It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Enough with the dishonest behaviour Truthers - I'm calling you out.

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

log in


posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 09:32 AM
Personally I think all buildings where designed to fall in such a way. Yes they were designed to take a direct hit from an airplane but there are unknown factors in every instance. MAYBE the building was designed to collapse on itself to reduce the amount of collateral damage. Take the example below.

Back in early September 2001, the Dow Jones industrial average had just fallen below 10,000. Much of the financial data that powered the stock exchange flowed through servers in a Verizon building adjacent to the World Trade Center complex. Tourists could walk in the front door of the New York Stock Exchange and up to a galley to watch the trading.


Just a thought.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 09:49 AM
If this were a government inside job, then why not inform the air-traffic controllers? Why not inform the 911 operators? Why not inform the flight attendants and the crew that this was just an inside job? And wait, why not inform the passengers that this was going to be staged and their airplanes were just going to land somewhere else?

Throughout the history of commercial aviation, September 11, 2001 is the only time in which multiple airplanes were highjacked for the same purpose.

The air traffic controller speaks to Mohammed Atta twice. Atta says "don't make any stupid moves". Now if this was all set up by our government, how did Atta even get into the pilot's seat in the first place? Would that not also make him a US government agent in on the whole thing? Hmmm, interesting there seeing as how Atta was part of the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, he was going to Technical University in Hamburg Germany and had applied to a crop dusting air training school in Florida. If he were part of the government conspiracy, then why didn't the government train him how to fly planes as they do all other agents if those agents were not in the Air Force.

How do you account for Atta being in the pilot's seat, if there were no planes? The security camera at the air port shows him boarding. For this to be a government conspiracy, then that means that no one refueled a fake airplane, no one put luggage on a fake airplane, and the ticket agents were taking fake tickets for a fake flight. Interesting.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 10:51 AM
i have never seen a person answer the heat problem. ever. couple pages back, completely ignored, like every thread i bring it up in.

surely if you believe in the OS, a plausible answer exists.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:03 AM
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

The heat problem has been addressed hundreds of times... you may not be pying attention.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:13 AM

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious

In Steven Jones' PDF "Answers to Objections and Questions", to support his claim for Sol-gels/Thermite he states:

"One molecule, described by the EPA's Erik Swartz, was present at levels "that dwarfed all others": 1,3-diphenylpropane. "We've never observed it in any sampling we've ever done,"

Which in the context of all of this, sound pretty damning... HOWEVER... he DELIBERATELY leaves out the next line the EPA says, which is:

"He said it was most likely produced by the plastic of tens of thousands of burning computers."

Tens of thousands of burning computers? That would only be plausible if the buildings were wholly engulfed in fire, which they were not. Why am I having to point out the obvious?

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:20 AM
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious

i've only seen it ignored.

*quotes old post*

the how and why are still subjective and all possibilities need to be investigated, but i can show you with certainty that those towers were brought down by something other than the planes.

it's so simple.

in these two pictures we can see molten metal running out, and the color of that metal. now, most OS'ers say "but that's just aluminum from the plane".

it actually doesn't matter. the color a metal glows is based off of the amount of thermal energy it has, and changes very little if a different metal is used. what these pictures mean is that the temperature to melt steel was there, so that could just as easily be steel running out. it's most likely a thermate charge that went off due to the plane impact.

the observed temperatures based off of the metal color (very consistent and accurate, blacksmiths use this all the time) are hotter than both jetfuel and office furnishings can burn by a large margin. where did those temperatures come from? the OS can't account for them.

that's the endgame. arguing that it would be "impossible" to get enough explosives in the building, or "impossible" to keep everyone quiet is a moot point. i've provided solid evidence that it happened.


if it's been handled so many times, you shouldn't have a problem with giving me the answer.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:26 AM

How do you account for Atta being in the pilot's seat, if there were no planes?

How do you account for believing that Atta was in the pilot's seat when no credible evidence has been put forth that he was even on an airplane? You're basing your conclusion on a couple of audio recordings that any audio novice could have easily created?

The security camera at the air port shows him boarding.

I have not seen any photographic evidence of a guy called Atta boarding an airplane at Boston's Logan Airport. I believe there is a photo of some guy in a blue shirt boarding at the Portland, ME Airport, but what exactly does this prove?

For this to be a government conspiracy, then that means that no one refueled a fake airplane, no one put luggage on a fake airplane, and the ticket agents were taking fake tickets for a fake flight. Interesting.

Again, I have not seen any evidence, such as signed statements from these airport employees, brought forth to substantiate your claims. Yeah I know, for National Security reasons, these employees must remain anonymous and the information they provided is classified.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:27 AM
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious

i've only just come upon your post,so not read the thread sorry,but regarding the trade centers,and your claim that it was'nt a controlled demo;the only evidence you put forward is that it looks exactly like a controlled demolition ? how does that work ?

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:29 AM
reply to post by Elbereth

Because you don't know what you're talking about???

Fires burned at ground zero for 99 days after 9/11.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:38 AM
reply to post by elephantstone

If you read the thread you'll see I've ansered that.

In brief, it looks like a ver unique type of French demo that doesn't use it explosives. What it does do is remove a floor which allows the higher floors collapse down on the lower floors. The WTC looked like this type demo becuase they had basically entire floors removed, or very very weakened.

So, it looks like a type of demo, but it DOESN'T look like a demo that uses explosives or thermite... Those sort of demos would have had hundreds of visible explosions or bright burning spots... in addition those sorts of demos will NOT account for the gradual acceleration of the collapse, whereas demos done with gravity, the french way, DO speed up...

Hope that clears it up.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:38 AM

Originally posted by hmdphantom
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious

1.What is your explanation for this ?

Normally if someone decides to jump of a tall building I'd expect them to move their arms and legs around. But this person clearly has hands tied up. He must have seen something which he shouldn't have which cost him his life.

And they did flail their arms and legs.... Until they passed out from fear.... Do a bit of research into suicidal jumpers.... If you get scared enough you pass out... and call me crazy.... but I would be pretty damn scared after jumping out of the twin towers.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:38 AM

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Elbereth

Because you don't know what you're talking about???

Fires burned at ground zero for 99 days after 9/11.

It is my understanding that the dust samples were taken from the pyroclastic cloud emitted on 9/11, not months later. Do you know otherwise?
edit on 14-9-2011 by Elbereth because: add

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:42 AM
reply to post by Bob Sholtz


Read through it carefully.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:45 AM
reply to post by karen61057

Hello Karen when i was saying about the hijackers...and i said i wasn't being is to point out it is just what we are being told is the case...we are told they found passports....we were told who these people were ...but in some cases it had to be recanted and the story changed concerning who they were...

We are told it was Al Qaeda but then one needs to understand who Al Qaeda is in order to the extent of, if these were Al Qaeda Members....

You have to know who OBL is...and there was much speculation on who he is....i think you may want to look up the Name Tim Ossman.

the point of what i was saying is...IT is that people are taking the spoon fed Medias word for things at face value....

Shortly after the 911 incident the first ones acusing OBL and Al Qaeda was Ehud Barak.....first guy....he had a pre wriiten speech and anounce it over the BBC....AND that was the start...Now Al Qaeda was formed out of what is a common practice of the was what is Called a CIA stay behind army after the russian invasion of Afghanistan.

Se the question is....why would people choose to just blindly believe....why not think for ones self.....I could post loads of things on it but it might be easier if you just read it for yourself....

Now some of this is propaganda...but when bothsides spit out needs to find the middle ground

It just opens the door to questions

As you can see.....things are questionable.....and his body was conveinently at buried at the Media will say they did not want to make him a martyr and a give his followers a place to gather...

now lets look at the supposed hijackers a touch....but hey research for yourself...

FBI still says these are the terrorists.14 But when they are found alive,
the FBI says their identity was stolen, and its not the terrorist.15[/center]

Remember that suspicious bin Laden "confession" video?

How could he praise uninvolved living people12 for the 9/11 hijackings?

If they stole identities, how did the FBI identify those passengers as terrorists?
Not by flight calls, which contradict the FBI13 information!

These aren't the first mistakes. FBI quickly had amended the original list8,
as the original "suicide hijackers" came forward!


now for me....just the fact that the story keeps changing by the FBI becomes suspicious.

I don't trust everything i read either i try to look into it my self....and i definately don't believe everything i see on tele or in the news....but for those who do.

Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well.

The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.


so people are willing to believe whole heartly from the media of all that occured....well then why not believe this....but i know that ...people have because they only want to believe one thing and this goes against the grain they take the time to debunk this...but don't bother to try and debunk the OS (baffling)

but like i say this is all very researchable.......but i am sure i am just some nutter truther......but let me tell you....Capt has called us out and have come out en masse.

you they say in court...and why i referenced court.....beyond shadow of doubt...well there is doubt.

edit on 113030p://f46Wednesday by plube because: (no reason given)

edit on 113030p://f48Wednesday by plube because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:48 AM

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Bob Sholtz


Read through it carefully.

that article supports my claim.

The temperature of the fire at the WTC was not unusual, and it was most definitely not capable of melting steel

yet if you read my post, i showed that due to the glow of the metal, that sufficient temperatures existed to melt steel.

The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.

the article also claims that the steel that was heated could support two or three times the stresses that it was taking.
edit on 14-9-2011 by Bob Sholtz because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 12:35 PM
reply to post by Elbereth

You mean the dust samples that were not collected by scientists? The dust samples tested by people that have a history of lying to prove their theories?

Search for the word "dust"

"The provenience of the dust sample used in my study is from an apartment at 113 Cedar St. in New York City. This fourth-floor apartment was the residence of Janette MacKinlay and was approximately 100 meters or so from the closest Tower the South Tower ...(snip)... Janette told me that she had a sense, almost a spiritual or reverential feeling (knowing the origin of the dust) to preserve some of it, which she did, placing dust from her apartment into a plastic bag. My first 9/11-related paper appeared on-line in November 2005, and Janette MacKinlay soon learned from it that I was seeking WTC dust and other samples for study. She contacted me and sent me a small sample by mail."

This dust was exposed to all surrounding conditions for a minimum of nine days before being collected. From MacKinlays writing: “We headed back to our place on Thursday, September 20th”.

Sounds really scientific huh?

Jones is a guy who's been busted numerous times, lying and manipulating "evidence".

Believe him at your own risk.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 12:37 PM
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

Why not read the hwole thing.

Most OSers don't, certianly I would NEVER claim that jet fuel melted the steel beams. The media might've said it, but they're known for talking out of their asses.

The beams didn't need to melt, and DIDN'T melt ...

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 01:01 PM
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious

Well lets think abput what your saying.....So we know the dust may be contaminated....

We know that things whould have been asked of the investigators on site...

The same Science the goverment used to decide What Occured...but does not let third parties have acess to materials for analysis.

The investigators whom decided from day one...MINUTES after the attack it was Al Qaeda....Specifically none other than Bin Laden......So therefore sold all materials for scrappage to be destroyed.

The same Investigators who hired Goverment only contractors for clean up not putting out for tender....on a huge contract such as this.....

And yet again you tell people to google and to blindly WHAT? take your word for things....yup you are new to ATS aren't you......

You see we have our resident debunkers....and you know what....after seeing your efforts i can really appreciate them for their Efforts.....Respect to them.

So to the SIx resident debunkers...thank you...and can you please take captian in your folds and teach him how to point and counter point.

point #1

point #2

Highly Sensitive Garbage
Given that the people in charge considered the steel garbage, useless to any investigation in this age of computer simulations, they certainly took pains to make sure it didn't end up anywhere other than a smelting furnace. They installed GPS locater devices on each of the trucks that was carrying loads away from Ground Zero, at a cost of $1000 each. The website has an article on the tracking system with this passage.

Ninety-nine percent of the drivers were extremely driven to do their jobs. But there were big concerns, because the loads consisted of highly sensitive material. One driver, for example, took an extended lunch break of an hour and a half. There was nothing criminal about that, but he was dismissed. 6
Shielding Investigators From the Evidence
According to FEMA, more than 350,000 tons of steel were extracted from Ground Zero and barged or trucked to salvage yards where it was cut up for recycling. Four salvage yards were contracted to process the steel.

Hugo Nue Schnitzer at Fresh Kills (FK) Landfill, Staten Island, NJ
Hugo Nue Schnitzer's Claremont (CM) Terminal in Jersey City, NJ
Metal Management in Newark (NW), NJ
Blanford and Co. in Keasbey (KB), NJ
FEMA's BPAT, who wrote the WTC Building Performance Study, were not given access to Ground Zero. Apparently, they were not even allowed to collect steel samples from the salvage yards. According to Appendix D of the Study:

Collection and storage of steel members from the WTC site was not part of the BPS Team efforts sponsored by FEMA and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).


So in my opinion SHE is a true American patriot for going above and beyond the call of duty......hip hip hooray!!!!

edit on 013030p://f03Wednesday by plube because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 01:17 PM
As we all know people are offended to easily. Some believe the truth movement so fervently that they deny logic.
Lets look at the wider conspiracy issue here.

Conspiracy theories have always had a mass of uneducated, illogical, and just plain silly people that have made themselves seen publicly, they become the unwanted face of the conspiracy. These people really become a detriment to the information. Evidence is something that we have to have, have to! Real evidence that is academically credible and can standup to scrutiny.

History, Law, and many of the arts teach us what evidence is, real evidence and how to gather and present it. If you have no knowledge of this then you will have a hard time properly arguing a position or even understanding a topic critically.

The poster did not say the whole 9/11 truther scenario is false. What he did was point out the obvious and to this date proven false claims of the truth movement.

There is evidence for what the poster is claiming, where needed. Go find it, actually look at the specific points he made. Do your own research if you claim the ability to do so. This is not a class he does not have to footnote for you.
edit on 14-9-2011 by H2323 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 01:31 PM
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious

exactly, many steel buildings have been brought down due to fire so its no surprise that building 7 went down due to the case that they couldnt stop the fire from bringing it down. this is a closed case.

new topics

top topics

<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in