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.

 

New Footage 9/11 Second Tower Explosion Incredibly Clear Video From Helicopter - Where Is The Plane?

page: 31
106
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by LightSpeedDriver
 


Come on now, let stop with this extreme see-saw effect of "its gotta be one or the other" and thats it. I really wish that Truthers would stop that and start thinking critically and rationally, but when I see comments like this, oh boy.

Was there substandard fireproofing in the WTC buildings? Yes, and it was documented and noted. Does that mean there was NO fireproofing anywhere in the building? No. Why do you have to make it one or the other, and not something in between?

This fireproofing is still there, especially when you have 110 acres, thin or thick, it is still going to turn to dust when dislodged and crushed and blown out by the crush of floors forcing air out everywhere.

Also, the steel wasnt just carted away rapidly. The clean up took months and months, and a lot of the steel went to Fresh Kills landfill. You see, I can tell you got your information from those dammned fool conspiracy sites, which are 99% based on lies, half-truths, innuendos and twists, not to mention healthy doses of personal incredulity smeared all over.
edit on 3/15/2012 by GenRadek because: extra stuff




posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by samkent
 


I was referring to the arguement that the truth movement is insignificant and disappears when you Osiffers turn off the computer



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by samkent
 


I was referring to the arguement that the truth movement is insignificant and disappears when you Osiffers turn off the computer


You don't even have to turn off the computer. If you look back through the threads you'll find a poll where even on this forum they couldn't get better than, I think, 80% that think 9/11 was an "inside job"! I mean, if you can't muster better than 80% here, what do you think it looks like in the wider world??



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by Danbones
 


Danbones, if only you knew what the 9/11 Commission was for. Its only been repeated ad nauseum hundreds of times by people like me and others, and yet, you guys still cannot get it right. I mean, get with the program chief.

I guess I have to again, straighten out the FACTS:

9/11 Commission was to investigate the events leading up to 9/11, the response during 9/11, and what transpired after 9/11. It was to investigate the intelligence failures, inter-agency rivalry, bureaucratic red-tape, incompetence, and many other missed, ignored, or unreported red-flags. It was to investigate how the responded to the attacks, the emergency procedures that went into effect, and how well the emergency services worked, and what failed.

Yeah, if you look at it like that, I do believe we weren't told the whole story. I want to know who fouled up, dropped the ball, and caused the deaths of over 3000 US citizens. Let us be honest, do YOU want to be the one to take the blame for 9/11?

Let me repeat this as well for those hard of hearing:
the 9/11 Commission was NOT responsible for investigating the impact, fires and collapse of the WTC buildings. That was left to ASCE and NIST and FEMA.


facts

not in any of the investigation you just mentioned apparently

The government spent more money on the Monika Lewinski investigation then they did on 911.
If you intend to construe 911 is only about questionable physics completely devoid of context, its only because context completely impeaches the OS on every level you care to examine, while ignoring tha actual physics

should I say the slower and louder?

There is enough testimony to the malfesance of the OS supporters in the 911 commisioners complaints and observations of the process, to completely negate any possible trust in any facet of the OS investigations into 911.
ergo the miniscule percentage nationaly and world wide of OS "Believers"


The ASCE/FEMA Investigation
Incredibly, no investigation was funded as the site was cleaned up. A group of volunteers from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), many of whom had also participated in the Oklahoma City bombing investigation, started an investigation with limited resources. FEMA eventually took over the ASCE's investigation, and named it the Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT). Months after the attack, frustrations with failures of the investigation were expressed in a congressional hearing.



you've seen one cover up, you have seen them all



NIST's Investigation
It was not until long after the Ground Zero clean-up was completed that an investigation with a multi-million dollar budget began: NIST's 'Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation' was funded with an initial budget of $16 million. If the problems with FEMA's investigation enumerated in the Learning from 9/11: Understanding the Collapse of the World Trade Center earn it the description of a farce, then the conduct of NIST's investigation earn it the description of a cover-up. NIST's Final Report on the Twin Towers shows that:

NIST avoids describing, let alone explaining, the "collapse" of each Tower after they were "poised for collapse." Thus, NIST avoids answering the question its investigation was tasked with answering: how did the Towers collapse?
NIST describes the Twin Towers without reference to the engineering history of steel-framed buildings, and separates its analysis of WTC Building 7 into a separate report. By treating them in isolation, NIST hides just how anomalous the alleged collapses of the buildings are.
NIST avoids disclosing the evidence sulfidation documented in Appendix C of the FEMA's Building Performance Study 1 This unexplained phenomenon was described by the New York Times as "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation."
NIST has refused to publish the computer models that its report imply show how the fires in the Towers led to "collapse initiation".


911review.com...

again

edit on 15-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by samkent
 


I was referring to the arguement that the truth movement is insignificant and disappears when you Osiffers turn off the computer


You don't even have to turn off the computer. If you look back through the threads you'll find a poll where even on this forum they couldn't get better than, I think, 80% that think 9/11 was an "inside job"! I mean, if you can't muster better than 80% here, what do you think it looks like in the wider world??


link please
I have better things to do then reference your posts, if it was so significant I would expect you to have a link handy to back yourself up
you know the deal you back your self up or it didn't happen

80 twenty and likely most of the national OSers are here
but the amount of truthers here is miniscule compared to the national world wide population
hmmmm
again



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 

Landfill eh? Some was "recycled" too. Under heavy guard, carted away. Like I stated earlier, forensic explosive people can detect ...oh what's the point? You have your answers and defend your scumbag government as many people here in Holland do the same. Sheeple will be sheeple and rulers like to rule...



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 





80 twenty and likely most of the national OSers are here
but the amount of truthers here is miniscule compared to the national world wide population
hmmmm
again

There is more concern over Darfur then there is over some 911 conspiracy. At least Darfur is mentioned in the national media onec and a while.

Why is it that there are no news outlets on the entire planet putting out stories of 911 conspiracy? Are we to assume the US government has so much power as to stifle the worlds press? And yet it took 10 years to catch an old man.

Add to that there are only a few websites dedicated to the conspiracy.

Since as you say 85% of the country believes, you can win the presidential primary just by talking about 911 conspiracies. And yet not a peep.

Even Richard Gage has a hard time attracting an audience. Have you seen the places he is giving his sermon? Most of his up comming dates don't even have a location. Look at the stats on his website. The hit count has been dropping over the last three months.

This whole thing is a tempist in a teapot. And ATS is the teapot.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   
Good job finding the video but the plane struck the building from the other side. Don't be discouraged though. Keep searching for the truth.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 



but the amount of truthers here is miniscule compared to the national world wide population

Yes, compared to the world population the number of "truthers" is miniscule, microscopic, in fact its damn near subatomic. You're all alone. There is no movement.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
Why is it that when I turn my computer off the truther movement disappears?


I imagine its because when you look at the computer its right in front of you kinda like this



If you took off those blinders you might see the truth



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by samkent


Ever see THIS report? Mainstream news ABC network


Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro. America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."


abcnews.go.com...

www.gwu.edu...

Seems they figured it was a good plan back then... just implemented against a new 'enemy'

Time Magazine... I call them main stream


Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away
www.time.com...



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by samkent
Why is it that when I turn my computer off the truther movement disappears?


I imagine its because when you look at the computer its right in front of you kinda like this



If you took off those blinders you might see the truth


And you are helping to reveal the truth by posting a picture of a photo-shopped Global Hawk in AA livery. That is helping people to " see the truth " how exactly ?



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Only your last link has anything to do with 911.

And I quote from the last page of it.




There are psychological explanations for why conspiracy theories are so seductive. Academics who study them argue that they meet a basic human need: to have the magnitude of any given effect be balanced by the magnitude of the cause behind it. A world in which tiny causes can have huge consequences feels scary and unreliable. Therefore a grand disaster like Sept. 11 needs a grand conspiracy behind it.

and



"If we think big events like a President being assassinated can happen at the hands of a minor individual, that points to the unpredictability and randomness of life and unsettles us."



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


NEVER MIND the plane vanishing whats the object entering from left to right @ 2:42 just above the radio mast
at high speed??



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by dejavooo
reply to post by burntheships
 


NEVER MIND the plane vanishing whats the object entering from left to right @ 2:42 just above the radio mast
at high speed??


A fast boat on the river.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by LightSpeedDriver
 



That's funny, I thought someone previously mentioned that the fire-proofing was sub-standard and way too thin?


Thats right the fireproofing applied to the steel was too thin - Port Authorithy chief engineer ordered it upgraded
when tenant space was vacated

The fireproof material was originally applied only 1/2 inch was ordered increased to 1 1/2 inches

Material was made of mineral fibers combined with cement - it was sprayed on from a hose

Had problems adhering to steel , was very friable (think dried mud) and would often peel or crumble from the
steel and have to be reapplied

Older buildings used to encase steelwork with heavy masonry or brick - in some cases up to 6 inches thick



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by LightSpeedDriver
 



Landfill eh? Some was "recycled" too. Under heavy guard, carted away. Like I stated earlier, forensic explosive people can detect ...oh what's the point? You have your answers and defend your scumbag government as many people here in Holland do the same. Sheeple will be sheeple and rulers like to rule...


Yes landfill - Fresh Kills on Staten Island. Only place in area big enough to handle all the debris

ALL THE DEBRIS was carted there by barge from Manhattan to be examined . It was screened and sorted for
body parts or personal effects

Steel was sorted with columns/floor truss from impact areas was pulled aside to be analyzed

www.nysm.nysed.gov...

americanhistory.si.edu...

Instead of posting idiotic nonsense might try reading these links



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


Fire proofing makes not difference when it's a known fact that one hours worth of room fire is not going to get steel hot enough to fail.


Of interest is the maximum value which is fairly regularly found. This value turns out to be around 1200°C, although a typical post-flashover room fire will more commonly be 900~1000°C. The time-temperature curve for the standard fire endurance test, ASTM E 119 [13] goes up to 1260°C, but this is reached only in 8 hr. In actual fact, no jurisdiction demands fire endurance periods for over 4 hr, at which point the curve only reaches 1093°C...

...Temperatures of objects

It is common to find that investigators assume that an object next to a flame of a certain temperature will also be of that same temperature. This is, of course, untrue. If a flame is exchanging heat with a object which was initially at room temperature, it will take a finite amount of time for that object to rise to a temperature which is 'close' to that of the flame. Exactly how long it will take for it to rise to a certain value is the subject for the study of heat transfer. Heat transfer is usually presented to engineering students over several semesters of university classes, so it should be clear that simple rules-of-thumb would not be expected. Here, we will merely point out that the rate at which target objects heat up is largely governed by their thermal conductivity, density, and size. Small, low-density, low-conductivity objects will heat up much faster than massive, heavy-weight ones.

www.doctorfire.com...

We also know it didn't get hot enough to fail because someone is seen standing right were the heat was supposed to be.

Not only that even IF it did get hot enough sagging trusses can not pull in columns! So fire proofing makes no difference, period.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by LaBTop
No, I was answering the last post above my post, where someone went on about a hole that opened up and coal layers in it were lighted by burning tower debris. CAPICE?
Ask them, when they filled it with concrete. How should I know?

Now that's the main question, was it molten by some unknown excessive energy source, was it all the time since erection of the Twin Towers laying under there?
WHY WAS IT NOT FILLED UP WITH CONCRETE IN THE 70ies ?
I have no photos from the WTC 7 basements cleanse operation.

Yeah, why was it not filled up with concrete in the 1970s? Good question... Do you think it was the "pothole" that caused the Twin Towers to collapse? Or do you think it was Explossives that made them collapse? Witnesses claim there were explosions long before the planes hit the Towers how911wasdone.blogspot.com...


On September 12, 2001, Peter Jennings interviews Marlene Cruz, a carpenter injured in one of the pre-collapse explosions in the WTC-sub-basement level B long before the planes hit the towers. She was the first casualty of 9/11 admitted at Bellevue Hospital. Cruz is a living witness whose testimony proves that pre-planted explosives were used to weaken the foundations of the towers as part of a well-planned controlled demolition

Marlene Cruz is not the only witness who says the explosions occurred long before the planes hit the Towers, for example Jesse Ventura interviewed another witness who also claim that the explosions occured before the planes hit the Towers...


Do a search on ATS, use : "LaBTop WTC 7" or "LaBToP WTC7"
I think I know more about certain WTC 7 subjects than you.

According to a New Theory, the "Ice Age" caused the WTC 7 Collapse , but Barry Jennings claim he heard Explosions inside WTC7 prior to collapse of either tower , which contradict the "Ice Age" theory.
According to another New Theory, the new theory speculates if it was melted aluminum that caused the buildings to collapse , but that theroy is contradicted by witnesses who claim there were Explosions in the buildings before the planes hit the Towers.

www.abovetopsecret.com... this "Physics Prof Says Bombs not Planes brought down wtc" thread "reply posted on 29-11-2005 @ 08:45 PM by LaBTop" you said >>Here's a much better picture, where you can actually see the burning THERMITE taking care of those remaining corner pieces



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by wmd_2008
 

All fine and well, but it still does not explain the powdering of the complete building. Or am I missing some fundamental force of nature? I mean, you can see in the footage that the whole thing literally turns to dust, right?



LETS test your construction knowledge what could have turned to dust why dont you make a list

edit on 15-3-2012 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
106
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join