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.
Originally posted by samkent
Don't you find it weird that in your video there is a constant stream of explosions just before the building falls.
Yet we hear nothing from any of the videos in NYC?
Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by hellobruce
Are the truthers circling the wagons?
So in other words you're now ADMITTING Gage does in fact tamper with the evidence he puts out. If you had come out and acknowledged that from the beginning we could have saved ourselves a lot of unnecessary grief.
I know, I've seen the documentary (for free I might add.....) , but apparently, according to some people, if he doesn't show the full sequence in every video he's ever made, then he's somehow swindling people out of their hard earned savings......go figure...
Originally posted by pteridine
I have explained why thermite cannot be used for demolitions in many threads including this one.
Originally posted by ANOK
Explain how WTC 7 landed in its footprint.
Originally posted by Spacespider
Their plan did not go as planned that's why.
The plane that they say hit pentagon was supposed to hit building7
building 7 was prepared with the same kind of explosions as twin towers
They had to go along with the destruction of building 7 because it was rigged with explosions to hide their tracks
Originally posted by HelenConway
If it was meant to hit building 7 then why was it NOT over NY ?
Originally posted by HelenConway
Originally posted by Spacespider
Their plan did not go as planned that's why.
The plane that they say hit pentagon was supposed to hit building7
building 7 was prepared with the same kind of explosions as twin towers
They had to go along with the destruction of building 7 because it was rigged with explosions to hide their tracks
If it was meant to hit building 7 then why was it NOT over NY ?
Another factor which is usually ignored is that it would not be possible to hit WTC 7 with a large aircraft while the Towers 1 & 2 stood. Have a look at the site and relative building heights. As it happened UA 93 went down at 10.03 which was 25 minutes before the North Tower fell. If it had gone directly to New York it would have arrived before that Tower fell. But UA 93 was due to take off at 0800 when in fact it took off at 0842 : so if it had taken off on time it would have been destined to stooge about the New York sky for more than an hour waiting for a clear run at WTC 7.
Originally posted by ANOK
Originally posted by pteridine
I have explained why thermite cannot be used for demolitions in many threads including this one.
Obviously not because thermite is used for demolition. Here is one example...
You haven't debunked anything unless you can explain how three steel buildings, for the first time in history, all globally collapsed from fire, and asymmetrical damage. If you can do that while explaining the laws of motion and conservation of momentum you might have something, but in over ten years I have yet to see it.
Explain how WTC 7 landed in its footprint. Explain how sagging trusses can put a pulling force on the much larger columns they were attached to. Also explain why the 1" and 5/8" bolts didn't fail first. Just the things that you ignore and fail to answer, constantly.
Originally posted by ANOK
e]
Obviously not because thermite is used for demolition. Here is one example...
Technology Marketing Summary
The Linear Thermite Charge (LTC) is designed to rapidly cut through concrete and steel structural components by using extremely high temperature thermite reactions jetted through a linear nozzle.
Description
Broadly, the invention provides for the thermite charges to make linear or curvilinear cuts into materials such as building structures, pavements, transport equipment such as ships, planes, and the like. As used herein, the term linear includes linear and curvilinear shapes. Typically, the term linear includes elongated jet shapes and is not limited by whether the elongated jet opening is linear, curvilinear, or has bends.
Benefits
Can cut both concrete and steel at one time making rebar/concrete structural elements faster to demolish
Can be designed to produce a linear cut by the use of a linear fixed-nozzle or a moving circular nozzle
Cuts with the speed of explosive shaped charges but without the fragmentation and logistical problems of explosives
Applications and Industries
Infrastructure (building/bridge) demolition
Roadway cutting for demolition or access holes for utility service
Pipeline cutting for offshore environments
When is one of you going to explain how sagging trusses can put a pulling force on the columns and why the 1" and 5/8" bolts didn't fail first? Anyone?. Chirp chirp chirp, anyone? Bueller?
Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by ANOK
When is one of you going to explain how sagging trusses can put a pulling force on the columns and why the 1" and 5/8" bolts didn't fail first? Anyone?. Chirp chirp chirp, anyone? Bueller?
Easy:
As the fire rages the trusses expand and warp. The fire (in that area) burns through its fuel and then cools. The trusses cool down and contract.
Originally posted by ANOK
When is one of you going to explain how sagging trusses can put a pulling force on the columns and why the 1" and 5/8" bolts didn't fail first? Anyone?. Chirp chirp chirp, anyone? Bueller?
edit on 4/1/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)
Fire scenario C, which is perhaps the most realistic one, does not show failure for any single floor
scenario, however it shows collapse to occur at a very low temperatures (400C) when two or more
floors are involved. At such low temperatures, there is negligible loss of steel strength and the cause
of failure is entirely because of instability created by geometric changes in the structure as a result of
the thermal expansion. As these geometric structural stability phenomena are of the greatest interest
here, we will attempt to explain this in considerable detail in discussing a few individual analyses.
The chief conclusions are:
1. The analysis presented points to a compelling fire induced collapse mechanism rather unique
to the type of structure that the WTC Twin-Towers represented
2. This analysis also shows that the collapse is initiated principally by a stability mechanism as a
result of geometry changes in the structure caused by thermal expansion effects
3. Furthermore it is quite possible that the geometric changes required to precipitate collapse could
result from very low temperatures not high enough to induce significant reduction in the material
properties
4. It can therefore be provisionally concluded that these buildings could have collapsed as a result
of a major fire event. This is of course assuming that any of the active fire suppression systems
would either fail or be unable to control the development of the fire. This is a normal assumption
when designing fire protection for buildings