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 Explosive New 9/11 Charge

page: 4
26
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


not really interested. apples to banans.


Not interested so again everyone sees that you talk total and utter bs! as soon as something contradicts your wacko theories you avoid it.!

What would your friends on your other forum say about it.



edit on 12-8-2011 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Interesting story, and an irrelevant one. There's nothing keeping you from this argument in the appropriate venue. What's keeping you?



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Wrong, concentrate on the right side of the building in the frame/s. Keep in mind that collision has already occured.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by smurfy
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Wrong, concentrate on the right side of the building in the frame/s. Keep in mind that collision has already occured.



Capture a still before and after your claimed expansion because there is NONE! Can you do that ?



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Interesting story, and an irrelevant one. There's nothing keeping you from this argument in the appropriate venue. What's keeping you?


How is it irrelevant you claim aluminium cannot go through steel is that not what you are claiming or have you changed your mind again?

The picture proves it can what we saw on the day proves it can!

Please learn the physics of this!



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


What about how wood can go through concrete walls in a tornado? Or straw through a telephone pole? Or how ice can go through the steel side of a ship? Boy, truthers have a very bad case of "forget a lot".

Of course they are not interested in facts!



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


What about how wood can go through concrete walls in a tornado? Or straw through a telephone pole? Or how ice can go through the steel side of a ship? Boy, truthers have a very bad case of "forget a lot".

Of course they are not interested in facts!



Q: There are reports of straw and other debris penetrating cattle, trees and other solid objects during a tornado. Does this occur because of the wind speeds involved, or is there any truth to something I was told which is the "inside" of the tornado is a perfect vacuum that causes solid objects to basically "open up" or pull apart?

A: You're correct, there are confirmed reports of straws penetrating trees or boards in tornadoes. Years ago some thought that tornado winds were fast enough to drive straws into trees, but measurements of tornado wind speeds have shown that they rarely approach 300 mph. The air pressure inside a tornado is lower than the surrounding pressure, but is far from a perfect vacuum. The most generally accepted theory about what happens is that the winds bend trees or boards enough to open up the grains, a straw flies in and the tree straightens up when the tornado moves on. (12-29-96)


www.usatoday.com...

edit on 13-8-2011 by Yankee451 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Yankee451
 


Well Yankee451 has given this link

letsrollforums.com...

If you are curious its worth a visit, now Yankee because of his lack of understanding (hopefully not due to his teachers) of the physics (material properties) of this event gets himself a little confused now none of us are getting younger so it may be an age thing I am no youngster myself but I am still as sharp as a tack.

Now Yankee claims the wings of a 100+ ton jet couldn't cause damage to the Towers YET when you look at his link the ickle little wings of a missile can ah thats cute!.

He also shows a picture of the claimed entry hole for the missile (it bends the steel in) and his claimed explosion point (boom
) on his picture which bends the steel in wait a minute both bend the steel in


Now he has been shown on here on various threads the picture of the USS Hinsdale attacked by a Kamikaze pilot during the war but he wont try to explain how the plane manage to pass through the STEEL hull.




He claims planes cant go through steel. Maybe thats why he tries to ignore it every time!

He still wants to preach his NO PLANES theories on here he cant so he does elsewhere.
He claimed the Towers had a concrete core until he was shown they didn't
He still tries to claim that floors had been removed before the attack, I think office workers would have noticed that.
He claims that the planes were computer generated real time on tv he tried to provide evidence to that by link to a system sports commentators used on tv to draw on screen.

Here is a link to the quality you could expect.



He seems to forget lots of people posted videos/pictures etc on the net but he thinks they are all faked!

His ideas are so wacko that they are harder to pull off than what happened!

Dont see any video of rockets screaming in towards the towers no reports from the public as they flew over.

You really have to start to think about what you claim Yankee, it's total and utter bs and delusional!
edit on 13-8-2011 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-8-2011 by wmd_2008 because: spelling

edit on 13-8-2011 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Hahaha!

I'm sure the readers can make up their own minds, but thanks for the free advertising...apologies to the OP, WMD is incorrigible sometimes.



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 04:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Hahaha!

I'm sure the readers can make up their own minds, but thanks for the free advertising...apologies to the OP, WMD is incorrigible sometimes.


I am sure they will Yankee as yet again you avoid the issues raised in my previous post so what does that tell everyone about you.

So Yankee I will ask you again how does the plane go through the STEEL hull of the ship or are you going to change your mind about that, you know like the concrete core?

You are like a lot on here and your other forum you make assumptions of what YOU think should happen based on little or NO knowledge of the subject you are talking about.

Now with you the list includes construction,materials,physics,video/photography which covers most of the subjects you try to use re 9/11.

So your right the readers will make up there own minds!



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by -W1LL
 




An Explosive New 9/11 Charge


Sauce for the goose.

If you have a lie that is slowly failing, the best way to back it up is by shoring up the foundations of that lie by admitting another lie that never was.

Confused?

In a nutshell, there will be sacrificial goats so that we have someone else to blame... but also, eliminate any doubts to the most fundamental prescribed sequence of events.

Call it a diversionary measure.

It would go something like... we found out that that the CIA did this or that and covered it up, but we are now more sure than ever that a plane really did strike the Pentagon, the towers fell because of the heat and WTC7 collapsed because of residual vibrations. Case closed... go back to your homes, hug your automobile, buy insurance, mow your lawn, all is well.

It's an old trick.

The Air Force does this same thing every decade or so regarding Roswell. You get a whole new set of hitherto unreleased information that admits that there were mistakes but that also continues to deny the truth that you are not supposed to get. You then supposed to feel vindicated for your suspicions and are now also comfortable that it's all been exposed.



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Yankee451
 


Yes I have heard and am aware that straw can also be deposited like that.

But there is also evidence of tree limbs and 2x4s piercing car doors, palm trees being pierced by a piece of plywood, fridge pierced by a stud, etc. Even just kinetic energy weapons can do massive amounts of damage. How do you think those railguns work? Kinetic energy is an amazing thing. The faster you speed something up, the more energy it will have on impact.

Here is an old favorite riddle: Which weighs more? A ton of bricks, or a ton of feathers? Which would you rather have impact you at 500mph?



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


You're hanging your hat on old wive's tales now, Gen? Thought you were made of sterner stuff than that.



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by redoubt
 



excellent post thank you!
I see why you chose the name redoubt, bravo!


Yankee - all I have to ask you is why? why do think there were NO planes that hit the towers? the pentagon I can believe no plane, but SIGH.
edit on 8/14/2011 by -W1LL because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


I don't speak for the readers, but speaking for myself, what I see is someone who's too afraid to approach me on a more appropriate thread.



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Yankee451
 


So wood cannot penetrate cinder block walls? A hunk of plywood cannot pierce a palm tree? That is fine. Your ignorance duly noted.

So what happened here:



And that was from Hurricane Andrew.
I do realize that the straw through tree is a little less credible and has an explanation for it, but uh, how did that plywood end up in there?

Yeah old wives tales.
I guess some farmer Bob went through some trouble to do this then too right?


Gee who was bored enough to drill holes in this wall to put a chair into it?


Who threw this branch through that house?


Must have been those hooligans from down the street to do this to a truck:


How did that steel manage to not knock over or cut through that tree? A tree is made of wood. So how did this I-beam not slice through it?
I guess steel cannot cut through wood. Alert the press!

How can wind do something like that to a truck? Must have been some secret weapon!

I guess the above examples of the power of a tornado or hurricane with top speeds of only 300mph, are all wives tales eh?

You see, a lot of things can do some serious damage when accelerated to high speeds. An airliner traveling over 400mph is like a missile, and everything else that is flying along at that speed will do some serious damage to whatever it impacts, including the wings, engines, fuselage, fuel.

And sorry, but I base my arguments on facts observed by experts, not make believe nonsense made up by armchair experts looking at blurry photos in their parent's basements.
edit on 8/14/2011 by GenRadek because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by -W1LL
 


Guess it's okay if the OP asks...

There are several reasons, not the least of which is aluminum wings can't cut structural steel collumns like a hot knife through butter. The videos show the "jets" didn't even slow down, and all this yammering from Gen, Hoop, and WMD about "physics" doesn't address that phenomenon, which is not possible.

Let's look at what the wings struck, and keep in mind the mass of the jet is composed of the combined mass of all of its parts. The mass of a wingtip is much less massive than the mass of an engine, yet they all entered the building in one, smooth motion...pure video manipulation.

Examining just one exterior box column's cross section...



It is because of the shape of the columns that it is an "apples to bananas" comparison to try to use WWII ship hulls as proof; that argument is offered as distraction.

...imagine a wing tip striking the two knife edges of a single box column with a "sawing motion". which is what would happen if the NIST is correct:



The jet would strike in a "wedge" motion, slicing from the inside-out:



...yet here's a close-up of the damage on the left side...



and another:



Note the "knife-edge" of the columns are bent left-to-right, not "wedged" from right-to-left. A jet can't account for the direction of that damage, even if it was possible for aluminum wingtips to slice structural steel columns like a hot knife through butter.

Jets can't account for that, but what can? I'm not talking about video, or witnesses claiming otherwise, because video can be faked, and witnesses can lie.

Using a blueprint from the WTC for a model, this is the cheap graphic work that offended WMD so much:







For more details, and a conversation that won't be relegated to "hoax" land for talking about no planes, please read my thread. I welcome all comments.

letsrollforums.com...



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


Apples to bananas, Gen. How many two by fours strike the trees sideways and cut them down?

The analogy is a wild stretch, don'tcha think?



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by -W1LL
 


To really understand why planes wouldn't have been used, it is important to understand the motive behind 911.

911 cannot be learned in a few sound bites. It takes time. Please read my 911 for Psychos post to get an idea of the depth of the corruption that 911 was meant to cover up.



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 





So wood cannot penetrate cinder block walls? A hunk of plywood cannot pierce a palm tree? That is fine. Your ignorance duly noted.


Now you're talking about wood and cinder blocks? Golly, I thought we were talking about structural steel box columns and flimsy aluminum wingtips.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join