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.

 

If 911 is viewed as a crime instead of a terrorist attack, it becomes clear...

page: 20
102
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by bjarneorn
 


I'm sorry, but you're taking my forum shorthand for official statements. When I say 19 Arabs I mean only to distinguish that finding from the background noise in the "truth movement" that seeks to blame everyone from George Bush to secret Israeli spies. If you want to know about the actual ethnography of the 19, do some research. However, you will soon realize the many things they have in common.




posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Here is a very interesting article by Jewish American Max Blumenthal regarding the Zionists implicated in the crimes of 9/11 and how they are active corrupting American politics, specifically the selection of the Republican presidential candidates.

Bibi Netanyahu / Zionist Lobby



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Bjarn - you did not have to nix out everything.

The post was good - we just don't want the mods to delete posts so we have watch the attacks on other members.

Okay?


Originally posted by bjarneorn

Originally posted by hooper

No, the US did not decide it was 19 Arabs then go looking for evidence to prove, that is truther scientific method. They looked at the evidence and concluded that it was 19 Arabs on the planes.



Sorry for my frustration ... I apologize ...

edit on 12/1/2012 by bjarneorn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by BRAVO949
 



I am truly interested in your attempt to prove linguistically that the voice is not a perfect example of a Hebrew accent.

Because no linguist would ever listen to a short and poor recording of someone under stress and then stand around and call it a "perfect" anything. The only people who do that are those with other agendas.

BIN LADEN DID 9/11


Hooper,

Why is it you and the other regular debunkers of 911 threads only attack some parts of the conspiracy theory people present ? You seem to never attempt to debunk the core of the posts. You just go for the low hanging fruit and derail threads by focusing on minute parts of the overall picture that are easy to ague either way.

What is your opinion on the core of the OP ? Is it that hard to connect the dots ? I mean it would be one thing if the person in power at the time of the event never had any connections with any of the countries or people involved but thats not the case. its been proven fact the Bush's and the Saudies/Bin Ladins have ties for a very long time.

www.hermes-press.com...

Whats is your opinion on the Bush family and its connections to JFK, RFK, Regan attempted Cou and 911 ?





edit on 12-1-2012 by WhereAreTheGoodguys because: Because I'm not good at english and I'm english.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by WhereAreTheGoodguys
 


Why even try? Hooper isn't here for the truth.

Hooper is here to defend his country right or wrong.

Hooper is a hundred percenter.

If you want to be "debunked", then hooper is your man. It matters not whether you have credible evidence. Just think of him as your obsessive compulsive detractor who can always be relied upon to demolish everything you say regardless of evidentiary merit.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
Hey Snow - if Israel lied about what we see in the video below why can we not agree taht they lied about their role in 9/11?




Originally posted by snowcrash911
reply to post by WhereAreTheGoodguys
 


Why even try? Hooper isn't here for the truth.

Hooper is here to defend his country right or wrong.

Hooper is a hundred percenter.

If you want to be "debunked", then hooper is your man. It matters not whether you have credible evidence. Just think of him as your obsessive compulsive detractor who can always be relied upon to demolish everything you say regardless of evidentiary merit.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst


Oh please. Demolitions don't actually fall at freefall speed, because you are using the weight of the floors above -- the PHYSICS however, of a FreeFall would require more of the mass to hit the floors below.



So why do Truthers keep saying the buildings collapsed at freefall and that is proof of demolitions?




Because BOTH of you are wrong and right. It isn't exactly free-fall, and there is NO POSSIBLE WAY for a natural collapse without removing the supporting structure to happen as fast as we saw it.

Like I said -- in a DEMOLITION, the floor's support is removed -- at THAT MOMENT, that particular floor is moving downward at "freefall speed" -- it's energy is used to crush the next floor and AT THAT MOMENT, the next floor is detonated and it starts to fall at "FREEFALL speed."

So 9.8 meters per second/ per second falling about 12 feet reaches a certain speed. Technically, it is FREEFALL SPEED -- just not freefall from the top of the building reaching critical velocity. So, are you READY to figure out the speed of decent for a top-down DEMOLITION would be at the WTC?
Assume one floor is 12 ft, average sea-level gravity (it's in Manhattan island so we are safe here), and ZERO starting velocity we get; 0.8639727748635776s for one floor to drop -- so just shy of a second.

For a Pancake collapse, each floor would have to defeat the load bearing structure below it -- WIND could not accomplish this.

With 110 Floors, a PANCAKE collapse then, would treat each floor as the start, without fancy calculus, we can add the time per floor. There are many factors that could slow down or speed up this collapse. The increasing force towards the bottom would increase the rate as each progressive floor were hit, and the time of force translation into the lower floor would add time.

But it pencils out to about 95 seconds. A FAST pancake collapse might take around 60 seconds. Up do 90 but no less than 45.

An object dropped without resistance from the top of the 1368 ft structure reaches the ground in 9.22470492484305s -- let's say 9 seconds.

The ACTUAL rate we saw on September 11, 2001; 10 to 15 seconds. Consensus seems to be 13 seconds.
>> Now WHICH end of the Newtonian and Engineering physics principles are getting stretched here for you to say that "free fall" skeptics are a bunch of fools?

If you had NO vertical supports between floors, then merely the "unfolding" of the curtain wall might get you to 13 seconds in a "house of cards" type collapse. If there were shaped charges on vertical supports and the core were taken out -- well, then this would facilitate the requirement for NO VERTICAL SUPPORTS between floors. WTC 7 did not have the load-bearing curtain wall -- so this super-fast pancake isn't possible with ANY sort of physics model I've heard of.

When people see a demolition -- this is what they see, and they intrinsically connect that with what we all saw at the WTC.

Perhaps you have some background in Religious Faith, or you just take things for granted because a lot of people told you -- I do not know why YOU don't see it. But I love figuring things out, love science, and I never take any FACT for granted. A lot of smart people are very much influenced by what people around them say -- and unfortunately, I was born with a deformity in my brain that makes me incapable of believing things I do not prove to myself.

FYI: I do however, believe in a Higher being -- based only on evolution and science concepts, and not one that bails people out because they pray.

>> Without the math, some people have some horse sense to believe their lying eyes. With math, we can realize that the pancake collapse doesn't add up.

>>>> I'm done with the tit-for-tat "EVIDENCE" discussion on 9/11. Basically, the most corrupt administration in American history told us we were attacked, and then proceeded to attack two countries with little involvement in the attack and committed war crimes. We are debating information that was cherry picked by this same administration, and whenever possible, they provided the experts to examine the evidence.

I can point to numerous cronies that Bush put in place in all the agencies that WERE involved, but we cannot know what any person can do in any given situation.

The Bush Crime Family may not be guilty of 9/11 but they ruined the crime scene, and I KNOW that the WTC did not have a collapse due to a fire on the 80th floor. Our country has continued to push towards Fascist laws. So I remain unconvinced that such a government WOULDN'T commit such a False Flag until they can go back in time and NOT behave like criminals.

I agree there is a lot of junk conspiracies, like the idea that these were not airplanes -- because I don't think BushCo would CARE about killing citizens if it meant they could get caught.

Bin Laden might have done it -- but it doesn't really matter
edit on 13-1-2012 by VitriolAndAngst because: quote error



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by bjarneorn
 



The US decided it were 19 arabs, and never looked at any other scenario.

No, the US did not decide it was 19 Arabs then go looking for evidence to prove, that is truther scientific method. They looked at the evidence and concluded that it was 19 Arabs on the planes.

Even when some of those on the list, were found to be alive ... they still stuck with the same list.

They were never found to be alive. That's an oldie but goodie.

All were arabs, and muslim ... that is called "RACISM" and not crime investigation.

Uh, so if the evidence points to Arabs or Muslims we can't go after them because its racist?

A crime investigation means you have to prove 3 different points.
MEANS, MOTIVE and OPPORTUNITY

You've been watching way too much Law & Order. If I'm a prosecutor I don't have to prove motive. Means and oppurtunity are meaningless without direct evidence.



>> I question how QUICKLY the Government decided it was Al Qaeda and who were the terrorists.

By the next day -- we KNEW it was Al Qaeda -- right after BushCo acted so surprised. It bolsters the argument that EITHER they made it up, or someone was warning them about Al Qaeda.

Bush should have been impeached that week for criminal negligence -- rank incompetence. Other than rigging an election and giving no-bid contracts to friends their administration showed no competency at governance, defense, security or diplomacy in the 8 years they were in office. The ONLY defense that Deniars can come up with for 9/11 is that Bush was incompetent.

There are reasonable people who believe the 9/11 story and think that Bush was a screw up. I disagree -- but I only have a problem with people who are BOTH apologists and try to say everyone with questions is a conspiracy theorist. When the government lies -- all you've GOT is theory. Otherwise you are a sucker.

>> So the stories of ignoring FBI warnings, Pakistani intelligence, and other security warnings at top levels MAY have been true...

>> The only scenario for BushCo not having prior warnings seems even worse; they looked on a CIA watch list for the names of people who had entered the country. They had to have enough to make it plausible and then every arab-looking man who stepped on these airplanes was one of these "suspects" -- automatically.

This doesn't mean they planned what happened and some decent but morally challenged people in Government can might be convinced to conduct a CYA story. Maybe only after the fact did they realize they were part of it.

The result; we quickly got the names of 19 hijackers, and some of these people ended up being alive and not knowing what the heck we were talking about -- not everyone on a WATCH LIST would be guilty, after all. This explains how such educated people from different countries could come together on such a tight-knit operation -- the Administration wanted to LOOK like it knew what was going on, so instead of bothering to really know who the dead terrorists were, they just made up a plausible story.

FOR INSTANCE: if the hijackers were caucasians from the US --- everything we saw could have happened exactly the same as it did. Arab men appear on other airplane flights. Where is the causal connection and the hotels they stayed in information? Abandoned in some cases, as the Atta in Jupiter Florida visiting hookers the night before the attack didn't mesh with the Muslim extremist meme. Anyone but me remember that?

>> This CYA situation, neither proves nor denies the 911 conspiracies. It just explains some of the contradictions. The Deniars always talk about how you could NEVER get hundreds of people to coordinate such a thing and keep their mouths shut -- but in fact, most of the people innocently did just that -- just on human nature. You either adopt the consensus story and go on working -- or bring the ire of a nation, several security agencies, and risk your life and reputation to admit that maybe you didn't find that ID where you said you did. Even when NOT part of a terrorist plot -- people fudge the facts all the time when something really bad happens -- a good investigation would have cleared these inconstancies up -- but the one we got was to "Bush" friendly to really do that. They were directed NOT to record any testimony that conflicted.

>> How does a coverup play out innocently?
Some people at the CIA said; "Sure, will give you all the middle eastern suspects that entered the US between such and such dates."

The security agent scanning videos at airports says; "Sure, well give you every arab-looking person who enters these planes."

The flight manifests might need to be doctored, or they just grabbed the arab sounding names FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUNTRY and got someone at the CIA to say they were on a watch list -- all you need in a scam is one weak link. Usually, I'll go with someone at the CIA as they've got a history of doing dirty work (it's got good guys and bad guys in different departments). Afterward, they shut up because now someone made them complicit, they don't know who and they have a family and bills to pay.

What we saw in the Bush administration and the INVESTIGATION was "compartmentalization." Only the coordinator or person in charge needs to be corrupt. Hard working people looking at tensile strength of girders don't know what everyone else is doing, or if their data is used.

Conspiracies happen all the time -- organically. The less transparency the more organic material available.

If would only take about 2 dozen people in our government to MAKE IT HAPPEN or LET IT HAPPEN, and if you think more, than how did 19 foreign people without access make it happen? I don't think Allah is on anyone's side.

These strange coincidences are not proof for or against 9/11 -- but I just want people to have some perspective. Things EVOLVE -- the mastermind behind 9/11 doesn't have to plug every whole, CYA will do it for him.
edit on 13-1-2012 by VitriolAndAngst because: grammar error



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by BRAVO949
 


I tend to think the Mossad did NOT play a role in 9/11 -- and it's not because they couldn't have or would not have. It's a lot of other things that made NO SENSE for a long time for me while Bush was in office.

The "dancing Arabs" incident, where some Israelis agents were caught and let go (wow, and someone thinks AIPAC has no power in Washington?), doesn't seem consistent with a group engineering the attack. As you can see; they were caught. They made the operation MORE DANGEROUS.

What I think they were doing is what I think the Mossad USUALLY does in the USA; collecting dirt. They were videotaping the attack, and something they caught in their cameras (maybe they were using infrared, UV, acoustic,..) made them very excited that they got the DIRT! The dancing afterwards was because they now had enough to make the Bush administration their errand boys.

So when they get caught, does the normal AIPAC influence get someone who looks like suspects off the hook with no questions? How does anyone who agrees with the Bush government theory of 9/11 explain how you would just let these guys walk WITHOUT DETAINING THEM?

>> What do I think might have happened? They got caught. The other Mossad agents who got back with the video tape (they either took a separate route or they used wireless to upload the video), told someone at a high level of the Bush administration (or shows them with a video clip on an email) what they got with thermal imaging that perhaps might arouse the interest of the American Public. The BushCo member than quietly pees his pants, and calls the people holding the Israelis agents to let them go with an apology and a gift basket.

>>>> The OTHER reasons I think Mossad wasn't involved is complicated.
Before 9/11, the Bush political family had horrible relations with Israel. If anyone BOTHERS to check their memories they can confirm this with a little searching. A few months before 9/11, Bush Jr. is on a golf course and after there is some big blow up on the Left Bank, he says to the reporter; "I don't think Israel is doing enough about their security problems." I gulped. I figured right then and there that they might be pissed off enough to show Bush what a real security problem was.

I remember Pappy Bush criticizing the Clinton administration for have TOO STRONG a relationship with Israel. It wasn't just Pat Buchanan that was slightly put off by Jewish people -- but somewhere along the way, since the '80s to the 21st century -- I don't know if it was bank money or well positioned cameras -- the Republicans became the PRO ISRAEL party. Today, it's as if they have ALWAYS been best buddies.


>> Bush Jr. had strong ties going way back with the Saudis. And it SEEMED at the time that the Saudis and Israelis were natural rivals. Today, I think they are "frenemies." For the same reason that I think we will always be spoiling for a fight with Iran but it will never happen.


>> IN A NUTSHELL -- Bush was NOT buddies with the Israel before 9/11 and was aligned with Saudis. If the Mossad did it -- then BushCo may have had to cover that up, but they would want to move to retaliate somehow. The EVIDENCE would not point to BushCo. However, if BushCo were guilty, and the Mossad had proof -- then they would have them by the short hairs.

What we saw after 9/11 was a huge change in world policy. The US seemed to do everything on Israel's wish list (and Bin Laden's/the Saudis).

It could be that the Project for a New American Century, however, is in someway connected to AIPAC. PNAC and their NeoCons gophers are basically the Bush Administration, staffed with go-along fundamentalists right out of Liberty University or full of bright ideas from the Heritage Foundation, ready to ruin Iraq's economy with supply side theories and incompetence.

So I could see some natural overlap that could lead many to suspect the Mossad.

>> But just as the Bankers and the Wall Street tycoons might mostly go to a Synagog, I don't think this background has ANY CONTROL over their totally self-serviing egomaniacal behavior.

Eventually, the US and Israel are going to get blowback for SOMETHING they've done --but the Bankers and BushCo operatives and terrorist hedge fund managers in Dubai will be enjoying a cocktail on some private island when it does.

It's useless to connect things to a country, when we've got names like George Bush, Hank Paulson and the like. George Bush is NOT a Texan, by the way.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Dear V and A,

Agreed Bush is not a Texan. Even if he was a Texan his main attribute would still be "straight up idiot."

Which is my counter argument to your claim.

You do have good points and they have validity but I think you are underestimating the power of the Zionist Lobby in its strangle hold on Congress and the Administration on one end of the equation.

The crimes of 9/11 took years to plan. I hope you agree with that. 9/11 was the biggest most successful covert / false flag operation in history and was a masterpiece even though they skrewed up several subparts.

Unless you want to argue with that fact (in my view) then whoever planned the deed had to be able to pull it off whether Gore or Bush or anyone idiot got into power and I don't think it was a sure bet that idiot GW was going to be president.

Bush was a stand-in and every president has been since Kennedy and maybe Kennedy was a stand-in too.

I feel you are thinking a president has a say in policy. I don't think they do, now. I know they did, to some degree, in LBJ's day because I have listened to several of the tapes he recorded of his daily activities.

But George is just too much of an idiot to have made any decisions and no one would allow him to - I hope.

Would you let him operate a forklift around you, for example? I don't think so.

So the Likud faction of the Republican party were runing the show from the start regardless of GW or his dad's view of Israel. Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith, Joshua Bolton, Wurmzer - all those dual citizens were calling the shots not the play-acting Texan.

You can call the guys mentioned above Americans if you want but to me that are not. They are part of the Atlantic spanning Zionist machine and Bush was their puppet.

I don't think that the real center of power would trust "Americans" to pull off the crime of 9/11 and they used Sayeret Matkal and the Mossad but the hardcore work was probably done by men who kill with out hesitation and that is commando unit types, Sayeret Matkal.

The other end is that there is no doubt Zionists were a major part of the cover up and they did a good job of it.
edit on 13-1-2012 by BRAVO949 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by BRAVO949
Hey Snow - if Israel lied about what we see in the video below why can we not agree taht they lied about their role in 9/11?





Hey BRAVO949!

Since Germany lied about what we see in the video below, why can we not agree that Germany orchestrated 9/11?




posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 




The "dancing Arabs" incident, where some Israelis agents were caught and let go (wow, and someone thinks AIPAC has no power in Washington?), doesn't seem consistent with a group engineering the attack. As you can see; they were caught. They made the operation MORE DANGEROUS.


Let go...?

Were deported after 10 weeks of intensive and not too gentle interrogations by the FBI


The law suit alleges that law enforcement officers and officials of the Bureau of Prisons unlawfully incarcerated them for an extended period of time and violated their civil rights during their more than two month imprisonment in the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) in 2001. The four plaintiffs claim that they were held incommunicado without access to attorneys or family, subjected to rough interrogations, physically assaulted, deprived of sleep and subjected to racists taunting by guards.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Schniemann,

So what happened at Dachau, bitte?

Can you give a very brief summary for us because I don't think you really know and what you think you know might be wrong.

And ThedMan - this line warms mein heart.

"intensive and not too gentle interrogations by the FBI"

Poor little Zionists were uncomfortable - they could have shot them on site for espionage. Good thing my Uncle Karl was not part of the interrogations.
edit on 13-1-2012 by BRAVO949 because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-1-2012 by BRAVO949 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by BRAVO949
Schniemann,

So what happened at Dachau, bitte?

Can you give a very brief summary for us because I don't think you really know and what you think you know might be wrong.


Let me unequivocally clear. I have suspected you were this sort of person all along, and now you've confirmed my suspicions. I have nothing but contempt for Holocaust deniers and Neo-Nazis, and I am not going to discuss this subject with you at all.

Shame on you. Shame on you for your ignorance, your racially motivated Jew hatred and your pitiful attempts to shoehorn 9/11 into your delusional bigotry.

There is HUGE difference between comtemplating possible Israeli involvement in 9/11 and the sort of dreck you're peddling.

Ich kann gar nicht so viel fressen wie ich kotzen möchte.
edit on 13-1-2012 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   
You should say you are sorry to everyone on here because that video you supplied has been debunked as pure WWII propaganda.

There were not homicidal gas chambers in Dachau and no serious historian claims there were - now.

Go look up the facts.

Those thin bodies are of people who died of typhus.

If you really don't know that and are from The Netherlands then what in the world is wrong with you or doyou chose to remain ignorant of real history.


Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by BRAVO949
Schniemann,

So what happened at Dachau, bitte?

Can you give a very brief summary for us because I don't think you really know and what you think you know might be wrong.


Let me unequivocally clear. I have suspected you were this sort of person all along, and now you've confirmed my suspicions. I have nothing but contempt for Holocaust deniers and Neo-Nazis, and I am not going to discuss this subject with you at all.

Shame on you. Shame on you for your ignorance, your racially motivated Jew hatred and your pitiful attempts to shoehorn 9/11 into your delusional bigotry.

There is HUGE difference between comtemplating possible Israeli involvement in 9/11 and the sort of dreck you're peddling.

Ich kann gar nicht so viel fressen wie ich kotzen möchte.
edit on 13-1-2012 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 09:23 PM
link   
The voice on the recording of what the official story called the lead hijacker was a Hebew accent and you know it.

It looks like you are the one who has been tricked, caught out and exposed.

I think everyone can see your true personality.

You seem so angry when proved wrong.


Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by BRAVO949
Schniemann,

So what happened at Dachau, bitte?

Can you give a very brief summary for us because I don't think you really know and what you think you know might be wrong.


Let me unequivocally clear. I have suspected you were this sort of person all along, and now you've confirmed my suspicions. I have nothing but contempt for Holocaust deniers and Neo-Nazis, and I am not going to discuss this subject with you at all.

Shame on you. Shame on you for your ignorance, your racially motivated Jew hatred and your pitiful attempts to shoehorn 9/11 into your delusional bigotry.

There is HUGE difference between comtemplating possible Israeli involvement in 9/11 and the sort of dreck you're peddling.

Ich kann gar nicht so viel fressen wie ich kotzen möchte.
edit on 13-1-2012 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 10:31 PM
link   
I don't find it all strange that a Holocaust denying Jew hater would think Mohamed Atta is a Jew, and fabricates a second lie about a Hebrew accent to justify the first lie.

ZIHOP is baseless, you have proven nothing and your quest to "prove" Israel did 9/11 is fruitless.

And you know that. You'll never get your way, your fringe beliefs will always be relegated to the bin, where they belong.

Now that must be really frustrating.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst

Because BOTH of you are wrong and right. It isn't exactly free-fall, and there is NO POSSIBLE WAY for a natural collapse without removing the supporting structure to happen as fast as we saw it.

Like I said -- in a DEMOLITION, the floor's support is removed -- at THAT MOMENT, that particular floor is moving downward at "freefall speed" -- it's energy is used to crush the next floor and AT THAT MOMENT, the next floor is detonated and it starts to fall at "FREEFALL speed."

So 9.8 meters per second/ per second falling about 12 feet reaches a certain speed. Technically, it is FREEFALL SPEED -- just not freefall from the top of the building reaching critical velocity. So, are you READY to figure out the speed of decent for a top-down DEMOLITION would be at the WTC?
Assume one floor is 12 ft, average sea-level gravity (it's in Manhattan island so we are safe here), and ZERO starting velocity we get; 0.8639727748635776s for one floor to drop -- so just shy of a second.

For a Pancake collapse, each floor would have to defeat the load bearing structure below it -- WIND could not accomplish this.

With 110 Floors, a PANCAKE collapse then, would treat each floor as the start, without fancy calculus, we can add the time per floor. There are many factors that could slow down or speed up this collapse. The increasing force towards the bottom would increase the rate as each progressive floor were hit, and the time of force translation into the lower floor would add time.

But it pencils out to about 95 seconds. A FAST pancake collapse might take around 60 seconds. Up do 90 but no less than 45.

An object dropped without resistance from the top of the 1368 ft structure reaches the ground in 9.22470492484305s -- let's say 9 seconds.

The ACTUAL rate we saw on September 11, 2001; 10 to 15 seconds. Consensus seems to be 13 seconds.
>> Now WHICH end of the Newtonian and Engineering physics principles are getting stretched here for you to say that "free fall" skeptics are a bunch of fools?

If you had NO vertical supports between floors, then merely the "unfolding" of the curtain wall might get you to 13 seconds in a "house of cards" type collapse. If there were shaped charges on vertical supports and the core were taken out -- well, then this would facilitate the requirement for NO VERTICAL SUPPORTS between floors. WTC 7 did not have the load-bearing curtain wall -- so this super-fast pancake isn't possible with ANY sort of physics model I've heard of.

When people see a demolition -- this is what they see, and they intrinsically connect that with what we all saw at the WTC.

Perhaps you have some background in Religious Faith, or you just take things for granted because a lot of people told you -- I do not know why YOU don't see it. But I love figuring things out, love science, and I never take any FACT for granted. A lot of smart people are very much influenced by what people around them say -- and unfortunately, I was born with a deformity in my brain that makes me incapable of believing things I do not prove to myself.

FYI: I do however, believe in a Higher being -- based only on evolution and science concepts, and not one that bails people out because they pray.

>> Without the math, some people have some horse sense to believe their lying eyes. With math, we can realize that the pancake collapse doesn't add up.

>>>> I'm done with the tit-for-tat "EVIDENCE" discussion on 9/11. Basically, the most corrupt administration in American history told us we were attacked, and then proceeded to attack two countries with little involvement in the attack and committed war crimes. We are debating information that was cherry picked by this same administration, and whenever possible, they provided the experts to examine the evidence.
.



This, sir, is perhaps one of the most epic posts I've seen on ATS, ever, period. Great analysis and description that explains your position brilliantly without attacking the other poster.
edit on 13-1-2012 by v1rtu0s0 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
 


Except, I don't understand this comment:


WTC 7 did not have the load-bearing curtain wall -- so this super-fast pancake isn't possible with ANY sort of physics model I've heard of.


WTC 7 did have a load bearing perimeter carrying roughly 50% of the gravity load, and the curtain wall was firmly attached to it. The curtain wall doesn't "float".

So, I don't quite understand what is meant in the WTC 7 quote above.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by BRAVO949

those thin bodies are of people who died of typhus.



Oh well that's all right then. I thought they were people who had been grossly abused; silly me.



new topics

top topics



 
102
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join