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.
That is the sound of structural failure, not explosives. There are major differences between the two.
That is the sound of structural failure, which has nothing to do with explosives. Proof can also be found in the seismic data.
originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb
That is the sound of structural failure, which has nothing to do with explosives. Proof can also be found in the seismic data.
originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: wildb
Notice in that video the camera shakes about two seconds before the collapse starts, every other video does the same thing.. Hum did the ground shake, seems it did..
Yes I did noticed that, it is in most videos taken that day.
The only thing that can explain that, is explosives going off at ground level.
AE911Truth lies about "118 Witnesses"
On your main page, you state that 118 first responders heard sounds of explosions "at the plane impact zone - a full second prior to collapse". I've read and re-read AE911truth's Graeme MacQueen's paper "118 Witnesses" and can't find a single witness who reported hearing an explosion at the impact zone a full second prior to collapse, much less 118.
The majority of witnesses (all 31 in the "bomb" category and well over half in the "explosion" category) use the term bomb or explosion to describe the sound DURING the collapse. IE, the roar of the collapse sounded like an explosion/bomb. The remaining accounts describe explosions well before and well after the collapses, as explicitly described by the first responders, and many say they believe in hindsight that the explosions were electrical (Stephen Gregory) or the like. Will you please provide me with information on which eyewitness(es) reported an explosion a full second prior to collapse at the plane impact zone, or remove this at the very least misleading/worst case dishonest claim from your main page? The 118 first responders deserve nothing less.
www.internationalskeptics.com...
originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb
Okay, here you go.
AE911Truth lies about "118 Witnesses"
On your main page, you state that 118 first responders heard sounds of explosions "at the plane impact zone - a full second prior to collapse". I've read and re-read AE911truth's Graeme MacQueen's paper "118 Witnesses" and can't find a single witness who reported hearing an explosion at the impact zone a full second prior to collapse, much less 118.
The majority of witnesses (all 31 in the "bomb" category and well over half in the "explosion" category) use the term bomb or explosion to describe the sound DURING the collapse. IE, the roar of the collapse sounded like an explosion/bomb. The remaining accounts describe explosions well before and well after the collapses, as explicitly described by the first responders, and many say they believe in hindsight that the explosions were electrical (Stephen Gregory) or the like. Will you please provide me with information on which eyewitness(es) reported an explosion a full second prior to collapse at the plane impact zone, or remove this at the very least misleading/worst case dishonest claim from your main page? The 118 first responders deserve nothing less.
www.internationalskeptics.com...
Apparently, "AE911 Truth" has come under attack from other 9/11 conspiracy theorist after it was determined they were being mislead and lied to by "AE911 Truth." In fact, some of its former associates have left that group due to its questionable practices.
You would have also noticed that there is not one WTC video that depicts the sound of demolition explosions. Case in point; no seismic data depicting demolition explosions.
Anyone WITH some education can tell you what example of ten- to thirty-fold cheating YOU missed in your repeatedly posted picture.
I'll give you one clue : the word nano is in it.
The honest picture would need a lot more vertical space : 14.6 plus 28.0 times more vertical space.
You are either missing quite some necessary education, or intentionally posting misinformation, and I have come to the conclusion after reading 91 pages of your stubborn endless diatribe, that the latter is the case.
If you resize your diagram to honest comparable dimensions, the REAL TRUTH would stare you in the face....
That red square would be in its vertical dimension, 42.6 times as big as it is now.!
I have the backing of structural and civil engineers, architects, firefighters, and even demolition experts.
originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: skyeagle409
I have the backing of structural and civil engineers, architects, firefighters, and even demolition experts.
So do we, and our scientist put their names on their technical Reports
]International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
Reload this Page AE911Truth lies about "118 Witnesses", is made aware, then lies further...
Apparently, "AE911 Truth" has come under attack from other 9/11 conspiracy theorist after it was determined they were being mislead and lied to by "AE911 Truth." In fact, some of its former associates have left that group due to its questionable practices.
We all know how the Truth-movement was hijacked many years ago by many disinformation to deliberately make anyone who doesn't support the OS narratives to be frown a pond.
And to skywhatever... to say that there is no audio, video or seismic proof of explosives is just a blatant lie.
Civil & Structural Engineers on WTC Collapse
"The aircraft moved through the building as if it were a hot and fast lava flow," Sozen says. "Consequently, much of the fireproofing insulation was ripped off the structure. Even if all of the columns and girders had survived the impact - an unlikely event - the structure would fail as the result of a buckling of the columns. The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."
Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief ’s Assessment
The jet collapsed the ceilings and scraped most of the spray-on fire retarding asbestos from the steel trusses. The steel truss floor supports probably started to fail quickly from the flames and thecenter steel supporting columns severed by plane parts heated by the flames began to buckle, sag, warp and fail. Then the top part of the tower crashed down on the lower portion of the structure. This pancake collapse triggered the entire cascading collapse of the 110-story structure.
911-engineers.blogspot.com...
Where's the seismic spike that depict WTC explosions? If you look at the data, there are no spikes that depict WTC demolition explosions.
We all know how the Truth-movement was hijacked many years ago by many disinformation to deliberately make anyone who doesn't support the OS narratives to be frown a pond.