What made you first suspect that these 9/11 conspiracy stories were false?

page: 12
14
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by ANOK
 


What about the DYNAMIC loads are you willing to catch the weight dropped 12ft yet Anok


You guys and your dynamic loading.


All collisions between two objects is dynamic loading. Floors dropping on floors is no different than two objects colliding horizontally.

Dynamic loading does not change the laws of motion, it is a given just like gravity.

What does dynamic loading have to do with sagging trusses?

edit on 6/13/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


Of course dynamic loads have an effect or engineers would have no interest in them, you keep treating this as a simple collision because that is all you understand



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   
To me, the biggest thing that CTs can't explain is that the point that the collapse initiates on the twin towers is approximately where the planes hit.

If the buildings were rigged prior to the event, how did they know what floors the planes would hit?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by TWILITE22

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by TWILITE22
Imo if jet fuel produced the results of taking down both towers in less than 2 hours on 911,why do we need nuclear bombs?I mean really just make bombs out of jet fuel if they can do that kind of damage.
the os stinks in more ways than one.



I just can't believe this kind of logic, what about the damage caused not just the fires, then the increasing load on failing components then the HUGE dynamic load of the floors above impact falling on the floors below.
didn't the "fires"cause the failing components?It's not my kind of logic you should worry about.
I find it incredible that of all the people that believe the os,not one of you guys have even one question,I find very strange that the die hard believers have taken 911 and put it in a box,every piece fits for you guys,not one question,nothing is suspicious and that is what you should call unbelievable.
Magic jet fuel...sure



The aircraft caused structural damage, the fuel explosion caused damage it removed fire protect so would the impact.when the collapse happened dynamic loads are created these are way above safety margins.

Plenty of calculators on the net for you to see the difference it makes.

The floor height of the towers was about 12 feet if you drop that distance from zero speed you will be at 19mph just think of all that mass above the impact area hitting at 19mph.

Have a look at this link
www.burtonsys.com...

Now do you understand



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wildbob77
To me, the biggest thing that CTs can't explain is that the point that the collapse initiates on the twin towers is approximately where the planes hit.

If the buildings were rigged prior to the event, how did they know what floors the planes would hit?



Yes and the South Tower although hit second fell first because of the greater load above the impact point , who would have thought that would happen



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by TWILITE22
I would say most of the people that you can set your watch to,race to all 911 thread and defend the os to the death?ring any bells?I don't reply in these threads normally because I see how they are relentlessly attack by the usual suspects.It's all a big game and I have better things going for myself than to argue with people that have an agenda.
Some people enjoy going around in circles,I'm not one of them.


That's not an answer. You were asked to specifically name someone who "defends the OS to death" and all you can say is "lots of people". Who are the "lots of people", precisely?



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 
Well you, for one. Recent days have seen the beginning of the end for you and your kind. Micro-nukes were employed that day, and the evidence for it is now overwhelming. Good luck with your mission, but we all know that lying is not healthy, and perhaps the price you've had to pay was too much. So relax Dave, it'll all be over soon.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 
Well you, for one. Recent days have seen the beginning of the end for you and your kind. Micro-nukes were employed that day, and the evidence for it is now overwhelming. Good luck with your mission, but we all know that lying is not healthy, and perhaps the price you've had to pay was too much. So relax Dave, it'll all be over soon.




MICRO NUKES
and your evidence is what?



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

You guys and your dynamic loading.


Yep.


All collisions between two objects is dynamic loading


Yep.


Floors dropping on floors is no different than two objects colliding horizontally.


Nope.

And here you display your ignorance about collisions. 2 objects moving towards each other horizontally ( or 1 moving and the other stationary) will encounter dynamic loading. Damage will occur to the 2 objects, as well as producing sound, generating heat, etc. These will "use up" ke, and assuming that neither of the 2 objects are being driven by a force, both objects will come to rest.

However, in the case of a vertical collision, the descending object IS being driven by a force, namely, gravity. Therefore, it is undeniable that the descending objectS (cuz now the impacted object is moving downwards also) will NOT come to rest, but will be driven by gravity again.

Undeniable physics. But no doubt you will deny it anyways.


What does dynamic loading have to do with sagging trusses?


Nothing.

But it has everything to do with stripping off the trusses from the core and ext columns.
edit on 14-6-2012 by Fluffaluffagous because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Although it's a complete waste of time, let me ask you, what 's the evidence that two airplanes brought down three buildings again? That's a much more relevant question, because there has never been evidence of that.
And to those new to the discussion, is it possible to look at the video of the collapse of those towers, and believe that gravity caused that much destruction? Run along now, you've been unmasked.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed
what 's the evidence that two airplanes brought down three buildings again?


Actually it was nine buildings, not three.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed

Although it's a complete waste of time, let me ask you, what 's the evidence that two airplanes brought down three buildings again?

.


2 planes brought down 2 buildings only.

Many other buildings were destroyed during the collapses. Only one also fell though.

Your question is a strawman.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Although it's a complete waste of time, let me ask you, what 's the evidence that two airplanes brought down three buildings again? That's a much more relevant question, because there has never been evidence of that.
And to those new to the discussion, is it possible to look at the video of the collapse of those towers, and believe that gravity caused that much destruction? Run along now, you've been unmasked.


Why dont you look here and educate yourself a little, you may not have the background to understand the loadings on a structure but this explains things in simple terms.

www.burtonsys.com...



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Fluffaluffagous
 
You guys illustrate my point. You've lost the war, so you are left with nothing to do but fight little skirmishes. Perhaps a real job is in your future? I ask that because the weight of your argument, could be carried by just one of you. Sometimes there's not always strength in numbers, especially when you're all telling the same lie.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by TWILITE22

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by TWILITE22
Imo if jet fuel produced the results of taking down both towers in less than 2 hours on 911,why do we need nuclear bombs?I mean really just make bombs out of jet fuel if they can do that kind of damage.
the os stinks in more ways than one.



I just can't believe this kind of logic, what about the damage caused not just the fires, then the increasing load on failing components then the HUGE dynamic load of the floors above impact falling on the floors below.
didn't the "fires"cause the failing components?It's not my kind of logic you should worry about.
I find it incredible that of all the people that believe the os,not one of you guys have even one question,I find very strange that the die hard believers have taken 911 and put it in a box,every piece fits for you guys,not one question,nothing is suspicious and that is what you should call unbelievable.
Magic jet fuel...sure


Do I believe the towers fell because of the aircraft YES was it just because of the fuel NO!!! why do you keep going on about fuel.

Why dont you look here and learn something this is simple enough even for you to understand


www.burtonsys.com...



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   
**Alright now, enough.**

So this is getting a bit out of hand.

Stop attacking each other and attack the topic instead.

Further violations of the T&C will result in posting bans.

~Tenth
ATS Mod



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 
Well you, for one. Recent days have seen the beginning of the end for you and your kind. Micro-nukes were employed that day, and the evidence for it is now overwhelming. Good luck with your mission, but we all know that lying is not healthy, and perhaps the price you've had to pay was too much. So relax Dave, it'll all be over soon.



Come now, Dill, we both know you are lying unrepentently here. I have said many times I do NOT "defend the OS to the death" and I know you've seen it. I've also explained what I think the true "conspiracy" is and I know you've seen that too. Tell me, in all honesty, what does it say about you when you need to resort to such a lie that can be proven to be a lie in a 30 second search on ATS to back your claims up?

The entire reason why you and the other truthers continue to cling to these absurd conspiracy stores of "secret controlled demolitions" and "micro nukes" is becoming obvious now- you simply will continue to believe what you want to believe regardless of anything anyone tells you. Five minutes from now you're no doubt going to spontaneously forget this post and insist I'm a "devoted believer in the official story" all over again. If you espouse such blind zealotry to this conspiracy dogma, hey, it's a free country, but I would appreciate it if you were honest about your true intentions.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed

You've lost the war


There is no "war" over 9/11.

It is over, you are defeated, bottled up into obscurity where you belong with truthers "DS" (Delusional Story that 9/11 was an inside job).We have left the field. You are behind bars.

truthers are cat toys.


so you are left with nothing to do but fight little skirmishes


there is logic behind this statement. We fight skirmishes cuz it is over for you. There are no big battles any more. You have lost. you have gone nowhere.


I ask that because the weight of your argument, could be carried by just one of you.


yes, we are inadvertantly playing with the same cat toy.





new topics
 
14
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join