganda. There are so many CT's about 911 finding the correct one will be an ever ending task. The Elite who put on the show have many hired guns to spin any truth. I have listed my reasons for this event. It was planned and it was to bring in the NWO. Easily seen once you connect the dots. Papa Bush first mentioned the NWO exactly 11 years earlier.

the hints everyone was given. It was their job to bring in the NWO but since this is hidden from the public the Elite shift the blame to skinny men from the middle east. That also helps to cause hatred all throughout the world and hatred and fear is needed to bring in the NWO.

Dont be afraid of the changes. The new world will replace this hell hole we live in today.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


What answers did you find? The only "real" answers are what was told on that day by the media and that we discovered that dirty muslims in caves planned and orchestrated the whole thing only an hour or two after the planes hit.....That is some real good intelligence gathering. They are so incredibly good that i'm surprised that it took 10 years to actually catch Bin Laden jacking off in his apartment (sarcasm). Oh, and the passport that miraculous flew out of the plane as it hit the towers and didn't get damaged at all even though everything in the towers were disintegrated.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever

Originally posted by ANOK
You are not taking into account the laws of motion that govern all objects in movement and what happens to them when subjected to other forces.


But the mass of the bottom of the tower doesn't have the force of gravity pushing it towards anything like the top does.
edit on 18-6-2011 by SkepticAndBeliever because: (no reason given)


The force of gravity does not change the way the laws of motion work. The force of the bottom pushing up against the top is still equal regardless of what force might be making it move.

Just to be clear, the law of equal opposite reaction relates to all colliding objects regardless of their mass or momentum. All colliding objects receive the same force, moving or stationary.

So no, gravity is not your answer.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by anumohi

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever

Originally posted by anumohi

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever

Originally posted by VirtualTech
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


"Nobody has came forward to make millions? "

The owner of the twin towers and building 7, Larry Silverstien has made incredible profits from 9/11
Silverstein Makes a Huge Profit off of the 9/11 Attacks



Most of that money went back into rebuilding the towers, you think Larry would go through the whole 911 fiasco just for that? And I asked why nobody from the demo team that planted the explosives has come out to make millions.
edit on 18-6-2011 by SkepticAndBeliever because: (no reason given)


at a rental profit of over a billion a month, verses the cost of renovation and asbestos removal of the twins....SURE WHY NOT....IT WAS ALL FREE



Just because somebody has something to gain doesn't mean they committed a crime. If my mom died right now I would get a crap load of money, does that mean if that some psycho kills her that nobody should believe it because I had more to gain? Not the best logic. And if there is a big cover-up that Larry Siverstein is involved in, then why would admit he "pulled" the building on camera?


because he was under the assumption everyone knew about the pull.......well apparently not everyone


NIST never even mentioned building 7...now do you get the picture....CONSPIRACY



And why would everyone be aware of building 7 to be taken down by controlled demolition for virtually no reason at all at the time? I don't buy it. Plus NIST wrote their conclusion on what happened building 7, so to say they "never mentioned it" is a flat out lie, please stop.
edit on 18-6-2011 by SkepticAndBeliever because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever

Originally posted by ANOK
You are not taking into account the laws of motion that govern all objects in movement and what happens to them when subjected to other forces.


But the mass of the bottom of the tower doesn't have the force of gravity pushing it towards anything like the top does.
edit on 18-6-2011 by SkepticAndBeliever because: (no reason given)


The force of gravity does not change the way the laws of motion work. The force of the bottom pushing up against the top is still equal regardless of what force might be making it move.

Just to be clear, the law of equal opposite reaction relates to all colliding objects regardless of their mass or momentum. All colliding objects receive the same force, moving or stationary.

So no, gravity is not your answer.



Hold your fist straight up and down with your knuckles pointed up and i'll smash down with my knuckles, and I guarantee your knuckles will feel more damage than mine..



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


If it was not an implosion demolition, then how did all four outer walls end up on top of the collapsed building?

Please really think about that before jumping to a conclusion.

First realise why buildings are imploded and why. Then look at the method involved in getting a building to defy physics, which an implosion demolition does in a sense, and a building would have to have done if it was not controlled. A naturally collapsing building is going to push all the rubble outwards falling on top of the outer walls, to make it do the opposite requires a special skill that...


....requires such skill that only a handful of demolition companies in the world will attempt it.

science.howstuffworks.com...

A little bit of research into the physics involved, and how implosion demolition works, and you can't fail to see the obvious.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever
Hold your fist straight up and down with your knuckles pointed up and i'll smash down with my knuckles, and I guarantee your knuckles will feel more damage than mine..


Oh geez another OSer analogy with the human body, why? Why do you ALL do this lol?

I don't care what damage you feel, the laws of physics are well known and can not be disputed. (If you're going to make analogies at least keep them in the realm of mechanics not anatomy. You all doctors or something lol?)

I'm already starting to realise you're a little confused when it comes to physics, another common trait among those that posses to see nothing wrong with the official report of the collapses.

Answer me this question, if a bug hits the windshield of a bus, what experienced the most force, the bug or the windshield?

edit on 6/18/2011 by ANOK because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
23
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join