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.

 

Controlled Demolition Was Not Needed To Bring Down The Towers

page: 33
23
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever
No witnesses said they thought the explosions were explosives thats's just your opinion, some even came forward saying they were upset that conspiracy theorists would twist their words to fit their claim... but you present facts? Nice try lol


When the fireman in this video says that "this ain't done yet, any one of these buildings could explode", he is talking about explosives. What else could he be talking about?



Don't worry about this guy, the president could come out and prove it was a sham. And the OP would still say it didn't happen. He is a disinfo agent. Just look at all his replies, videos and links. It's very simple to see. he has a link and rebuttal for everything. He just can't handle when it defies physics what he is saying is wrong




posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:51 AM
link   
Also OP pops up on all 9/11 threads spreading disinfo. all my construction friends and engineers would have him burbling his words if we had a real debate about all this.

Just note all the expert diagrams and responses here he hasn't answered too. When a real expert comes here and rips him on physics he doesn't know what to say so he picks his own fights
edit on 20-6-2011 by MasterAndrew because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 01:53 AM
link   
I just thought about a prior posters comment with respect to the motive,you've named alot of the points I come to in contemplating the logistics and the motivations for it. Now like most things relating to 9/11 I find that individual facts are more resonant of clarity when the pieces are unified for an attempt at the overall picture. As an example,flight 96 is a great head scratcher and so is the pentagon hit (IMHO),but tie them to how long it took for the two flights to come under suspicion by control towers, how no jets could be mustered....at all...and then you start getting somewhere. Another example is the towers (excluding 7), highly controversial topic yes? Mired in speculation,inadequate investigative efforts, and in my opinion a large scale dis-info campaign,but tie that to the highly unusual amounts of key stocks being traded and by whom the trades were being made,then you gain some ground. The molten steel is a damning piece but tower 7 is the key to the cypher so to speak...I think this was a multifaceted strategic move. Many people don't realize how much money came out as a result of the ensuing war,there was oil to be had,democracies to establish (CONTRA style), The Patriot Act,Haliburton rakes in and all corporations like them,and CHENEY owns Haliburton...shouldn't that be a conflict of interest for a vice president of the U.S. to profteering off the war him and cowboy bush plunged headlong into-WHICH by the way congress openes the coffers to bush for to finance the Mcarthy-like witch hunt he lead us around by the nose with over those stupid nukes...I know that the property owner had an opportunity in all of this to cash in on WTC via insurance,wouldn't that shut him up? The real players here are totally off the radar and you'll never know the agenda to a meaningful sense. only what they deem lowly enough that it matters not how compelling a piece of evidence it is as its simply not enough to matter in a sense more useful than opinions and supposition. Anyone standing to gain from this knew only enough to compell them to do their share to make it possible. guilt,fear,or blackmail if not murder or the intent or threat of,would keep everyone in line after as the heinous nature of such a mass murder would be good incentive to zip it. I can only suppose everyone but the top had little understanding of what they participated in,it would be the easiest way to insure the integrity of the plan. Now that I think about it, that's cell tactics. Its what the government insists was al quaedas main strategy in executing terrorist acts and its another coincidence to add to the pile. Id also like to point out that its a great strategy for maintaining the plans viability in the event of unforseen complications. If I were to make an assertion based on all that I would say that if the government or some bubble between the MIC (military industrial complex) and the government had to do it and make it look external, that's how theyd do it. They've been doing it for years in south and central america. Backing and training rebel forces in insurgency,weakening native government structure through terrorism masked as local rebel movements instead of the red white and blue. Our government has expert experience in false flag operations om smaller scales and it wouldn't be a stretch to assume they just got ambitious, very ambitious. Its like I said,those towers dropped clean,that's skill at pulling,this is a practiced art,this would be done with experts on the subject at the head of the op,but riff raff terrorist cells were the public culprits using an incredibly lacking field of experience to fly commercial grade chunks of american hardware into these columns. Doesn't it make sense? hide the sophistication of the execution behind barbarous intent and result. THOUSANDS died that day and America was just looking for a fight over it and that was no doubt the reaction intended. Their motives can never be known but to them or to us by their own choice. whoever they are and whatever they want,they take care in making sure you don't know it at all till they have it; even then they seem to have had plans laid out for long after too. The Bush Carrier is a good touch on it all. A final flip of the bird to the american people...and we just eat it up...amazing.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by MasterAndrew
Also OP pops up on all 9/11 threads spreading disinfo. all my construction friends and engineers would have him burbling his words if we had a real debate about all this.



Ya because construction workers know more than the experts NIST hired? Quit spreading disinfo and lying out your teeth to prove your outdated debunked theories that the SCIENTIFIC community laughs at lol @ construction workers, what a sham.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 03:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Buford2
reply to post by MindfulReason
 


If you find that out PLEASE let everyone know. I wondered why people cannot see the dust instead of thousands of pounds of steel crushing down. What caused the building to turn to dust and what caused the huge explosions in the basement that turned steel into lava. What do they have that we do not know about? What type of weopon can turn a Tower into dust? Not sure if we will ever know since most are concerned with terrorist and flying jets into buildings. The entire event was a ritual to bring in the NWO but I would like to know what type of weapon was used. Remember when Papa Bush called for the NWO on Sept 11, 1990? His Son GW brought in the beginning of a long battle. I am sure people will say this was just some terrorist from caves and their abilities to overcome the most powerful Government on this planet. They may try to explain away Papa Bush and all the references of 911 in movies, music, TV and other well hidden places. This is nothing more than a movie yet so many believed every aspect of the story was real. The destruction was real just like the destruction of the Gulf Oil spill which was shown a year before it happened in the movie Knowing. The Elite do not lie to us. they do not hand feed us either. They have a role to play and although they seem mean and dangerous as hell they have a purpose. Something tells me the ending will be good. Order out of Chaos is their motto.

edit on 19-6-2011 by Buford2 because: (no reason given)


Why did George Jr. make it happen 11 years later to the day after daddy Bush's pronouncement? Do the NWO members have some special reverence for the number 11?



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 04:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever

Originally posted by VirtualTech
If you think that there was no foul-play on 9/11 then you are sheep.



Resorting to name calling and conspiracy theory movie references to prove you're point logically, typical truther. Plus have you not seen the most recent debate with Loose Change with Popular Mechanics? The LC guys even said not to watch their video because it was full of holes and dubious claims and to watch 911: Press for Truth. so why reference a move that not even the makes of it agree with anymore? And I probably saw Loose Change and Zeitgeist way before you, so please go home with that #.


Who owns Popular Mechanics? Hearst Corporation... Hearst Corporation controls the MSM. Hmmmm.... Coincidence?
edit on 20-6-2011 by blackrain17 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 04:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever

Originally posted by MasterAndrew
Also OP pops up on all 9/11 threads spreading disinfo. all my construction friends and engineers would have him burbling his words if we had a real debate about all this.



Ya because construction workers know more than the experts NIST hired? Quit spreading disinfo and lying out your teeth to prove your outdated debunked theories that the SCIENTIFIC community laughs at lol @ construction workers, what a sham.


Yes they obviously do. Nist has failed miserably, dont even mention them any more. Their incompetence is such they should be imprisoned. How often did they change their story? what 5? 6? times, I forgot the count.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   
the twin towers where build to take numerous hits by a airplane. I think it was 7 hits total.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


60% of the people who compiled the nist report alluded to a coverup.

I was a welder on a powerplant. We have the real knowledge, who do u think reads all the blueprints, measures everthing out and accounts for heat distortion? Some guy in an office? We have practical knowledge.

If its so debunked, I've been waiting almost 7 pages for you to explain the heat/molten metal. You ignore whatever doesn't fit with your theory, including numbers and basic physics.

Your agenda couldn't be more clear.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


60% of the people who compiled the nist report alluded to a coverup.

I was a welder on a powerplant. We have the real knowledge, who do u think reads all the blueprints, measures everthing out and accounts for heat distortion? Some guy in an office? We have practical knowledge.

If its so debunked, I've been waiting almost 7 pages for you to explain the heat/molten metal. You ignore whatever doesn't fit with your theory, including numbers and basic physics.

Your agenda couldn't be more clear.

I have buddies in welding,BOB's right,some paper pusher isn't going to know the intricacies of steel,he will know what a paper tells him and nothing more. you want the right answer you go to the professionals who specify in the field not political suits. Use common sense.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


60% of the people who compiled the nist report alluded to a coverup.

I was a welder on a powerplant. We have the real knowledge, who do u think reads all the blueprints, measures everthing out and accounts for heat distortion? Some guy in an office? We have practical knowledge.

If its so debunked, I've been waiting almost 7 pages for you to explain the heat/molten metal. You ignore whatever doesn't fit with your theory, including numbers and basic physics.

Your agenda couldn't be more clear.


First, name the 60% percent. You cannot becuase that is complete and utter BS. Next, there is a big difference between reading blueprints and then applying as opposed to designing those blueprints you will read. Yes, a guy in the office may very well have more practical knowledge and to think that ANY welder has more knowledge than an architect is ignorant. Do some welders have that knowledge, and have they pointed out flaws, yes, but your example is too broad.

Heat and molten metal. You are a welder, right? Have you ever heard of a process called smelting? What is left...Think about it. The fires at the 9/11 site lasted for months. Do you really think that there would be no molten steel after all of that time, especially in the lower floors.

BTW, I was a fabrication welder for 2 years (MIG and TIG) as well as a student long ago regarding strcutural blueprints so I understand your point but it was incorrect.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 

Where did the molten steel come from? there wasn't supposed to be any. The spokesman for NIST John Gross has even said that on camera in answer to a direct question. If you accept then molten steel, you are opening a can of big juicy worms.

www.metacafe.com...
edit on 20-6-2011 by smurfy because: Add link.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 


you really don't understand his point because there is no way an architect knows more about welding...THAN A WELDER. does architecture recquire metallurgy degrees? No. Maybe engineering background,likely but not expert standard degrees because that woukd make him an engineer not an architect,metallurgy is not the expertise of architects abd your just stretching your exaggerated expertise to satisfy your need to be right. No guy in an office knows metal better than the guy working with it. you have your roles flipped. an architect may have some experience in metallurgy but not comparable to a tradesmith and everyone knows that,oh except for you that is.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


60% of the people who compiled the nist report alluded to a coverup.

I was a welder on a powerplant. We have the real knowledge, who do u think reads all the blueprints, measures everthing out and accounts for heat distortion? Some guy in an office? We have practical knowledge.

If its so debunked, I've been waiting almost 7 pages for you to explain the heat/molten metal. You ignore whatever doesn't fit with your theory, including numbers and basic physics.

Your agenda couldn't be more clear.


First, name the 60% percent. You cannot becaus that is complete and utter BS. Next, there is a big difference between reading blueprints and then applying as opposed to designing those blueprints you will read. Yes, a guy in the office may very well have more practical knowledge and to think that ANY welder has more knowledge than an architect is ignorant. Do some welders have that knowledge, and have they pointed out flaws, yes, but your example is too broad.

Heat and molten metal. You are a welder, right? Have you ever heard of a process called smelting? What is left...Think about it. The fires at the 9/11 site lasted for months. Do you really think that there would be no molten steel after all of that time, especially in the lower floors.

BTW, I was a fabrication welder for 2 years (MIG and TIG) as well as a student long ago regarding strcutural blueprints so I understand your point but it was incorrect.


architects have numbers they run off of,they work off capcity guidelines and math. Knowing a metals characteristics and the molecular structure of different alloys and weaknesses,strengths',etc. is a quality best attributed to master craftsmen of the trade,not the guy who hires them...pretty big distinction.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Averysmallfoxx
reply to post by esdad71
 


you really don't understand his point because there is no way an architect knows more about welding...THAN A WELDER. does architecture recquire metallurgy degrees? No. Maybe engineering background,likely but not expert standard degrees because that woukd make him an engineer not an architect,metallurgy is not the expertise of architects abd your just stretching your exaggerated expertise to satisfy your need to be right. No guy in an office knows metal better than the guy working with it. you have your roles flipped. an architect may have some experience in metallurgy but not comparable to a tradesmith and everyone knows that,oh except for you that is.


Someone saying they are a welder means nothing as well as saying you are an enginneer means nothing. It does not mean one is smarter than the other or if you have a title you understand. I know architects who could not build a tree house and I know welders who no # about metallurgy.

However, I also know architects who started as welders/fabricators/contractors and they do have more knowledge and experience than most people you know. I have also seen the opposite and it you have been in the workforce long enough you know these people exist but not to a great extent. I know that there is nothing that beats hands on experience but to write everyone off is ignorant, which the post stated.

I got the point but simply stating welder would know better about fabrication than a 2nd year out of college newbiw who could not build anything with lincoln logs but he knows his way in CAD...



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 


tig makes pretty welds.

the main point made was that construction workers don't know what they're talking about. i disagree. i know quite a bit about metal, how it reacts to heat, the energy required to melt metal, etc. i'm sure you do too. "following blueprints" sounds like its a simple mindless task, but i assure you, when you're running hundreds of feet of pipe in every imaginable direction all on top of each-other up 4 and 5 stories for 6 different turbines, it gets complicated and tedious. you learn a thing or two.

the problem with molten metal is that jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough at its max temperature to melt steel (the amount doesn't matter, as there is a difference between energy and temperature), and the fires in the towers were oxygen starved, and mostly around 500-650F at the hottest, when you need about 2750F to melt steel. it didn't get hot enough to even weaken the metal substantially, yet there is molten steel everywhere.

where did the heat come from? nothing in the OS accounts for it. since sulfur was found in the steel, and multiple experiments have shown that the sulfur didn't come from things in the office, thermate is the logical conclusion.

thermate accounts for the sulfur AND temperatures. the OS accounts for neither, and ignores both.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
Your agenda couldn't be more clear.


Exactly. 4 days registered and almost 400 posts? Almost all trying to debunk the "inside job" theory and a little "believe it was really Osama".

Paid Shill? Does that really happen? If it does, this would be our guy.

Okay, go ahead and ding me for an off-topic post.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by freakjive
 


No I doubt he is a paid shill. This guy is from Canada and a big time stoner with prior record.
edit on 20-6-2011 by blackrain17 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   


Exactly. 4 days registered and almost 400 posts? Almost all trying to debunk the "inside job" theory and a little "believe it was really Osama". Paid Shill? Does that really happen? If it does, this would be our guy.

More likely spamming the boards to increase traffic to the site and to YouTube. It may be more than one guy working in shifts. He or they do not care about the 911 arguments in the least bit; they just want to increase revenue for the site. My guess is that he's working from within ATS. Remember, ATS took a hit lately with traffic, because their #1 man recently got banned, so this would make the most sense.

It's kind of entertaining at first, since it has been kind of a drag around here for a long time. After a while, he'll just become part of the scenery once the novelty wears out.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


Hmm yeah he's a post engine but as you can tell all those posts are just filler. You have a good point,the missing threads thread drama comes at just the right time to make this a bit plausible lol...can you fill me in on the banned posters you briefly referenced?



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join