Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

I'm pretty sure this building is going to collapse - Sharjah Skyscraper!

page: 19
63
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 2 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   


I told you to come back with something better than this.
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


And I apparently disobeyed her Royal Highness, eh?

Fact is that planes did crash into the WTC towers on 9-11. There were fires, and the buildings collapsed. You have no proof that anything but airliners crashing into them caused them to collapse.
edit on 2-5-2012 by butcherguy because: Added royal to her highness




posted on May, 2 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 



We don't need to talk about camp fires, the heat inside a jet engine, the blast furnace used to melt steel -- we ONLY need to talk about Office Fires since nothing in a plane is any hotter than what burns in a fracking office.

I am guessing that you will agree that the WTC towers collapsed.

I am going to suppose that you will admit that planes flew into them.

If the planes caused no structural damage that contributed to the failure of the towers, what did it?



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 



We don't need to talk about camp fires, the heat inside a jet engine, the blast furnace used to melt steel -- we ONLY need to talk about Office Fires since nothing in a plane is any hotter than what burns in a fracking office.

I am guessing that you will agree that the WTC towers collapsed.

I am going to suppose that you will admit that planes flew into them.

If the planes caused no structural damage that contributed to the failure of the towers, what did it?


The Planes did knock over some vertical supports on one level. The point is that's NOT where the building collapsed -- AND the floors below had no fires nor structural damage.

Now the loss of the curtain wall as the loss of struts would probably allow for a collapse if they buckled OUTWARD -- but doesn't explain why the collapse started at the top of the building. And the slumping of the center structure could NOT have happened at all.

The plane did not have enough hard mass to even put a dent in the building core -- if we want to say that the pancake collapse occurred -- it could ONLY do so by a few floors loosing connection to the core -- like bridges, the force of a few floors dropping and then added weight as more floors collapsed, could definitely rip the lower floors FROM their struts. HOWEVER -- that's not what we saw on 9.11 -- what we saw was that the core appeared to go first, and that caused the towers and the center-top of ALL THREE BUILDINGs to slump -- after that, it was a typical top-down collapse that looks like every other demolition video I've ever seen.

>> So what brought down the WTC buildings was some sort of prepped demolitions and other agents that would remove the core support, and sequentially cut vertical supports at each level at the time each floor impacted.

There is NO WAY IN HELL that was a pancake collapse, as it occurred too fast. I saw 20 floors of the north tower disintegrate into dust as they were briefly falling off to the side -- was it "wind resistance" that caused Concrete and Steel in mid-air to crumble?

No planes an no fire brought down the WTC in the way we saw it. I could speculate HOW I would do it -- but that only provides rope to hang the need for a real investigation. The burden of proof is on the government and the totally bogus models put forth by the NIST.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy


I told you to come back with something better than this.
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


And I apparently disobeyed her Royal Highness, eh?

Fact is that planes did crash into the WTC towers on 9-11. There were fires, and the buildings collapsed. You have no proof that anything but airliners crashing into them caused them to collapse.
edit on 2-5-2012 by butcherguy because: Added royal to her highness



The "dust" collected by the CDC other agencies, and investigators was comprised of a good portion of iron-aluminum amalgam -- small little round droplets. That is consistent with residues created by thermite.

The "pyroclastic dust" seen escaping the building and reported by firemen on the foyer level seems inconsistent with any normal building on fire.

Explosions heard by firemen are consistent with small shaped charges going off -- which would probably be C4 as it is highly flame retardant. Theories that these were just lightbulbs seems to fly in the face of what we would expect from trained firefighters who've been in other burning buildings.

About 5 different eye-witnesses who escaped in the lower parking levels report large explosions -- very far away from the chaos of the plane impacts above.

Interference in investigations into credit transactions, video tapes removed, Radar tapes destroyed at the FAA and numerous OTHER violations of crime scene protocols indicate an attempt to COVER UP by the Bush administration. They stalled an official committee for years and it could only operate if it agreed to ONLY ADD TESTIMONY THAT supported the Government theory -- that's right; there is NO PROOF of anything but the planes taking down the building, because the committee was forbidden from recording anything but evidence that supported the case. We don't know how many eyewitnesses might have disagreed with findings.

A sample of steel sent to sculptor showed evidence of Thermite -- all other steel was sent to be recycled in China even though a New Jersey steel yard offered more money.


>> That's just off the top of my head.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 
okay, you have convinced me.

The planes were just to get people to watch the buildings until they pulled 'em.

but what could cause this to happen?


Concrete and Steel in mid-air to crumble?

What would explain this?



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 



The "dust" collected by the CDC other agencies, and investigators was comprised of a good portion of iron-aluminum amalgam -- small little round droplets. That is consistent with residues created by thermite.

No it wasn't. Please find me the CDC document that specifically states iron-al in small round droplets. Good luck!

The "pyroclastic dust" seen escaping the building and reported by firemen on the foyer level seems inconsistent with any normal building on fire.

If the dust were pyroclastic the dead would have numbered in the 10's of thousands. The dust was not pyroclastic. It was just dust.

Explosions heard by firemen are consistent with small shaped charges going off -- which would probably be C4 as it is highly flame retardant.

Says who? And here's a little challenge - can you think of anything else that goes "boom"?

Theories that these were just lightbulbs seems to fly in the face of what we would expect from trained firefighters who've been in other burning buildings.

Who's theory included light bulbs? How about transformers? Water mains?

About 5 different eye-witnesses who escaped in the lower parking levels report large explosions -- very far away from the chaos of the plane impacts above.

No they didn't.

Interference in investigations into credit transactions, video tapes removed, Radar tapes destroyed at the FAA and numerous OTHER violations of crime scene protocols indicate an attempt to COVER UP by the Bush administration. They stalled an official committee for years and it could only operate if it agreed to ONLY ADD TESTIMONY THAT supported the Government theory -- that's right; there is NO PROOF of anything but the planes taking down the building, because the committee was forbidden from recording anything but evidence that supported the case. We don't know how many eyewitnesses might have disagreed with findings.

Too bad that none of that is true.

A sample of steel sent to sculptor showed evidence of Thermite -- all other steel was sent to be recycled in China even though a New Jersey steel yard offered more money.

That's just all and out lies.

>> That's just off the top of my head.

I don't think that's the actual bodily location that stuff came from.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 





The plane did not have enough hard mass to even put a dent in the building core --

The experts disagree with you.

Can you please tell us your qualifications to make such a statement?



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   


which would probably be C4 as it is highly flame retardant
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 

Just for your info, C-4 is an explosive. Most explosives are flammable. C-4 is flammable.... not flame retardant.


When ignited with a flame rather than detonated with a primary explosive, C4 just burns, so American soldiers during the Vietnam War era would sometimes use small amounts of it as a fuel for heating rations


Wikipedia: C-4



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 



Who's theory included light bulbs? How about transformers? Water mains?

Thermal expansion tanks often explode during fires, they could be found in the building. And get this..... Fire extinguishers can explode in a fire also.




posted on May, 2 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by hooper
 



Who's theory included light bulbs? How about transformers? Water mains?

Thermal expansion tanks often explode during fires, they could be found in the building. And get this..... Fire extinguishers can explode in a fire also.


There are plenty of things that could have made sudden loud noises including stessing steel sections and the myriad of cars and vehicles nearby that were on fire.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Can someone help me out here?
The times that I remember reading the word pyroclastic, it was associated with volcanic eruptions.

What am i missing? Is there a volcano in NYC? Did a volcano erupt there on 9-11?



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
Can someone help me out here?
The times that I remember reading the word pyroclastic, it was associated with volcanic eruptions.

What am i missing? Is there a volcano in NYC? Did a volcano erupt there on 9-11?


Here's the deal. Some conspiracist, way back when, looked at the video on 9/11 and decided that he/she thought it looked like what you see when a volcano erupts and then decided to apply the word "pyroclastic" not knowing (suprise, suprise) that "pyroclastic" has a very specific definition that includes, among other things, a tremendous amount of heat. Anyone caught in a true pyroclastic event dies. But the word sounds real technical so it persists. Its an appeal to techno-babble. Like "10 micron dust particles" and "Newton's Third Law". Sounds like the user knows what they are talking about and anyone that is scientifically challenged may just fall for it. But as you may have noticed, few, if any, ever do.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
well at least you spelled crap correctly hooper
unlike the wtc nothing to see here move along folks move along

Hopper doesn't cut steel for a living, he's a expert
edit on 30-4-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

It must be frustrating for poor ole Hopper. I'll bet that he has never once convinced anyone to believe the Official Crock 'O Cowdung..... and yet he just keeps babbling on and on and on, unfazed by the utter incredulousness of anyone who happens to get in the way of his prevarications.... gotta give him an E for effort tho....



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

Originally posted by Danbones
well at least you spelled crap correctly hooper
unlike the wtc nothing to see here move along folks move along

Hopper doesn't cut steel for a living, he's a expert
edit on 30-4-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

It must be frustrating for poor ole Hopper. I'll bet that he has never once convinced anyone to believe the Official Crock 'O Cowdung..... and yet he just keeps babbling on and on and on, unfazed by the utter incredulousness of anyone who happens to get in the way of his prevarications.... gotta give him an E for effort tho....


Well, you see, thats the funny part - I, unlike you, don't need to convince anyone. Everyone is already convinced.

So how are those investigations going?

Its Hooper.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Well, you see, thats the funny part - I, unlike you, don't need to convince anyone. Everyone is already convinced.

Let me clarifying something for you Hooper. First of all, no one is "convinced" by your artfully contrived jargon.... that is purely in your imagination. Second, I don't need to convince anyone. Let me explain to you how human consciousness works.

You see, when people believe lies, they can be taken advantage of. When they no longer believe the lies, they can no longer be taken advantage of. When they can no longer be taken advantage of, they will begin to deconstruct the bogus paradigm that has been created by your Overlords. That will set off a chain-reaction of consciousness-awakening. This, in case you didn't know, is the BIGGEST FEAR of your employers. They are absolutely PETRIFIED of everyone finding out that they are powerful enough to EASILY overthrow your crooked Cabal. Unfortunately for them, the steamroller is approaching full speed and nothing can stop disclosure from happening. Thanks mostly to the Internet.

Your bosses have conspired together for hundreds of years (actually thousands) towards achieving a lofty goal of planetary domination that is going up in smoke, right now, before their very eyes. And they're frantic about it. More and more people are no longer believing their crap, and even worse for your employers, the world is about to find out how the Power Elite have been butt-slamming them all along. I wouldn't want to be anywhere near your camp in the not-too-distant future.

You may not believe this, but those of us who really understand what's going on have a deep appreciation for guys like you playing the Devil's Advocate. The more crap you fling, the faster we evolve.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by SimontheMagus
 



Unfortunately for them, the steamroller is approaching full speed and nothing can stop disclosure from happening. Thanks mostly to the Internet.


A steamroller at full speed!!! That's really a good one. Yep, you may be right - the truth movement is zipping along like a steamroller!!!! (Just for clarification - steamrollers are very, very, very slow and also "steamrollers" haven't been in use for about 80 years).



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by SimontheMagus
 


I'm sorry but that is just a load of pretentious cr*p. And I've been hearing about disclosures being round the corner for years.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy



which would probably be C4 as it is highly flame retardant
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 

Just for your info, C-4 is an explosive. Most explosives are flammable. C-4 is flammable.... not flame retardant.


When ignited with a flame rather than detonated with a primary explosive, C4 just burns, so American soldiers during the Vietnam War era would sometimes use small amounts of it as a fuel for heating rations


Wikipedia: C-4



Can you PLEASE do more than just breeze through Wikipedia before you comment. You package C4 in flame retardant gel -- or whatever. You can throw that stuff on a fire and not blow up. It will NOT blow up from fire -- it might burn and that's it.

Anyway, most of these buildings weren't on fire, so any suitably packed C4 shaped charges would be operational -- whether that's how it was done is mere speculation but IF you think that a kerosene fire that isn't hotter than a normal office fire is going to destroy steel -- why would you think that adding explosives and other accelerants would be impossible or make it suddenly stay upright?

The crime scene has been destroyed, but we've got plenty of dust and anecdotal evidence to suggest a conspiracy. You can't hide the tons of dust from 9/11 that shows evidence of thermite reactions -- there was NOTHING in that fire or any normal fire to force steel and aluminum into a compound.

Likely, Bush and his co-conspirators are still running things -- much like when "Putin" stepped down only to put in place his protege.

Obama has yet to arrest anyone in regards to trillion dollar frauds on Wall Street, we are still at war, the economy is still floundering paying huge windfalls the the very wealthiest, and many of the top companies pay under 3% tax if nothing at all.

9/11 isn't much more than a bad month of traffic in this country as far as loss of human life -- what significant is what this false flag allowed to take place. Bid Laden didn't "allegedly" do as much damage as all the Fascists have done with their "spy on America" policies and their unfunded resource wars. I don't go to bed at night fearing Al Qaeda -- I've got much more anxiety about "reputable bankers."



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by SimontheMagus
 



Unfortunately for them, the steamroller is approaching full speed and nothing can stop disclosure from happening. Thanks mostly to the Internet.


A steamroller at full speed!!! That's really a good one. Yep, you may be right - the truth movement is zipping along like a steamroller!!!! (Just for clarification - steamrollers are very, very, very slow and also "steamrollers" haven't been in use for about 80 years).



I have to wonder at people who show such GLEE at the concept that we will not see justice for 9/11 -- I really do.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


Actually, we are at the one year anniversry of one big pile of justice.


I don't consider punishing anyone who, in your imagination, is guilty of a crime. That wouldn't be justice. That would be insanity.





new topics

top topics



 
63
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join