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.

 

"The towers couldn't have fallen that way..."

page: 53
17
<< 50  51  52    54  55  56 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ReptileRipper
 


He couldn't even wake these people from there ignorant slumber.




posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhotonEffect
reply to post by ReptileRipper
 


Forget the airplane engines. You're trying to sell me on some convoluted story that whoever planted the engines in broad daylight planted the wrong ones. I can't buy that. It's just not reality.

But back to the towers.

Your claiming that the collapse defied the laws of physics. Did you come to this conclusion on your own or are you relying on some 9/11 conspiracy site for this info?

How about this:

What about this collapse is defying the laws of physics in your estimation?




*facepalm* ..... LOOK AT THAT PICTURE !!! Jesus your either retarded or just plain old ignorant ........ show me a steel structure that`s collapsed exactly like that with or without explosives and i`ll personally come to your house and suck your toes.

and no .... dont forget the engines , the engines are the key problem with the official story ..... why would i forget them ? that`s just rediculous , you want proof , i give you proof, you tell me to forget it ??? oO ? Oo ? get real dude , get real.
edit on 18-10-2011 by ReptileRipper because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by ReptileRipper
 



*facepalm* ..... LOOK AT THAT PICTURE !!! Jesus your either retarded or just plain old ignorant ........ show me a steel structure that`s collapsed exactly like that with or without explosives and i`ll personally come to your house and suck your toes.


Oh eew that's really bad.


The fact is There is no way for those columns to go any where. They wouldn't crush or bend or collapse. They should of held the weight of the world. Period . And I mean it this time.
edit on 18-10-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by anoncoholic
 


Borders on lunacy? Come on man.


Originally posted by anoncoholic

A C130 was seen climbing in altitude at the Pentagon and what is a C130 but a cargo carrier and why would it be climbing (unless the Pentagon were a landing/takeoff strip) if not to drop off cargo and in this case speculating it was plane parts seems more logical than all the jumbo-jets pieces turning to vapor.


What really borders on lunacy is your sense of logic if you can sit there with a straight face and suggest that the cargo plane was making an air drop of plane parts to be planted at the site. In broad daylight. With witnesses all around. None of whom reported seeing such a spectacle.

Please think about what you're saying. Please.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


I know , the fact that he`s ignoring theres nothing forcing the building down is just beyond me , and the way its spewing out , i mean , it fell in ten seconds , his stupidity amazes me.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:09 PM
link   
" Forget the airplane engines. You're trying to sell me on some convoluted story that whoever planted the engines in broad daylight planted the wrong ones. I can't buy that. It's just not reality."

Ok so..... show me where i claimed the parts were planted .... i dont remember saying that ..... IMHO i beleive something DID crash into the pentagon , and something DID hit the ground in shanksville .... But neither were a 757 , it was a different plane ..... and i also beleive the areas effected in the pentagon held information on the BIG LIE , also , i beleive building 7 held ALOT of information on the BIG LIE too , after all , were talking about 2 buildings that these people work(ed) at.
edit on 18-10-2011 by ReptileRipper because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-10-2011 by ReptileRipper because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReptileRipper
what about the fireman who keyed in on the radio and said it was dying out ? was he lying too ? i guess he was also "up there" huh ?


Sorry about not getting to you on this. I was at work.

The fireman who called in the small fires was on the very lowest floor of impact. The ones with the main fire and damage were still above him.

I imagine you must have to try really, really hard to come up with these inane points to argue which you think defraud the entire OS.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReptileRipper

*facepalm* ..... LOOK AT THAT PICTURE !!! Jesus your either retarded or just plain old ignorant ........ show me a steel structure that`s collapsed exactly like that with or without explosives and i`ll personally come to your house and suck your toes.

and no .... dont forget the engines , the engines are the key problem with the official story ..... why would i forget them ? that`s just rediculous , you want proof , i give you proof, you tell me to forget it ??? oO ? Oo ? get real dude , get real.
edit on 18-10-2011 by ReptileRipper because: (no reason given)


Retarded? Clearly you're ill-equipped to answer the question if you have to resort to the name calling.

You seem so certain that the collapse defied the laws of physics. Yet you can't explained how. Typical truther BS



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by ReptileRipper
what about the fireman who keyed in on the radio and said it was dying out ? was he lying too ? i guess he was also "up there" huh ?


Sorry about not getting to you on this. I was at work.

The fireman who called in the small fires was on the very lowest floor of impact. The ones with the main fire and damage were still above him.

I imagine you must have to try really, really hard to come up with these inane points to argue which you think defraud the entire OS.


Once again ..... WRONG .... he was on the 78th floor

www.youtube.com...




posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by PhotonEffect
 


Well explain to me what is making that building fall like that (without explosives) , remember it fell in 10 seconds ...... then tell me it doesnt laugh in the face of physics. C`mon .... how many times have i asked you numbskulls for an in depth explaination .... ive gave evidence supporting my claim .... where is yours ?



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by ReptileRipper
 


Your logic is lacking once again. No surprise there.

So planes crashed at each site. Good we can agree on something now.

So why would there be a reason to lie about the types of plane? Why not just say it was an American Eagle commuter plane if that's what it was?

Wheres the logic?



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReptileRipper
reply to post by randyvs
 


I know , the fact that he`s ignoring theres nothing forcing the building down is just beyond me , and the way its spewing out , i mean , it fell in ten seconds , his stupidity amazes me.


They did not fall in 10 seconds. That's a myth. You need to use a different 9/11 conspiracy site because your info is way outdated.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhotonEffect
reply to post by ReptileRipper
 


Your logic is lacking once again. No surprise there.

So planes crashed at each site. Good we can agree on something now.

So why would there be a reason to lie about the types of plane? Why not just say it was an American Eagle commuter plane if that's what it was?

Wheres the logic?


well .... people would say ..... wheres 77 ? or wheres 93 ? .... seriously , your an idiot .
and as for -> They did not fall in 10 seconds. That's a myth. You need to use a different 9/11 conspiracy site because your info is way outdated.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReptileRipper
reply to post by PhotonEffect
 


Well explain to me what is making that building fall like that (without explosives) , remember it fell in 10 seconds ...... then tell me it doesnt laugh in the face of physics. C`mon .... how many times have i asked you numbskulls for an in depth explaination .... ive gave evidence supporting my claim .... where is yours ?


No. They did not fall in 10 seconds.

But I'm glad you brought that up. I'd like to use my picture again, if you don't mind, to show just how ridiculous your assertion is.

If the towers collapsed in 10 seconds as you claim, then how fast was the debris in this picture falling?


hint: look at the huge chunk of debris on the bottom left of the tower compared to the top part of the actual collapse.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by PhotonEffect
 


Your seriously not seeing this ?

Tell me how long YOU think it took for the top of that tower to hit the floor, the fact that you point out that big old scary slab, just proves my point that you are either retarded or ignorant... the question is .... why is it flying out like that ? oohh thats right , because the carpets were burning



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReptileRipper

well .... people would say ..... wheres 77 ? or wheres 93 ? .... seriously , your an idiot .
and as for -> They did not fall in 10 seconds. That's a myth. You need to use a different 9/11 conspiracy site because your info is way outdated.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by PhotonEffect
 


PROVE IT THEN FFS , i`m tired of your stupid dodging game ..... put up or shut up.
2nd



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhotonEffect
reply to post by ReptileRipper
 







Looks like your classic building collapse....

Er... wait a second.. you may want to pick a different picture bro, this isn't helping your arguement.




There looks to be a mushroom cloud in the center of another larger mushroom cloud.


Kind of like a nuclear explosion... so yeah, must be gravity.

edit on 18-10-2011 by v1rtu0s0 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by ReptileRipper
 


You still can't answer it.

Let's start with a simple question.

Is it your estimation that the towers achieved a state of free fall?



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:44 PM
link   



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 50  51  52    54  55  56 >>

log in

join