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.

 

FIVE QUESTIONS: The Twin Towers and a Controlled Demonlition: HOW?

page: 25
14
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by ANGELA11
 


Soon they'll be showing you pictures of Kamikazes and of plywood pierced palm trees. Anything but honesty.


edit on 9-12-2011 by septic because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by vipertech0596
 


How is it clear to you the collapse started at the point of impact? There is nothing that shows you where the collapse began. The collapse could have started at any of the floors with explosives. You are talking about what you see on the outside. Twenty floors could have collapsed on the inside seconds before the facade ruptured. The whole core of the building could have and probably did disintegrate seconds before the facade ruptured.

How does it add more mass on the way down? The mass was already there. There is no weight added to the building. The north tower was tilted. It went straight down. The north tower should have fallen over but the building collapsed underneath the point of impact.



posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   
Only in bizarro 9/11 truther world, could someone state that an aluminum airplane cannot damage steel....and then the same someone complain when people post pictures of the holes in STEEL warships, made by ALUMINUM planes.

Again, to the topic at hand, no evidence of controlled demolition. No traces of det cord, no remains of blasting caps, no remains of encrypted radio receivers necessary for a wireless demolition, no string of explosions that would indicate the setting off of demolition charges (which, would be quite a few...thousands...for a 110 story building, no seismograph indications of said explosions.... And yes, for a CD of that size, there would be literally thousands of charges going on in a timed sequence, not the boom......bang........crash..............boom that was heard coming from the flammable objects inside the towers.

And in the face of this we have allegations of super secret hush a boom military thermite compounds...................which would STILL leave wiring etc.... Of which, NONE was found by any of the police officers, federal agents and assorted other workers who spent years going through the debris from the WTC.



posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ANGELA11
 


There is VERY clear video from NYPD helicopters showing the collapse starting at the impact points.....accompanied with the audio from the crews prior to the collapse saying "Hey, I think that building is going to collapse"

It isnt hard to find, you see the tops of both buildings drop...right at the impact zones.



posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by vipertech0596
 


How does the building collapse at the point of impact, with every column failing with no push or pull on any side of the building to fall straight down? It's impossible. The core alone should have had enough strength for there to be a push effect on the collapsing floors. It's impossible. What should have remained is at least half of the buildings while the collapsing floors spilled over. There was nothing but dust, steel and rubble.

The buildings were demolished.
edit on 10-12-2011 by ANGELA11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by ANGELA11
 


And again, a severe lack of knowledge of the facts. The reason why NYPD started radioing the buildings were going to collapse was that the helos could see the buckling, which was indicating the failures of the trusses.......which you just posted, did not exist.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:15 AM
link   

edit on 10-12-2011 by ANGELA11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:19 AM
link   
reply to post by ANGELA11
 


Umm, okay,,,,which hollywood fantasy are you watching? Your last post, made less than no sense....



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596

Again, to the topic at hand, no evidence of controlled demolition. No traces of det cord, no remains of blasting caps, no remains of encrypted radio receivers necessary for a wireless demolition, no string of explosions that would indicate the setting off of demolition charges (which, would be quite a few...thousands...for a 110 story building,

And in the face of this we have allegations of super secret hush a boom military thermite compounds...................which would STILL leave wiring etc.... Of which, NONE was found by any of the police officers, federal agents and assorted other workers who spent years going through the debris from the WTC.




Considering the evidence was shipped away at lightning speed, it's hard to justify your claims. Also, you can't prove that these people found nothing. I'm sure whatever they found was immediately handed over to 'authorities'.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by ANOK
 


And this is said by the person who's so sure it's melted steel. You're a hypocrite and you know it.


What are you talking about? Where did I say I'm sure it's melted steel?

All I pointed out was the counter argument to it being 'aluminum' or 'lead', and the fact that it would be an amazing coincidence for other materials to make the 'aluminum/lead' bright red like melting steel. Sorry you failed to comprehend that.

What else could it be varemia?

So I can take your reply as an admittance you have no proof, and it is simply a common opinion of OS supporters, that you repeat without ever having really thought about it?

Another question to ponder, if it was simply melted aluminum, or lead, why is it not just pouring down and instead looks more like this?...



?



?



So, a bit more to answer than just why it's bright orange huh?



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
 


Lightning speed? There is still some of it sitting in the landfill they took it to.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
 


Lightning speed? There is still some of it sitting in the landfill they took it to.



You mean the one in China, or the locked room full of evidence?



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


Well you see, what had happened was...


*Look around the room nervously*

*Knocks a cup off the table and runs...*




posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
 


No....that would be at Fresh Kills. There is also a bunch at JFK. And while we are at it, the whole "they shipped it all to China" is crap. Some went there....AFTER it was checked, some went to Louisiana, Indiana, Pennsylvania....v



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by NotPsyOpsed
 


Ninety some feet wide is a small hole? Not to mention, flight 77 only went through TWO exterior walls.



Yes, "NOT" to mention. so get over it, there was only a flyover, by a passenger jet.

Stop fooling you`r mind. The P - 700 missile went thru 3 rings.

90 feet ? ..................lol......lol....!!!


911review.com...



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by NotPsyOpsed
 


No, the Pentagon has a floor plan whereby the bottom two floors from the E to the C-ring were continuous: AA 77 had to pass through two walls only. What you see from above are light wells; only one of which reaches the ground, the one in between ring C and ring B.



This is a common misconception.

EDIT: I may have misunderstood you; the link you cite shows the exact diagram I posted (and I should have known, as both sites are run by Gregg Roberts & the Hoffman family) which BTW, is a crudely colored in version of figure 2.10 (Pg. 8) of the Pentagon Building Performance Report.
edit on 10-12-2011 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 05:51 AM
link   
As for the answers to why those buildings came down.. it make take another five years, but you will see some answers. It won't be from NIST, it won't be from Bažant, and it won't be from AE911Truth.
edit on 10-12-2011 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by NotPsyOpsed
 


Ninety some feet wide is a small hole? Not to mention, flight 77 only went through TWO exterior walls.


Two exterior walls! UN believable!



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Originally posted by vipertech0596

...explosions that would indicate the setting off of demolition charges (which, would be quite a few...thousands...for a 110 story building, no seismograph indications of said explosions.... And yes, for a CD of that size, there would be literally thousands of charges going on in a timed sequence, not the boom......bang........crash..............boom that was heard coming from the flammable objects inside the towers.


I already countered this assumption you're making, on page 2. But I will try again...

You are an intelligent person, I can tell by the way you carry yourself. HOWEVER,
Please take a step back and have a normal conversation with me here.
We both admit the towers fell, right. You and I agree that they fell all the way down, both of them. Starting at the crash holes. That was real, not a hologram. The towers are gone.
OK, so what you are saying is that they fell WITHOUT the help whatsoever of anything but GRAVITY pulling on the building, in ways it hadn't previously pulled because of damaged support beams and weakened sections caused by heat.

BUT, in order for a controlled demolition to work, THOUSANDS of charges would have been needed covering the entire building...and so on.

How does that even remotely make sense?
You think they fell without aid, BUT IF they were to have been aided with cutter charges, 1000's would be needed. But by your logic, wouldn't it be fair to say ONE or TWO floors could have been rigged and given you the same result?

No charges = Total global complete collapse is possible.
BUT
Demo charges = Impossible without the complete building covered in findable explosives.

I DONT UNDERSTAND! You just can't have it both ways.

And top that all off with the fact that you possess not one shred of evidence that the resulting pile of rubble was caused by gravity alone. Unless I'm wrong and you have informations that you have not been forthcoming with. Like diagrams showing what was happening throughout the building during each second of total collapse. Or computer models confirming the physical event.
If you don't have this proof then you must admit you are making an assumption that the buildings were un-aided during collapse. An idea floated to you by your Gov't and your Media without you seeing a shred of evidence personally.

Where am I wrong?



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


First off, in response to the post about the fire, you obviously don't know that office fires are hot. Secondly, you seem to still be under the delusion that the entire building must be weakened in order for a collapse to be possible. Since a high rise of a similar design to the towers has never been hit by an airliner or allowed to burn on an upper floor, it seems somewhat of a strong assumption you make about the strength of the floors. The floors on fire in the towers weren't intact either. That's how you have the possibility of an initiation of collapse. If you've seen pictures of the impact hole, on at least one tower you can see inside where the trusses have been knocked loose on like half the floor. That transfers weight loads to the remaining columns, and then fire did the rest.

So you know I'm not just talking out of my ass, here's a link to a nice site all about office fires:

www.drj.com...


Other avenues of internal fire spread are long narrow chases, chutes, raceways and dumbwaiters for piping, conduit, grouped wiring, trash removal and laundry transfer.
Atria provide a massive chimney effect, and heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) ducts can circulate smoke, heat and toxic gases to large areas remote from the fire.
As if that’s not enough cause for concern, consider that even the most basic construction elements of a high-rise can contribute to overall fire damage. Structural steel rapidly loses strength as its temperature exceeds 1,000 F and localized collapse is likely, making adequate fire protection of such structural elements essential.


Now, with your comment about the material dripping from the tower, how would you expect it to NOT be diluted? It's in an office building for cripes sake.

But, since you don't think aluminum ever glows for some reason, here's a picture of some non-diluted aluminum:



Do you see that it's glowing where the fire is? Also, watch the video from the tower again. As the molten metal drips down (and it could be lead too, since that floor is where UPS was storing a ton of lead batteries), it sparkles. Seriously, watch it closely. Does molten steel cool that quickly?

Edit: For reference, I got the picture here:
forums.bit-tech.net...
edit on 10-12-2011 by Varemia because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join