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.

 

U watch -- U consider -- U explain

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by pshea38
Q. Why does the footage showing the 'controlled demolition' of wtc7 (as seen in the OP)
look fake and of bad quality cgi?
A. Because it is faked and of bad quality cgi!

The perpetrators released fake cgi video to fuel conspiracies (guided by their controlled
truth movements), while the actual buildings were demolished in private!


Seriously, you can't be serious. People were there and witnessed it and still talk about it today. Just because you haven't met them doesn't mean they're fake.

This is one of the biggest cases of denial I've ever seen. What in the world is real to you?


Take out witnesses with military and media links (since the Main Stream Media and the
military are both conspirators in the 9/11 Hoax/Con) and you are left with very few (and often
contradictory) testimonies. So what should we rely on?

Demonstrable proof of 9/11 Media Fakery, maybe?

Did you ever get a chance to go (properly) through the links I am sure
I have posted for you before, or are you determined to remain forever in error?

9/11 Video Fakery
9/11 (And Other Major World Events) Media Fakery

They kill brown people, you see!
They Fake the killing of white people in order to be able to justify the killing
of brown people. That's how there are so many people on board the 9/11 Con money train.
They know it was Faked. Very few would be on board a scheme involving the actual
murder of 3000 white westerners. Now 3000 mostly simulated (as in the the game The Sims)
entities, and a demolition job passed off as terrorist attacks (with the aid of faked video, actor
witnesses and a sold out MSM) is a more palatable route to fortune! (And the killing of brown
people and the stealing of what is theirs).

9/11 Actors

Are you sure you can afford to not take the time to go meticulously through everything
written and shown in the above links, Varemia?




posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by hdutton
I know about mimimal posts.

Some times the less one says, the more room there is for others to consider.

Like I said: U watch


www.youtube.com...


Then : U consider


And Finally : U explain


The pile of the same stupid just gets bigger and bigger, but as long as it gets the Truthers giddy and moist, I suppose its all good.

Why they keep pointing to fires in buildings that were *totally* different from the WTC, and buildings that did not have 767 slammed into them and then, with great breathlessness and many typographical errors )!!!!@@!!) and while losing the ability to spell, say "See? U explain", just adds to the aforementioned pile of stupid.

It just gets faster and funnier. A digital Occupy Wall Street !!!!@@!@



at what point did wtc 7 have a 767 slam into it?


you're right, you just proved that the pile of stupid gets bigger and bigger, thank you for that



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


Hi


You don't understand the science if you really believe an hour of fire could cause thousands of tons of steel to instantly fail...


I am no engineer but I have always wondered at this statement. Why does the steel have to fail at the same time? Could it not have been an accumulated effect?
Fire is random, so would have had different temperatures at different places, this could mean some beams failed before others and then after the passage of time enough beams had failed accumulatively to make the building collapse.

As I said, I am far from being an expert, but the premise that all of the steel failed suddenly and immediately and at the same time seems unrealistic to me.



Regards the O.P:

Those videos don't really prove anything.
Were the respective buildings constructed the same way?
Did the fire have the same properties in both buildings?
Did both buildings have structural damage, due to parts of a massive adjacent building falling on it?
I think it is disengenous to just show two burning steel framed buildings and say why don't they behave in the same way. There will be so many variables involved.
edit on 4-10-2011 by doubleplusungood because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-10-2011 by doubleplusungood because: Too many hellos

edit on 4-10-2011 by doubleplusungood because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by pshea38
 


And the people who were actually there? I've met a couple people with relatives who were there. Are they all lying?



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by pshea38
Q. Why does the footage showing the 'controlled demolition' of wtc7 (as seen in the OP)
look fake and of bad quality cgi?
A. Because it is faked and of bad quality cgi!

The perpetrators released fake cgi video to fuel conspiracies (guided by their controlled
truth movements), while the actual buildings were demolished in private!


Seriously, you can't be serious. People were there and witnessed it and still talk about it today. Just because you haven't met them doesn't mean they're fake.

This is one of the biggest cases of denial I've ever seen. What in the world is real to you?



how many of these witnesses have you met vermia?



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by patternfinder

at what point did wtc 7 have a 767 slam into it?


you're right, you just proved that the pile of stupid gets bigger and bigger, thank you for that


And this is where it is repeated... again... that debris from WTC 1 hit WTC 7, starting its fires and influencing its collapse.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by patternfinder
how many of these witnesses have you met varemia?


Personally, I think one (edit: in hindsight, I was meaning someone who was on the ground and saw a plane hit WTC 1. As per the pentagon, I don't specifically know someone.), but I can't remember who, so I don't lend it credibility in my memory. I do know people who know people though. One person in particular had a father who worked in the building (though I can't remember specific details, so again, I can't really offer much).

Still, isn't it kind of far fetched to say that everyone is lying about what happened in New York on 9/11?
edit on 4-10-2011 by Varemia because: (no reason given)


Edit: Blah, I'm kind of tired of mistyping. I think I'll just do my homework for class now.

One final note, though. Tell me, is it easier to fly a real plane into a building (perhaps laden with a bomb or what have you), or is it easier to spend hours of coding and generating CGI and faking witnesses and influencing the media?
edit on 4-10-2011 by Varemia because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 09:32 PM
link   
post removed coz it was pointless
edit on 4-10-2011 by doubleplusungood because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by SavedOne

Originally posted by anoncoholic
One other interesting aspect they don't want you to consider is how come a blow torch doesn't melt? Or the pot on your stove? Nope, they would rather have you believe the obvious lie than see logic.


A torch's flame is outside of the torch, not in it. The gas has to mix with oxygen to burn, so by design this occurs just outside of the tip. The torch itself doesn't get very hot. As for the pots on your stove, burners can go to about 400 degrees and a pot can reach up to 300 degrees. Most pots are made of aluminum which has a melting point of around 1000 degrees. The fires in the WTC were believed to be in the 1800 degree range which is not unusual for a building fire. That would easily melt your aluminum pots thus negating your attempted analogy.

But structural steel has a higher melting point- around 2800 degrees. But the issue isn't at what point steel melts, it's at what point steel deforms (fails). This is largely dependent upon the load on the steel. In the case of the WTC fires, all the buildings had fires well below the top, so there were tremendous loads on the columns and connections at the fire points. The problem was made much more severe because the buildings did not have sprinkler systems, so the steel was only protected by a layer of fireproofing. Fireproofing is only intended to protect steel long enough for egress (exiting) and for firefighters to bring the fire under control. In the case of the WTC buildings, there wasn't enough time for either to occur. The buildings all were built under older codes and if they had had sprinkler systems it's highly unlikely the collapses would have occurred.

Do we have all the answers on why the collapses happened? No, there are some mysteries about it. But the mysteries are because of the strange and unusual forces these buildings were subjected to, there's no precedence for this. We will probably never have all the answers. But not having the answers does not mean there's any kind of conspiracy afoot here.

Personally I always chuckle at people who think our government could pull off something as incredibly complicated as bringing down 3 high-rise buildings in the middle of one of the biggest cities in the nation all within a few hours of each other and without anyone knowing a thing beforehand. This is the same government that is filled with bumbling fools that can't even control their spending or agree on the simplest of resolutions, give me a break! Go to your local DMV and try to get your license renewed, that'll give you some insight into how brilliant and efficient our government is, LOL!


first of all, there were reports of melted steel, this is why the temperature that steel melts is pertinent....second of all, the government had the israeli moosad agency involved who are absolute masters at such things....the government just provided the smoke screen with norad and the faa in order for moosad to bring about this military industrial complex change in america....george bush's little brother marvin provided the other smoke screen via his security company that was contracted to secure the buildings......



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by patternfinder
how many of these witnesses have you met varemia?


Personally, I think one (edit: in hindsight, I was meaning someone who was on the ground and saw a plane hit WTC 1. As per the pentagon, I don't specifically know someone.), but I can't remember who, so I don't lend it credibility in my memory. I do know people who know people though. One person in particular had a father who worked in the building (though I can't remember specific details, so again, I can't really offer much).

Still, isn't it kind of far fetched to say that everyone is lying about what happened in New York on 9/11?
edit on 4-10-2011 by Varemia because: (no reason given)


Edit: Blah, I'm kind of tired of mistyping. I think I'll just do my homework for class now.

One final note, though. Tell me, is it easier to fly a real plane into a building (perhaps laden with a bomb or what have you), or is it easier to spend hours of coding and generating CGI and faking witnesses and influencing the media?
edit on 4-10-2011 by Varemia because: (no reason given)



i haven't heard anyone from new york tell me what they saw so i can't say that anyone is lying....you are assuming that everyone in new york that saw this thing happen are qualifying the official story....this would be stepping out of bounds just as much as you have claimed others have.....plus, i'm not saying that there were no planes....i'm really at a loss when it comes to what really happened, that's why i'm staying as neutral as i can yet tipping further towards demolition.....i can't for the life of me figure out based on the video evidence that has circulated what actuall happened, but i do know the events that happened prior to 9/11 and the agenda that you can still go on PNAC's website today and see, tells a story of sabatoge of the american peoples...
edit on 4-10-2011 by patternfinder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 10:42 PM
link   


Sorry if this has been posted. Here is the monkey wrench in the theory fires caused the collapse.

Have a nice evening everyone.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 11:44 PM
link   
I watched..it was crap. I consider 98% of vids posted on youtube to be nothing but garbage. i don't have to explain anything. You explain to me the usefulness of that video and most of the other so called 'proof' videos'. Then,when you can do that,I'll come back and edit this reply. I won't be holding my breath.



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 12:04 AM
link   
Both sides have arguments and perspectives, but in the end only one story can be the truth. Regardless of the truth it seems to me many questions are left unanswered on this entire event...



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

In Truther World

What are the rules in Truther Physics


Truther world hey, let`s have an in-depth look into your world, and what you believe in.......

1). Seismographic data and the UTC, there were 5 recordings from 9/11 to which one measured 2.3 on the Richter scale an equivalent to 80,000 lbs of Ammonium nitrate being exploded, of these recordings two were around the times of the initial impacts, I say around the times as these recordings preceded the actual impact times, calculated via air traffic control data and I quote - "We have determined that the impact time was 9:03:11 based on our analysis of FAA radar data and air traffic control software logic." It is known that the FAA followed the aircraft using four different radar tracking stations utilizing primary radar return with all times to the second. Radar is based upon microwaves that travel at the speed of light, and therefore an error variance (which is in microseconds) need not be stated.

The seismic spikes relating to the initial impacts were recorded 14 and 17 seconds prior to the North and South towers being hit, there are no reasons whatsoever that these times are incorrect and therefore indicate that something else is responsible for them, is there something else that these recordings can be associated with? you or I was not there, so let`s get some evidence from 38 people whom were there, the most well known of these being William Rodriguez, his story -

`Arriving at 8:30 on the morning of 9-11 he went to the maintenance office located on the first sublevel, one of six sub-basements beneath ground level. There were a total of fourteen people in the office at that same time. As he was discussing the day’s tasks with others, there was a very loud massive explosion which seemed to emanate from between sub-basement B2 and B3. There were an additional twenty-two people on B2 sub-basement who also felt and heard that first explosion.

At first he thought it was a generator that had exploded. But the cement walls in the office cracked from the explosion. "When I heard the sound of the explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated, the walls started cracking and everything started shaking." said Rodriguez, who was crowded together with fourteen other people in the office including Anthony Saltamachia, his supervisor for the American Building Maintenance Company.

Just seconds later there was another explosion way above which made the building oscillate momentarily. This, he was later told, was a plane hitting the Tower at about the 90th floor. Upon hearing about the plane, he immediately thought of the people up in the restaurant. Then there were other explosions just above B1 and individuals started heading for the loading dock to escape the explosion’s resulting rampant fire. When asked later about those first explosions he said: "I would know if an explosion was from the bottom or the top of the building." He heard explosions both before and after the plane hit the Tower.

So, it is safe to say that explosions in and around the basements of both towers were responsible for the seismic spikes, you and I were not there, these 37 along with William Rodriquez were

The number of witnesses who presented evidence of explosion and explosion damage, and particularly the injuries that some witnesses received, again leaves no room for doubt that there were explosions in the basement of WTC1. The following video link of the powerful testimony of William Rodriguez is evidence that corroborates the facts of this recordings; and these facts corroborate these 37 eyewitnesses:

video.google.com...

While the aircraft crashes caused minimal earth shaking, significant earthquakes with unusual spikes occurred at the beginning of each collapse. The Palisades seismic data recorded a 2.1 magnitude earthquake during the 10-second collapse of the South Tower at 9:59:04 and a 2.3 quake during the 8-second collapse of the North Tower at 10:28:31.

You or I are not seismic data analysis experts, let`s see what the experts have to say..

A "sharp spike of short duration" is how seismologist Thorne Lay of Univ. of California at Santa Cruz told AFP an underground nuclear explosion appears on a seismograph.

"The seismic effects of the collapses are comparable to the explosions at a gasoline tank farm near Newark on January 7, 1983," the Palisades Seismology Group reported on Sept. 14, 2001.

One of the seismologists, Won-Young Kim, told AFP that the Palisades seismographs register daily underground explosions from a quarry 20 miles away. These blasts are caused by 80,000 lbs. of ammonium nitrate and cause local earthquakes between Magnitude 1 and 2. Kim said the 1993 truck-bomb at the WTC did not register on the seismographs because it was "not coupled" to the ground.

To be continued......


edit on 5-10-2011 by Seventh because: Typos



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne
In Truther World
What are the rules in Truther Physics


Part 2.

"Experts cannot explain why the seismic waves peaked before the towers hit the ground. Asked about these spikes seismologist Arthur Lerner-Lam, director of Columbia University's Center for Hazards and Risk Research told AFP, "This is an element of current research and discussion. It is still being investigated."

"Only a small fraction of the energy from the collapsing towers was converted into ground motion," Lerner-Lam said. "The ground shaking that resulted from the collapse of the towers was extremely small."

Last November, Lerner-Lam said, "During the collapse, most of the energy of the falling debris was absorbed by the towers and the neighboring structures, converting them into rubble and dust or causing other damage -- but not causing significant ground shaking,"

Evidently, the energy source that shook the ground beneath the towers was many times more powerful than the total potential energy released by the falling mass of the huge towers".

So, here we have just one aspect that cannot be explained by experts, the main points up for debate are the initial two impacts recorded 14 and 17 seconds prior to both impacts and how earthquake status Richter scale recordings which peaked before the towers hit the ground, were made.

Well known facts amongst the seismic hierarchy include - Buildings built to withstand hurricanes etc do not channel kinetic energy from around 1000 feet above ground level to the earth, they absorb it, and, as clearly proven by the lack of seismic data recorded at both the Pentagon and Shanksville that day, a plane crash does not generate enough energy to trigger seismic recordings.

So here we have aspect number one, 38 eye witnesses, seismic data, experts analysis, can you please explain how *Truther Physics* plays it`s part in this aspect?.

2). The B.B.C. and the collapse of WTC7, in your world this is put down to a newsreaders goof, pray tell how a bulletin of this status managed to slip through the stringent protocols of Main Stream News broadcasts?, this is how they work...A news editor receives the news, they check the scoop for authenticity via reliable sources and available evidence endorsing it, they then edit it and load it into the Autocue for the news anchor to then read it, the broadcast that day was relayed to us curtsey of a bulletin that had been previously verified by the news editor and read word by word by the anchor, please explain how and whom was responsible for relaying this bulletin to the B.B.C., it had had to come from somewhere, who?.

3). In your world it is okay for key people to make outrageous mistakes, even though their mistakes point to a bigger picture, let`s start with Rumsfeld and I quote - "Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Centre". and "The people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania.".

By far the biggest in this category is Bush and his initial response to the 1st impact as he states he was sitting in a corridor waiting to enter the classroom and was watching the T.V., after seeing the crash he thought to himself `What a terrible pilot`, we know he must be talking about the 1st crash as when he was told about the 2nd it was completely different circumstances, he was reading to the kids when his chief of staff Andrew Card came in and told him, so what is wrong with his statement?...

A). To this day there is only one captured video footage of the 1st impact and that is by the Naudet brothers, and this film was not released until the following day.

B). There was no T.V. in the area Bush was waiting.

C). And never has been.

Just a few key points that warrant questioning in *our world* but are fully acceptable in yours, a few more..lack of rooftop rescues - `Semendinger and other veteran pilots have stated that rescue from the North Tower roof would have been difficult but possible`, there is absolutely no excuse whatsoever as to why the only viable fire escape possible for those above a fire should be locked it is inexcusable, insider trading and Cindy McCain etc, the Bin Laden tapes and the Swiss voice analyst, 503 first responders ignored by the 9/11 commission, WTC7 not worthy of a mention by the 9/11 commission, Newton's Three Laws of Motion.

If all that and more does not warrant questioning or does not arose suspicions then I for sure am more than happy living in my Truther World with my Truther Physics to keep me warm.


edit on 5-10-2011 by Seventh because: Typos

edit on 5-10-2011 by Seventh because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


Thanks, Seven. As I was reading thru your posts, two people kept coming to mind. Varemia and Dave. For these two to continue to defend the OS is criminal. I don't want to leave anyone out, but these two in particular have been the most vocal lately. It's one thing to be skeptical, even Tupac shows that's possible. But for these two, I feel as though they should be held accountable, to be tried for obstruction of justice, because nobody can possibly be this stupid. We've given them enough rope, they've hung themselves, but they should not be allowed to escape without punishment. If they insist on continuing their charade, I can see no other option.



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed
 


Thanks, Seven. As I was reading thru your posts, two people kept coming to mind. Varemia and Dave. For these two to continue to defend the OS is criminal. I don't want to leave anyone out, but these two in particular have been the most vocal lately. It's one thing to be skeptical, even Tupac shows that's possible. But for these two, I feel as though they should be held accountable, to be tried for obstruction of justice, because nobody can possibly be this stupid. We've given them enough rope, they've hung themselves, but they should not be allowed to escape without punishment. If they insist on continuing their charade, I can see no other option.


Now THIS is probably the biggest reason why I post here. It's one thing for someone to speculate whether there may be government involvement in the 9/11 attack. It's another thing entirely for someone to be such a mindless, unrepentent fanatic that they're seriously considering "punishment" for anyone who disagrees with them.

These damned fool conspiracy web sites have raped the truthers so badly with all this "sinister secret agents constantly plotting to murder us all" crap that they're becoming complete neurotic wrecks from a nonstop diet of abject paranoia, and that's leading some of them to believe the system has been so corrupted that they think they have no alternative but to start taking matter into their own hands. That 9/11 truther who travelled across the entire country specifically to shoot people at the Pentagon a while back illustrates right there that sooner or later, some innocent bystander WILL get killed over this irresponsible foolishness.

You're overlooking the biggest option you can take, Dillweed- get professional help. I'm not saying this to be mean. I'm saying it as a matter of fact. When you carry around so much irrational hate over these conspiracy stories that you think doing bodily harm to strangers you've never met makes perfect sense to you, it ain't mentally healthy. Speculating conspiracy theories on ATS is all just harmless make believe. Someone having to blow your head off with a 12 gauge because you got the idea in your head to track them down where they live to "punish" them is as real world as real world gets.



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by hdutton
 


Different buildings, different circumstances, different results. Not exactly one of the world's great mysteries.


But why doesn't everybody want to know the amount of steel on every level so they can make intelligent comparisons? Great science in the nation that put men on the Moon!

psik



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seventh

So, it is safe to say that explosions in and around the basements of both towers were responsible for the seismic spikes, you and I were not there, these 37 along with William Rodriquez were


William Rodriguez was in the basement himself. If there was any explosion in the basement powerful enough to take out the structural foundation, it would have killed him, too along with everyone else in the basement. The 1993 bombing destroyed the four floors above where the van bomb was placed, killing the people in the area, and even then it wasn't enough to bring the building down.

William Rodriguez testified to the 9/11 commission that fireballs from the impacting plane came down the elevator shaft, pushed the elevator down into the basement, and sevrerely burned the occupant (who Rodriguez subsequently saved). If this shock force was powerful enough to push an elevator down an elevator shaft like a bullet down the barrel of a gun, the shock force was certainly powerful enough to hit the bottom of the elevator shaft like a hammer. This is almost certainly what Rodriguez felt.



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 




Who put the man on the moon?

edit on 5-10-2011 by borutp because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join