Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Let’s Agree to Put an End to the Petty 9/11 Argument’s

page: 8
9
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 10 2012 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by LaBTop
 


On the 1,3-diphenylpropane subject, read both these thread pages very concentrated :
www.abovetopsecret.com... (Page 5)
www.abovetopsecret.com... (Page 1)

I'm curious who sees the relevance of part D. of the Sierra Report in my post :
www.abovetopsecret.com... for all these cancer cases under first responders.

What I said then in 2006, is just as important now. Related to the use of TB's. (TB=GASEOUS)
Realize, that when so much gaseous compounds were used to destroy these HUGE dual buildings, and another building hours later, there must have been remnants of these gases left over, measurable by these USGS guys and the others.

May I again remind you of the Geiger counter readings around the Pentagon from this old lady I posted about?
And the same ones read by her colleagues in New York ? Find that post of mine, I believe it was in the huge Pentagon thread. ( "Did a Boeing etc." )
And these Geiger counters were not meant to read huge amounts of alpha nor beta radiation, so the amounts they could read, were by far not the real amounts, if measured with the right radiation measuring equipment for those kind of "soft", short lived radiation.
Soft, but you better not inhale them or otherwise get radiating alpha or beta particles in your systems. That's a sure recipe for multiple cancers.
edit on 10/12/12 by LaBTop because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 10 2012 @ 09:09 PM
link   
In all their posts on the last few pages, the posters who seem to seek to counter my arguments, have not shown ONCE the courtesy to even try to offer their contra arguments on the solid arguments I provided. And David Chandler provided in his videos.

1. Not one, to counter David Chandler's WTC North constant downward acceleration graph, that must have been a down sloping, then up sloping graph if it had been a true gravitational collapse.
2. Not one serious one to counter my WTC 7 Cianca photo-anomaly seismic thesis, just sidesteps to arguments of "no videos with explosion sounds", which I however provided, and then got ignored.
But no contra argument against that unexplainable first energy event on that seismogram from WTC 7. No serious reasons came up from them. In fact not one.
3, No addressing of the "Explosion Just Before WTC7 Fell" video, no addressing of the Rick Seagel tapes, which can be found in abundance in threads about them, on this same forum.
4. Not one serious contra argument against this video : "WHAT A GRAVITY-DRIVEN DEMOLITION LOOKS LIKE". And its grave implications for the official theories.
5. The most important video, "9/11 WTC Detonations Finally Revealed" from Bonez does not get one word to address it, from them. Because at last you can hear clearly the first detonations that forced that top part of WTC North downwards. And pulverized a great deal of that part already.
6. Nothing on the "OBJECT EJECTED by EXPLOSION BEFORE WTC COLLAPSE" video.

Conclusion : full swing use of distraction techniques, but no serious refusals at all.

I already tried to let them get used to the idea that main stream networks video material was tampered with, mainly I think, to edit unwelcome sounds out. And still they keep focusing on "no explosives sounds for WTC 7", while I just showed them the video from BoneZ (WTC North explosions to be clearly heard) and from David Chandler's excerpts from videos, where we can hear also the ULF boooms just before WTC 7's collapse.

Again, full swing distraction techniques, and full dodging from all clear proof.



posted on Dec, 10 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   
o, let's ad another nail to the official theory coffin.

The FREE-FALL ACCELERATION of WTC Building 7, David Chandler, AE911truth.org
www.youtube.com...




AE911truth.org, Monday, Dec 08, 2008.
In its draft report, released in August 2008, NIST attempted to cover up evidence that WTC7 fell at freefall, but the cover-up was transparent. In its final report, released in November 2008, NIST finally acknowledged freefall, but couched it in a bizarre framework that continues to deny its clear significance. ae911truth


The embarrassing, for NIST, video by David Chandler, who proved 100% sure, that WTC 7 fell for 2.5 seconds in free fall.
That can only mean one simple thing, 18 floors were shattered to pieces above floor 5.
And these floors could not be filmed by any news camera, when WTC 7's collapse initiated, so we have no views on those lowest floors, which is normally enough for the wolfpack of 9/11 official theory followers to cry that "not a splinter of evidence can be shown etc".
The huge problem they have regarding such an opinion is, that they can't give any sort of even remotely scientific explanation for that 2.5 seconds period of freefall at the onset of the collapse. While every physics professor can tell you that it can only mean one thing :
All resistance over 18 floors was out of the way in those 2.5 seconds.



posted on Dec, 10 2012 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by LaBTop
 




Hey LaBTop, do you know what else you find 1,3-diphenylpropane in? I'll give you a hint! It is found all around us! You find it in plumbing. Also computers, carpeting, almost everything we use. Give up?

Answer: Plastic.


Yeah I know, kinda anti-climatic eh?



posted on Dec, 10 2012 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by LaBTop
 


I just love how for all of these high power explosives going off, I need to really crank up my sound system and be in a soundproof room to hear them just barely.



posted on Dec, 10 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


Well, then you didn't REALIZE something ELSE ! What also missed your ears.

YOU CAN'T HEAR A SOUND from the collapse TOO::::::::::::but you hear that ULF sound quite well, when you use good quality ear phones, capable of playing 1 to 20 Hertz and above sounds.

And the conversation of the people around the camera is very well to follow, so the microphone worked as usual.



posted on Dec, 10 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


Did not READ my links to my 2006 posts about that chemical compound concentrated enough, as I told you.
And did you miss my last profession?
And also that I was the one that HowardRoark picked that remark from, about plastics?

Next time read all my links first, before getting again in such a misplaced triumphant frenzy.

Would you be so kind all, to stop the childish, condescending tone please, you are not communicating with a child, but with someone who stood at the birthplace of quite some interesting inventions you probably all enjoyed many times in your life time. And were very happy with.

My avatar will have put you on the wrong foot, perhaps.

I am in fact on the far other side of that depicted lifeline. I'm a great-great-grandfather.
That's why sometimes you have to do without me for quite some time, my health is not always at top notch anymore, I am in waiting for the ultimate knowledge shower....from our creator?
Or, just that disappointing fading away from my last senses? I'll wait and see. If the glass of life was half full, or....
Luckily for me, I am the born-optimist of the whole family.



posted on Dec, 10 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
*AUDIO* OF EXPLOSION JUST BEFORE WTC BUILDING 7 FELL Uploaded on Sep 5, 2010.
www.youtube.com...




A loud, low-frequency "boommmm" can be heard just before the east penthouse of WTC 7 falls.
David Chandler will soon be publishing a video that contains a more in depth analysis of this footage, including audio enhancements of the explosion.


0:00 to 02:05 / 11:53 The narrator of this video let you hear the ULF sound at ONE second before the penthouse topples into the roof of WTC 7.
He repeats it 4 times in a row, so you can hear it clear enough. My experience is, that you have to listen to it with good headphones, with which you can hear very low sounds. (1 to 20 Herz and all amplitudes above that). I then, after I turn the sound up, hear it clearly and distinctly in my right ear. He said he changed the sound to Mono, since it was recorded only at one channel. This video was FOIA'd from NIST.

Then you hear the words of Graig Bartmer, former NYPD and first responder. He tells how he was near WTC 7 when it blew, and he had to run from under the umbrella of debris, and the whole time "you heard boom boom boom boom".

Then a witness, an emergency worker, interviewed by 1010WINS NYC News Radio, live on 9/11 said :
..."WTC 7, we heard this sound, that sounded like a clap of thunder, it looked like there was a shock-wave ripping through the building and the windows all busted out"."

(LT: That clap of thunder is what most military and civilian people who experienced a TB, explained as what they heard at first, before the real ULF sound hit them.)

..."about a second later the bottom floor caved out and the building followed after that. We saw the building crash down all the way to the ground".
The bottom floor was the one where the long roller stairs bottoms were.
Then again 4 repeats of that ULF sound.

And this is what most opponents seem to miss in this video :
That low, ULF sound is the loudest sound in that video of the collapse. The collapse itself only gives off a faint crashing sound, lower in amplitude than that ULF sound 1 sec before collapse started.

So that debunks all former posted remarks that no one of them posters, heard explosion sounds, since they also heard in that case, no collapse sounds. Only the commentary of the people around the camera microphone can be heard loud enough, which was much louder than the whole collapse. That's what I mean with my remark that the reporters and camera men were pushed back behind that perimeter line so far, many blocks away from WTC 7, that any explosion or collapse sounds were difficult or not to register on their equipment.

The rest of this video is a short lecture by Richard Gage from AE911Truth.org.

One commenter posted this :

“he set the charges-set, boom, it collapses”
( you can also hear at that same time on the radio: “into the dive hole!” as you can hear the explosion…..)
“he came back twenty minutes later looking like a three stooges movie all covered in plastic I swear to god” Man 2 “do yah got good Sh*t in there?”
“that’s good Sh*t”.
“don’t look back there”
Man 2 “Who-hoo-hoo-hoo”
“allllriiiight” (inaudible)“come on back?”

anyone have audio enhancing software? Help!""

Don't know how that ended, if he ever got that software and published the source.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by LaBTop
 


I have. And you have so many contradicting things at the same time, it is really difficult to follow.

For starters:
You claim this 1,3-diphenylpropane is a smoking gun or whatever of sol-gel thermite. Yet then you go on and say it was special TB explosives. Then you claim the explosives were hushed (magically) so that only ULF can pick it up and seismic stations.

LaBTop, what is the deal?

I would love to see one real example of a demolition that had its high power explosives hushed with water. It defeats the purpose of a thermobaric explosive. You do realize that the more powerful an explosive, the LOUDER it goes boom? I know that I cannot hear the collapse well, but in other demolitions, you can hear the blasts clearly before collapse and sometimes you cannot hear the collapse at all.

1,3-diphenylpropane. It is found in many plastics. You just had three large office building HowardRoark does a good job of putting your claims to rest and brings up quite a bit of interesting information you left out. 1,3-diphenylpropan- [ 1',1'-(1,3-propanediyl)bis-benzene] is the full item that was found. It was in the air.

More on platics
fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire87/PDF/f87014.pdf

also some more readng for you



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by LaBTop
 


As for Craig Bartmer:

What exactly got his attention to the WTC7 collapse? I do not recall him saying anything about a low frequency boom or anything like that. Interesting how standing next to it, he noticed nothing wrong until people started yelling its collapsing. Why would he leave that out? How the hell do you miss a blast like that while standing right next to the bloody building and forget to mention that? I know he heard boom boom boom, as the building fell, where was it before it started?



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by LaBTop
 


So did your ULF corroborate with any of the other 30 or so recordings of WTC collapsing? Or is on only on just that one video? And if so, what would be the conclusion?



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply by GenRadek to post by LaBTop

Good gracious man! Do not try to act as a chemist or someone who understands chemistry, never anymore.


You claim this 1,3-diphenylpropane is a smoking gun or whatever of sol-gel thermite.


No, had you read a bit more thorough, you would have understood that Dr Jones came up with that idea.
I am no advocate for the thermite theory. The strange thing is, that when I once proposed the idea as something to chew on for a while, on this forum, not a week later Dr Jones turned up at this forum and introduced his new, thermite theory. Check it with ATS search.
I showed him that he made a mistake in timing the first photo in his thesis page (of WTC 7 after the North Tower also came down), in the afternoon, while the shadows proved it was taken at about 11 o'clock A.M.
EDIT : there was no big 20 stories high gash to see in the south facade of WTC 7 on that clear photo, with only small smoke clouds at the bottom of WTC 7. That debunks that WTC 7 huge damage debunker story again, I posted that conclusion easy to see in that photo, also many times, nobody ever listened. ENDEDIT.


Yet then you go on and say it was special TB explosives. Then you claim the explosives were hushed (magically) so that only ULF can pick it up and seismic stations.


No, I did not said that too. And pleaaaase, ULF is not something as a broadcast in UHF on your pocket radio.
It is an ultra low frequency wave form, and its non-detectable with that radio. It's a sound. It does not send. It is send by a vibrating object.
The only thing in that sentence you had right were the seismic stations. But they can only pick these ULF waves up, when they filter for that part of the amplitude table. Normally they filter for others than these extreme low Herz regions.


I would love to see one real example of a demolition that had its high power explosives hushed with water.


Are you for real? I just gave you a hint in which thread you could find my posts about wall breaching units.
Basically a plastic (hehe) plate with a thick rim around it filled with water. Under that rim is a small indent molded, where you clamp your det cord in, all around that plate's own rim. When you fix that WBU with a wooden pole or something against the wall you want to enter later, and then ignite the det cord, the form of the det cord will be cut out in that wall, blowing that whole chip of the wall inside the building, so that any adversaries behind it are also neatly neutralized. Then you walk in through your new doorway.
Are you all perhaps some kind of gamer or so? I am doubting if this is really the place to be for me. I'm too old to quibble with gamer kids. If your not such a person, how come you can't read what is offered, and obviously do not understand at all what is comprehensively explained.

I informed HowardRoark that it is one of the byproducts of most plastics when these are burned. And that the hotter you burn it, the more of it is formed. How come you constantly try to put your own totally misunderstood ideas in my mouth?


1,3-diphenylpropane. It is found in many plastics. You just had three large office building HowardRoark does a good job of putting your claims to rest and brings up quite a bit of interesting information you left out. 1,3-diphenylpropan- [ 1',1'-(1,3-propanediyl)bis-benzene] is the full item that was found. It was in the air.


My good man....what a bunch of typos. Next time, try to reread your own posts before posting here.
That was ALL my information I myself first posted in one of the two threads I linked you to, but that you obviously did not read to the end. Then HowardRoark admitted he was wrong in the other thread I linked you to, and then made another mistake at the end of that thread, by dissecting the right name into two pieces.
Next time, read the posting-dates, then you understand who said what first, and who duplicated.


1,3-diphenylpropane. It is found in many plastics.


No, it's not. It's only found AFTER you burn those plastics, in the resulting soot and gases, as one of the many byproducts of plastics melting and heating.

Your whole above posting attitude expresses an eager need to beat me with whatever you can stumble over.
Try another, more positive approach. It will heal your mind, believe me.
edit on 11/12/12 by LaBTop because: See EDIT.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   
I'm curious where you got your accusations from. Do not argue with a chemist when you are clearly not one.
Here's an excerpt from my 2006 post, and as you can see, it were all MY words, that you now adhere to HowardRoarke. And then try to ridicule me. Try another, friendlier approach, next time.


LaBTop : You will only obtain 1,3-diphenylpropane in a specific test mixture 2, and at low yields, at a very specific temperature.
In the case of the burning WTC buildings and burning post-collapse debris heaps, there are very different temperature ranges to take in consideration (see NASA's hot spots measured by their planes), and when we consider temperatures above the fixed temperature of 380° C in above tests, I can asure you that the probability of increased occurrences of derivatives of 1,3-diphenylpropane will increase logarithmically with higher temperatures.
Not even considering, the totally different setup of all constituents in these WTC fires.

I would suggest you to find the make-up of the plastics used in the manufacturing of computer monitors and housings, and keyboards, since you or your links expect them to be the source of that specific 1,3-diphenylpropane derivative at decomposing temperatures.

BTW,


HowardRoarke: And you are right; it is a moot point since that is not the compound detected in the air samples.



LaBTop : I posted quite a long excerpt out of the Sierra Report in your new thread around Prof. Jones and Kevin Ryan's remark about 1,3-diphenylpropane as a compound in aero gels used to mold explosive thermite charges.
(Your new thread : www.abovetopsecret.com... )
It is full of remarks about sampling of DPP in DUST samples.
Which has not been done by EPA, btw. And the sampling they did, was, amazingly, done with out of date methods and aperati.
It were outsourced firms which directed us to their very strange way of sampling of DUST, AIR and WATER, during the -critical for sampling taking- first weeks of such an immense historical happening on US soil.

They did not use f.ex. their own stringent advises for asbestos sampling in their own offices, but a totally outdated method.
And accepted the removal of a stringent warning in their first report on 26 September 2001. And let it be replaced by a confirmation that it was save to return to work for all New Yorkers.

How about that for criminal behavior of the White House (who forced them to do so) and compliance at their side?

[edit on 24/7/06 by LaBTop]



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by LaBTop
 


As for Craig Bartmer:

What exactly got his attention to the WTC7 collapse? I do not recall him saying anything about a low frequency boom or anything like that. Interesting how standing next to it, he noticed nothing wrong until people started yelling its collapsing. Why would he leave that out? How the hell do you miss a blast like that while standing right next to the bloody building and forget to mention that? I know he heard boom boom boom, as the building fell, where was it before it started?


He said he stood only a few feet under the umbrella of debris bursting out from the lower floors. That means that the penthouse wasn't moving yet on top of those 47 floors. He went running, and THEN he heard the BOOOM,BOOMM, BOOOMMM's.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by LaBTop
 


So did your ULF corroborate with any of the other 30 or so recordings of WTC collapsing? Or is on only one just that one video? And if so, what would be the conclusion?


Could you stop with only asking endless questions? What about beginning with your argument, then ask my opinion about it.
You do that too to ANOK. It's called condescending attitude. Be more open. And get rid of superiority feelings, it's a burden, not a gift.

Again, did you forgot that I started with leading you all to the idea that the editing rooms of the main networks were infected with military editing teams? We know that CNN was infected a few weeks before already. Others for sure were too. Who probably had only one task : filter everything out what can indicate explosions.
And that's SOUND.
Many of the other camera's also didn't register any sound of the collapse. Don't you find that not a tad bit curious, only a block away, and camera's not registering a thundering collapse sound sequence?

And after that, all video material was collected or confiscated by NIST.

By the way, most camera's have a feature that automatically cuts off all sound with amplitudes above a certain threshold, Auto Gain Control. I posted on it in a post yesterday about the OKC bombing.
The tape recorders that had AGC too, flattened off the sound of the OKC bombs for about 10 seconds, then the sound level had returned to recordable levels again.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by LaBTop
We know that CNN was infected a few weeks before already. Others for sure were too. Who probably had only one task : filter everything out what can indicate explosions.


No, we do not know that, in fact it is just a really silly conspiracy theory, not based on any fact.

So the military were there in case the hush a boom explosives did not hush properly....



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by LaBTop


He said he stood only a few feet under the umbrella of debris bursting out from the lower floors. That means that the penthouse wasn't moving yet on top of those 47 floors. He went running, and THEN he heard the BOOOM,BOOMM, BOOOMMM's.


But what got his attention to even look at the WTC7? His own words please.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by LaBTop
 





We know that CNN was infected a few weeks before already. Others for sure were too. Who probably had only one task : filter everything out what can indicate explosions. And that's SOUND.


That's a common misconception. It's totally debunked in an article in the secret part of Wired magazine. I doubt you have access though. I'll be happy to post scans, right after you post scans of the secret part of that blasting manual that reveals the workings of 'quiet thermobaric explosives'

Sound like a deal?



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   


We know exactly by atomic clocked time, when that photo event in Manhattan took place !
reply to post by LaBTop
 


Have you got secret evidence for this claim too?



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 09:37 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 





new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join