It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


WTC destruction, the Leftover candidates, Pro&Contra Arguments.

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 04:35 AM
Taken/corrected from this bsbray11 post from 2006 :

The Trinity Video/Audio :
AVI Format (Video only) -
AIF Format (Audio only) -
MP3 version can be found here: (defunct now)

The audio illustration of 110 floors collapsing in 14 seconds:
Quicktime - :
Gives only the video when you have WinAmp or a DivX Plus-player installed with an additional DX50 codex. It however shows from a spot behind the Trinity Church how the South Tower was blown up by thermobaric bombs on every few floors.

Very clear evidence, now that you know how a TB bomb pumps-up a whole floor and shatters both the concrete-on-steel floor panels in such a WTC floor. Causing all that dust spitting out of those window rows.

If it was a true gravitational collapse induced by failing steel columns, those steel floor plates would have been smashed down on each other, their concrete tops broken but reasonably intact through the collapse process. The resulting debris heap would have been the damaged top section (the pile-driver) laying on top of a lot of broken floors-with steel floor plates under it-, resting on each other, and the facade panels pealed away and laying in another heap on top of each other, on all four sides.

That's not what we saw in reality.

posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 06:10 AM
This is one of my 2006 posts from a thread titled :
NIST WTC7 status report, page 6 :

Originally posted on 31/10/06 by LaBTop

For me, the biggest question still is:
How and why did FEMA come to their conclusion that 20:33 was the initiation of WTC 7's collapse ?
I saw nothing happen in form of visual effects BEFORE the famous east penthouse denting at 20:46.

I see only one sane conclusion : someone high up forced or planted the idea in LDEO 's investigating minds, that this 20:33 seconds point was the start of all WTC 7 collapse events, because that someone had realized that that was the ONLY convenient way to mask what really happened, and that 33 + 17 is 50.
Which is the 10s point on that seismic graph (EDT 17:20:50), which so conveniently preceded all following seismic signals above the standard background noise levels.
Included that huge give-away peak, of Thermobaric Bombs-explosions (TB's).

Any later start of events timestamps would raise a LOT of eyebrows.
So, who came up with that 33 figure ! AND THE REASON for it, to use it !
Were there rumbling sounds at 20:33 ?
Or was it solely based on seismic interpretations? Which ones?

And nobody can be accused, nobody who REALLY and honestly did not see the immense indications of that NIST time-stamp on that Cianca photo, compared with the LDEO data explanations.

I think nobody at LDEO at the time their report came out, (in the week of 9/11 already) ever saw that photo, it popped up in the much later government approved NIST reports.
And when the first reports came out, still nobody but me saw the repercussions of a side by side view of the 17:20:46 point on that LDEO seismic graph of the WTC 7 collapse, and the 17:20:46 time-stamped Cianca photo graph.

PS : Cianca's personal website (Google full name Nicolas Cianca) is down...... where you could find his 9/11 photo collection, and his remarks. He is the one who can explain a lot about the reason NIST put that time-stamp on his photo.
Even the WayBack website can not bring back a coordinated effort to find that photo and the accompanying text from Cianca him self.

His site disappeared around the time I posted the first time about the discrepancy between his timestamped photo and the timestamps on the WTC 7 LDEO chart.

They will not remove that photo, it is impossible, they realize that, they will take care that the seemingly-right answers will be given.... trying to weaken the arguments.

[edit on 31/10/06 by LaBTop]

Edited however again on 02/02/2013 by LaBTop to expand/clarify some texts.

Do realize, that the seismic SIGNALS belonging to that EDT 17:20:33 time stamp are not included in that famous LDEO WTC 7 seismogram, that one starts at the EDT 17.20:40 point, their 0s point !

And the validity of that NIST EDT 17:20:46 timestamped photo of the first dent in the WTC 7 east penthouse roof line is already proved conclusively earlier on in this 2013 year posted thread.

I have always asked myself WHY all kinds of totally laughter provoking ATS threads are starred and flagged up to totally crazy figures, and my threads are getting a few only, while they prove WITHOUT doubt how WTC 7 was demolished.

It can only mean that a lot of ATS readers do not visit this 9/11 ATS forum anymore, or lack the necessary seriousness to understand this kind of writings.
Those of you that READ this and my other threads and posts :

Starring and flagging is the only possible way at ATS and other sites, to attract the necessary attention and alert other members. Use the ATS Tools+ / PM (Private Messages) system to alert your ATS friends, too.!
I personally don't give a flying fart about them, it however will PERHAPS alert the sleeping ATS masses.

9/11/2001 was surely not operated (operetta'd, yes) by some Saudi Arabic PATSIES, who were told that they would survive that black operation, with a lot of money in their bank accounts.
Mafiosi always option for the safest, cheapest solution.......leave no witness behind.

Your US Army top brass, and your US Political brass, are MAFIA-like organized, networks. Just as the rest of the western countries.

They do not walk out of line, it's a death penalty in those circles. See what happened lately in China too.

posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 11:04 AM
Q.: Why should we believe you over the geophysicists and seismologists who work with seismic data every day?

A.: Because I used their own atomic clocks against them.
Because I have used their own full expertise in the field, cross linked it against an unexpected, just as expertly deducted "unknown" (at the moment of their publication they had not conducted time-framing of video streams)
being an expertly time-stamped photo, and proved them wrong in their most important interpretation of their own data, in this case, the arrival time of the WTC 7 global collapse surface waves. They tried constantly to give the impression that the first huge pack of seismic peaks in the WTC 7 seismogram was the initiation of the global collapse. It was not. That expertly time-stamped photo, proved that.

Because I showed us all that there were even more massive waves arriving in front of those global collapse waves.
Because those can only be interpreted as the result of massive explosions.
Because their magnitudes were bigger than the global collapse magnitudes.
Because one core column breaking can't ever result in a much intenser excitement of the underlaying bedrock than the following breaking of ALL the remaining core columns in the building during a global collapse.

I have used mainly logical deduction, and was aided by a lot of studied and accepted seismic knowledge.

And I provided a lot of food for thought about the credibility level of scientists, when subjects as national security, government involvement or military credibility are part of their research.
A lot of them HAVE to follow politically correct rules, or their USA based Grants funds will disappear in thin air.
They are very susceptible to pressure from their funds raisers, whether they are government, military or capital investment firms.
Or their Dean or Director will explain them how lightning fast you can loose any credibility in your cosy and well paid scientific circles, if a dedicated adversary decides it is time to smear and discredit you.

posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 02:30 PM
Truly a treasure chest, like bsbray11 already wrote :

We should be immensely thankful to the original author of this site, who kept this site up during all these years.
SAVE its three pages to your hard-disk or memory stick, these are utterly important historic records, they must not get lost. The more copies exist, the more chance they will survive the coming inevitable global holocaust.
History will later prove that 9/11 was a turning point for their psychotic warfare, they went far too far..!

LET'S DISCUSS ITS THREE PAGES full of immensely important freely offered soundtracks in the form of sonograms which can be much better used for interpreting explosive sounds than a simple audio file. Especially when compared to known demolition jobs, which the author also performed and offered.

A useful tool for analyzing audio is a spectrograph or sonograph which gives a visual display of frequency response over time.

A quick demonstration of how a device like this works can be seen here :
An explanation of spectrograms here :

When looking at visual content of the Trinity Church clip (download link), starting at 2 seconds into the video, the South Tower mechanical floors at levels 75 and 76, where there were no offices, violently explode outwards. This is particularly noticeable on the east face (right) face of the building as the whole line of floors pops out. Material can be seen ejecting from the south and north faces also in this clip. Estimating the distance of the camera to these floors at about 450 meters, we would expect the sound to take about 1.3 seconds to reach the camera, which in fact, it does.

The mechanical floors of the North and South towers (numbered 7-8, 41-42, 75-76, 108-109) had thicker concrete and steel floors and were supported by a much more robust construction than the normal office floors. They can be seen as darker bands on each tower's facade where there were vents rather than windows.

Thick steel I-beams were used instead of the criss-crossing floor trusses used in most of the towers' floors because of the need to house heavy equipment and engineering considerations of over-all building stability. The fact that these floors offered no noticeable resistance to the progressive collapse of the buildings remains unexplained. The evidence of the Trinity Church clip by itself would suggest that at least the 75th and 76th mechanical floors were destroyed by high-explosives. This possibility has been widely discussed in other articles which visually analyze the same explosion as seen from different camera angles. Opponents of the various "demolition theories" contest that the placement of a large number of explosives within the building could never go unnoticed by building tenants, however, since there were no offices or even windows in the mechanical floors, the undetected placement of a large amount of explosives would not present such an extreme logistical problem as is imagined.

This is a sonogram of the Trinity Church South Tower collapse explosion sounds, which you can listen to in the above linked-to page under
Part I: The South Tower Collapse -- Trinity Church Audio Recordings :

Trinity Church
**update** discussion of the authenticity of this clip's audio can be found on "this page" (closed b.o. very uncivil comments) since the audio portion has most certainly be "dramatized" for the Dolby 5.1 format from whence it came.
The first video is screen-marked "10:28am" (LT : which should be "9:58am", it's the South Tower collapse.! ) and is a very brief clip of the south tower collapse, recorded close-by from the south east next to Trinity Church. Though less than 5 seconds long, this clip offers fairly high quality audio, the most pronounced sound being that of 2 gigantic explosions. They are unmistakable and sound like 2 violent thunder claps.

ADJUST your monitor's contrast and brightness, to view the red data points much better !

Trinity Church clip video:

Trinity Church clip sonogram 1.280px × 759px :

Trinity Church clip sonogram 640px × 380px :

Which shows, when compared to this demolition job, the same features of explosions (camera was on tripod, no huge background noises during recording of this demolition, thus a more clean and stable sonogram) :

J.L. Hudson Building Demolition sonogram 1.435px × 842px

J.L. Hudson Building Demolition sonogram 640px × 375px

There are many more, very interesting sonograms offered by the author, just view them, I will post the best ones.

Page Contents.
Page 1.
Page 2.

edit on 2/2/13 by LaBTop because: COLORED AROUND A BIT MORE.

edit on 2/2/13 by LaBTop because: Audio link added for Trinity Church clip, hear those huge EXPLOSIONS....

posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 12:23 PM
This post in the other thread should be read also,
just as my next post after that one there.

posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:22 PM
And now, for a lighter touch, I ask for constructive criticism from my peers.
Peers are critical but same souls.
Sometimes I loose contact with them, many of you have damn long tooth.
SMILE.! Since we solved the WTC 7 mystery.

The destructive criticism of my adversaries has died down to zero, which was inevitable, after all this evidence.

Let's make it a good old ATS discussion, try to find weak points, I will answer and try to refute them.

posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:22 PM
Same link as in the next post !

In WTC 2, the core was damaged severely at the southeast corner and was restrained by the east and south walls via the hat truss and the floors. The steady burning fires on the east side of the building caused the floors on that side to sag. The floors pulled the heated east perimeter columns inward, reducing their capacity to support the building above.

1. The floor plates there on the east side, stood PERPENDICULAR and with their smallest side, onto the facade plating seats, and would break away from their seats welds and bolts instead of pulling a whole Vierendeel facade plate inwards.. !
2. That were CONCRETE floors on thin steel plates, and concrete when expanding, breaks, and does not pull a damn strong and thick, slightly, no higher than 600 C (its the damn outside of the building, in full wind gust) heated Vierendeel facade plate with three stiff and thick steel columns in it, inward....
That whole story is plain bull excrement.
Ever heated your open fireplace its iron rack with a load of red to WHITE hot coal and wood on it, for a whole day? Did it SAG ?
3. And have you ever looked at those trusses under them concrete on thin steel plates, floors? They were shaped like this, those two angles were a lot wider b.t.w., more like 120+ degrees :


and when those sagged, they would rather break away from those concrete on steel plates floor segments, at their connection points, the seats on the Vierendeel facade plates, or JUST sagged, no more than that, they would EXPAND and sag a bit down, but not PULL anything in that process.

And at the east side of WTC 2, you would not be able to observe sagging plates through the windows, as NIST already lies for all these years, BECAUSE they stood with their SMALLEST sides onto that east side facade...!

That was the damn lowered ceiling plates its aluminum rim that sagged a bit, in front of those windows in that famous FAKE EVIDENCE photo of NIST..! And they immediately jumped the gun and declared that photo evidence of SAGGING FLOOR PLATES......: fake science.

Come on, when are you going to wake up ? And react to this thread ?
(I wouldn't be surprised when this site is heavily monitored and filtered by outside forces...ATS wouldn't even notice that, just a thread and post filter aimed at certain subjects, at a backbone Eisenbahnknotenpunkthinundherschieber)
edit on 3/2/13 by LaBTop because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:24 PM
NIST Testimony on World Trade Center Building Collapse, 2005.
The Investigation of the World Trade Center Collapse: Findings, Recommendations, and Next Steps.
Statement of William Jeffrey, Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology, before the Committee on Science, House of Representatives, October 26, 2005 :

A principal factor limiting the loss of life was that the buildings were only one-third to one-half occupied at the time of the attacks.

NIST estimated that if the towers had been fully occupied with 20,000 occupants each, it would have taken just over 3 hours to evacuate the buildings and about 14,000 people might have perished because the stairwell capacity would not have been sufficient to evacuate that many people in the available time. Egress capacity required by current building codes is determined by single floor calculations that are independent of building height and does not consider the time for full building evacuation.

So I ask the official theory defenders to restrain from now on, at least in this thread, to bring that so often repeated argument to the table, that delivery of "all those explosive charges" would have been too obvious to all the tenants and personnel in both buildings.

As you can read above, it was difficult to find or meet people when running around in those 2/3 to 1/2 UNOCCUPIED FLOOR SPACES.

And then we had those UNOCCUPIED four mechanical DOUBLE floors, that's another 8 floors you can subtract from those "occupied" 110 floors.
That means they only had to bring their four TB's in at every third "occupied" floor, that's 34 "occupied" floors in all........Times f.ex. four (a lot) TB's per "occupied" floor, that's 136 TB's masked f.ex. as 2 PK airconditioning units (120 centimeter by 40 cm by 40 cm, which is a damn strong TB) brought in per huge freight elevator that ran from top to bottom. Then a few somewhat bigger ones spread in one basement, READY. One day max, work. Bring in, hang up, set the timers to receive the ignition radio-signals, get out, one day work, at the most. One night, even easier.

edit on 3/2/13 by LaBTop because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 03:15 PM
Here are all your ANSWERS, if you still may have some vague doubts of my collection of 9/11-evidence :

posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 11:13 PM
If you are interested in much more of my arguments, read this whole thread its 20 pages too, and especially my last, 9/11 Legal post on page 20 :

posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 06:26 AM
Labtop do you realize that the last 12 posts are yours??
You are flooding the thread with words but no one is responding.
This is the exact same senerio in the real world. No one is listening to any 911 conspiracies in the real world either.

posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 07:12 AM
History will prove who is on the right track, and this will be a repository for that, just as this.

In the mean time, I will ad more and more evidence of the biggest false flag operation in US history.

posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 07:15 AM

Originally posted by LaBTop
History will prove who is on the right track,

It already has, after 12 years people ignore those babbling about conspiracy theories on 9/11

In the mean time, I will ad more and more evidence

Bit hard to add more evidence when there is none there now....

posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 10:22 AM
I'll leave the playground to you.
This last page proves to me that this forum is meant to be dead.
Goodbye ATS.

posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 01:35 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 01:38 AM
LT/ : Which makes it quite clear what indeed member pinkbirdatabase means would be the conclusion, in the case of the Pentagon attack.

If that 9/11 Pentagon attack plane, according to the "recovered " flight recorder, flew in a straight horizontal line, at a speed more than 400 Knots, at such ridiculous low heights and high speed, it would have been immediately pushed up by the ground effect (at that speed of 400+ Knots), to a 16 meters height above ground level there, according to half of its own wingspan of 32 meters, if its flight stick was held at a STEADY nose-horizontally position.
Which would have let it miss all 9 meter high light poles, and let it pass over the top floor of the Pentagon with quite some clearance.
It could have had only approached that low, when flown in a ridiculously up- and down hopping flightpath, getting in- and out of its own ground effect, only when steered by an expert pilot, with thousands of flight hours experience, which Hani Hanjour definitely not was or had.

And thus was the attack plane not a 757, or it was a much smaller wingspanned fighter jet, or it was not a plane at all but a missile. Or a pack of missiles.

OR, those two DoD Pentagon north-parking boot video's are a total fake and part of a much bigger black project, which 911 definitely was.

Definitely, because of this very long list of 911 officially backed-up wrongdoings, and my evidence for it being very wrong but up till now still strongly defended by the US government and a lot of its supporters here at this forum and at numerous other forums and websites.

Its seismic evidence was made by myself, and the rest is the combined work from a few very keen 911 researchers :

read also all my posts at page 6 of that same thread :
and you will find this seismic drawing made by LDEO 3 days after the collapse of WTC 7, the next friday, and filled in with my comments :

Then you should watch this YouTube video by Achimspock, which strongly supports my seismic data reports posted by me years ago already. He did not know of the FOIA video which is included in my very long list above, where you can hear that very low rumble a few seconds before you see the east penthouse structure on the roof of WTC 7 sink into that roof and then the whole building sunk nearly straight down with about 2.5 seconds of its start at real free fall speed (that means explosives were used that took away all resistance at once in the lower floors :

WTC7 collapse sound & seismic spikes

So, both 2 parking-boot videos shown by the DoD were fakes and something totally different happened, for example a set of detonations while the stretch of highway in front of the Pentagon was held by insiders cars.
One radio and television station reported there was a traffic accident on that highway just before the attack, and thus all lanes stood still in a traffic jam.

I showed many times a CBS video from just 3 minutes after the official impact time, where you can see cars speeding past the heavily smoking west wall on that highway, and no traffic jam at all. Which means two possible explanations :

1. That traffic jam report was false,
2. All those witnesses their cars were all together moving already after those 2 to 3 minutes. But we have the pictures of Ingersoll and several others to prove that the cars in the 2 HOV lanes were stationary, most of them empty with doors or windows opened, and only a few people standing in groups on the Pentagon side of the road watching the fires.


posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 01:39 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 01:40 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 01:40 AM
LT\ : Just as the discussion comes to a point that Zaphod58 in his last above post quoted by me, at last acknowledged that a 757 plane at lower than half its wingspan (thus inside its own ground effect) and going at 400+ Knots according to the "recovered" FDR (flight data recorder), is going to bounce around (he better could have written "up-and down", instead of "bounce around", I read that as in a horizontal plain, not in the vertical plain as rightfully intended ), and thus NEVER could fly in a steady horizontal flight pattern, as shown in the two parking-boot camera video's published by the DoD, the discussion is cut off by ATS after a few other posters posted with a tendency to go on and on.

That closure was at a very bad moment is the least I conclude.
There were no rules or ATS etiquette violated on page 25 or 26 by either Zaphod58 or Rob Balsamo from the Pilots for Truth forum (here writing as pinkbirdatabase), he is (for insiders) obviously not at all a friend of mine, quite the opposite, but in this case he was dead right-on :

Those two DoD boot video's do not show a 757 flying at + 400 Knots, that low above the Pentagon lawn.

What we see in fact, is the, in a HORIZONTALLY straight line expelled, spiralling smoke exhaust of an unidentified flying object, which could be anything capable of flying, in any airline or airforce its arsenals. But not a 757 or other widebody & wide wing plane.

Because we can clearly see some smoke travelling perfectly horizontally, from the right of the shown video screen to the Pentagon's west wall at its left, which covers a distance of at least 150 to even 300 meters.
And if that flying object cut light pole nr 1 first (such a pole is 9 meters high), at a height of at least a meter lower than its top light appendage (see the photo's of that cut pole nr 1), then it was there already flying much lower than half of the wingspan of a 757 !
Which thus was much less than 16 meters high (which is half of a 757 its wingspan of 32 meters).

Measure the distance between that pole and the impact point on a Google map from that time (use the History feature of Google maps and go to 09/11/2001).

In fact it flew already at light pole nr 1 at a wing height above ground of less than 9 meters, in fact at 8 meters high, because there that pole was cut by a wing according to all official sources. And another 4 poles further down in its path were cut too, even lower than 8 meters high.
Above a flat grassy lawn.....

So, do you still believe that a 757 flew towards the Pentagon west wall ?
Or do you now believe that those two DoD parking boot camera's did not record what the DoD wants us to believe ?
Or are those two video's genuine, and what we see in there is one or more Tomahawks or such, approaching the Pentagon its west wall ? They reportedly flew with spiralling smoke exhausts trailing them. See the ship launches in the Persian Gulf at night from the two Gulf wars.

posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 01:14 PM
No thats ok, I'll still believe the actual evidence of actual 757 debris inside the Pentagon, the countless people that actually saw the plane plummet into the Pentagon, and the flight data recorders, radar returns, oh, and the 757 aircraft debris inside! Oh and the dead passenger remains and dna.

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in