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.

 

WTC7, the smoking gun that just will not go away until the traitors are rounded up

page: 17
46
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by MI5edtoDeath
 


Nice picture of open pit quarry .....

You do realize the differences betwena 110 story skyscraper and an open pit quarry in regards to radio
signal propogration....

On second though you probably dont have a clue.......


You did read the blurb and not get mesmerized by the picture?

You are correct in that it is conventional to use det cord wired detonators in the demolitions industry because it is what they have always done.

Telephones were the same at one time. They too were wired, now we all have wireless cellphones. Cellphone work because they use nodes in the form of cellphone towers as conduits to other cellphones. Therefore, it is entirely reasonable to surmise that advanced wireless detonators use repeater nodes and cell form signalling between node and node, node and cellphones, and cellphones and cellphones.

Basically, each devise would back the other up to form a network. Your limited up take of technology and obtuse understanding of systems exposes you as deficient in many ways.


edit on 25-5-2012 by MI5edtoDeath because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 25 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


First anything is possible in false flag operations. I suggest you read up on history.

2nd, I don't see steel anywhere in the dutch building. And it was a partial collapse. We had 3 demolished towers in 911,,,Towers!!! You are comparing apples and oranges.

And yes 90 West had fires,but how were they started? Please don't tell me: a flying desk with fire on it was the smoking gun...The building was built in the 1900's. The possibilities are endless in such an old building .


And you actually think the heat and fire that stayed stagnant in ground zero was do to the fuel from the planes? That's your definitive assessment? Sure



just like WTC huh?





First Inter..Bank . The weakened floors should have collapsed do to the huge amount of weight above,,no structural failure.lol



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
 


Yes its called COMMON SENSE

The FDNY Chiefs realized that

WTC 7 had suffered severe structural damage

Fire were breaking out on multiple floors

And most important - there was no water available. No water means sprinkler system is non operable and the
standpipes which pipe water to each floor will not have any water

i dont know about you, but a FDNY Fire Chief knows not to risk their men in such a situation



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
 


The building being damaged changes its ability to resist fire. That should be elementary.


How was it damaged ? prove it.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
 


Yes its called COMMON SENSE

The FDNY Chiefs realized that

WTC 7 had suffered severe structural damage

Fire were breaking out on multiple floors

And most important - there was no water available. No water means sprinkler system is non operable and the
standpipes which pipe water to each floor will not have any water

i dont know about you, but a FDNY Fire Chief knows not to risk their men in such a situation


Is that why the FDNY thought it was safe to send 300+ firemen into the towers prior to the buildings coming down?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by MI5edtoDeath


The windows of highrise building during extensive fires blow in and not out. This is because of the stack effect of lift shafts and stairs. There are at least a dozen of these conduits in WTC 7.



The large hole ripped in the South side of the building would negate the stack effect. The building would not be able to develop an internal low pressure strong enough to suck the windows in.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
 


The building being damaged changes its ability to resist fire. That should be elementary.


So superficial external damage from flying debris changes a buildings ability to resist fire?

Strange logic you applied there.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by MI5edtoDeath


The windows of highrise building during extensive fires blow in and not out. This is because of the stack effect of lift shafts and stairs. There are at least a dozen of these conduits in WTC 7.



The large hole ripped in the South side of the building would negate the stack effect. The building would not be able to develop an internal low pressure strong enough to suck the windows in.


It would negate the effect on the floors where the hole was ripped out but not through out the building. In fact the hole would add more energy to the stack effect from the floors that are still intact but burning. We should be seeing flames coming out of the holes as super heated gases combust in the oxygenated air.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
 



STOP THE PRESSES ! Since you did not see any steel the building must not have been built with any .....

Here is excerpt from the accident review of Delft School fire


Completed in 1970, the Faculty of Architecture (FOA) building was a reinforced concrete and
steel structure consisting of a combination of six, 3-story structures, which effectively served as a
podium, with a 13-story tower located above (see Fig. 1). The 3-story structures included
basement, ground floor and 1st floor. These structures were characterized by public use space,
including an architectural library, an auditorium, exhibition halls, and a cafeteria. The tower
served primarily as academic space, featuring lecture halls, offices, and design studios. Floors 2-
12 were characterized by a combination of 1- and 2-story interior spaces (


Operative phrase - "REINFORCED CONCRETE AND STEEL"

As for 90 West St - must have missed this from NY Times article.....


But the building was severely damaged when flaming steel debris rained on its north facade and gouged the exterior.


Operative phrase "FLAMING STEEL DEBRIS RAINED ON ITS NORTH FACADE" .....

Now where did this flaming steel debris come from...?

Did it materialize out of the sky ?


the south tower of the World Trade Center collapsed directly across the street. Scaffolding which had been erected on the facade for renovation work did nothing to stop the fiery debris from raining into the building and tearing a gash deep down its northern face


Collapse of South Tower. Fiery debris

Now First Interstate Bank

Why didn't it collapse

Maybe had something to do with this


Extinguishing this blaze at the 62-story First Interstate Bank Building, 707 West Wilshire Boulevard, required the combined efforts of 64 fire companies, 10 City rescue ambulances, 17 private ambulances, 4 helicopters, 53 Command Officers and support personnel, a complement of 383 Firefighters and Paramedics, and considerable assistance from other City departments.


Almost 400 firefighters,,,,,

At WTC 7 there was no Fire fighting operations. The building was abandoned when determined that operations
inside would have been too dangerous



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4hero

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
 


The building being damaged changes its ability to resist fire. That should be elementary.


So superficial external damage from flying debris changes a buildings ability to resist fire?

Strange logic you applied there.


If the firefighter reports are accurate, which they probably are, then it was much more than "superficial external damage." It doesn't take a rocket scientist to be able to read.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4hero

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
 


The building being damaged changes its ability to resist fire. That should be elementary.


So superficial external damage from flying debris changes a buildings ability to resist fire?

Strange logic you applied there.



I guess to you, a 20 story gouge noted by quite a few firemen at WTC7 is just superficial. That and fireproofing being damaged. Yeah nothing can go wrong there.

I guess I'll ask you too. Why did firefighters put a surveyor transit on WTC7 with there was nothing wrong with it? Do you even know what a surveyor transit is?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
 


Yes its called COMMON SENSE

The FDNY Chiefs realized that

WTC 7 had suffered severe structural damage

Fire were breaking out on multiple floors

And most important - there was no water available. No water means sprinkler system is non operable and the
standpipes which pipe water to each floor will not have any water

i dont know about you, but a FDNY Fire Chief knows not to risk their men in such a situation


why was there no water available?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek

Originally posted by 4hero

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
 


The building being damaged changes its ability to resist fire. That should be elementary.


So superficial external damage from flying debris changes a buildings ability to resist fire?

Strange logic you applied there.



I guess to you, a 20 story gouge noted by quite a few firemen at WTC7 is just superficial. That and fireproofing being damaged. Yeah nothing can go wrong there.

I guess I'll ask you too. Why did firefighters put a surveyor transit on WTC7 with there was nothing wrong with it? Do you even know what a surveyor transit is?
Show me the picture of that 20ft gouge . And Sur-trans is massively a strange move. A vertical transit would have been the logical one. Did they do a Sur-trans for 90 West? I really enjoy posting with you



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno

Originally posted by GenRadek

Originally posted by 4hero

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
 


The building being damaged changes its ability to resist fire. That should be elementary.


So superficial external damage from flying debris changes a buildings ability to resist fire?

Strange logic you applied there.



I guess to you, a 20 story gouge noted by quite a few firemen at WTC7 is just superficial. That and fireproofing being damaged. Yeah nothing can go wrong there.

I guess I'll ask you too. Why did firefighters put a surveyor transit on WTC7 with there was nothing wrong with it? Do you even know what a surveyor transit is?
Show me the picture of that 20ft gouge . And Sur-trans is massively a strange move. A vertical transit would have been the logical one. Did they do a Sur-trans for 90 West? I really enjoy posting with you


I have never seen this gouge. I always presumed it was behind the dust cloud but one would have to see it to know that it is there behind the dust cloud.

Where is the photo of the gouge?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
I guess to you, a 20 story gouge noted by quite a few firemen at WTC7 is just superficial. That and fireproofing being damaged. Yeah nothing can go wrong there.

I guess I'll ask you too. Why did firefighters put a surveyor transit on WTC7 with there was nothing wrong with it? Do you even know what a surveyor transit is?


Spinning the same old yarns as usual radek! We base our research on facts here, not on your magical stories.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by MI5edtoDeath


Where is the photo of the gouge?





posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4hero

Originally posted by GenRadek
I guess to you, a 20 story gouge noted by quite a few firemen at WTC7 is just superficial. That and fireproofing being damaged. Yeah nothing can go wrong there.

I guess I'll ask you too. Why did firefighters put a surveyor transit on WTC7 with there was nothing wrong with it? Do you even know what a surveyor transit is?


Spinning the same old yarns as usual radek! We base our research on facts here, not on your magical stories.


Ok, what magical story? I asked you and others, why did firefighters put a transit on WTC7? It happened. Fire chief said they did. I'm asking you why they did. Stop trolling and start acting like an adult.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno


why was there no water available?


I dont suppose the collapse of the Twin Towers had anything to do with it? Just a thought.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by MI5edtoDeath


Where is the photo of the gouge?




There are lots of smashed windows and cladding but no gouge. No fires either



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek

Ok, what magical story? I asked you and others, why did firefighters put a transit on WTC7? It happened. Fire chief said they did. I'm asking you why they did. Stop trolling and start acting like an adult.


Hahahaha! These magical stories...


I guess to you, a 20 story gouge noted by quite a few firemen at WTC7 is just superficial. That and fireproofing being damaged.


You know neither of these are true!

As for the surveyors transit, of course I know what one is! I'm not surprised they got one out, what with all the explosions reported in WTC7, it certainly wasn't for the superficial external damage from debris, or from the deliberately started fires!

Please do show me this mythical 20 story gouge you fantasise about....



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join