New 911 Evidence Solves Unanswered Questions

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Where the Twin Towers Ended Up

www.theatlantic.com...

Shortly after the attacks, New York City sold 175,000 tons of World Trade Center steel scrap to be made into something else. Some went to cities in the United States; about 60,000 tons went to companies in China, India, and South Korea. But some steel was recovered from Ground Zero for a different purpose: to be memorialized.

Break

For years, that steel, along with hundreds of other artifacts from that day—crushed police cars, elevator parts, souvenirs, and jewelry from the underground mall—was stored in an 80,000-square-foot hangar at John F. Kennedy International Airport. The 840 pieces of steel were cut to create 2,200 chunks. Since 2008, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has doled out these artifacts to government and nonprofit organizations for free. Now, just 30 remain.

Break

The biggest chunk of steel, weighing 47,000 pounds, was given to the Stephen Siller Tunnel to Towers Foundation, which raises money for first responders injured or killed in the line of duty.

Why does the truth movement rely on falsehoods?

The truth 'movement' does not rely upon falsehoods, they rely upon obvious facts that contradict the official story.

Why does the official tale rely upon falsehoods? Because that is all it has.

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Where the Twin Towers Ended Up

www.theatlantic.com...

Shortly after the attacks, New York City sold 175,000 tons of World Trade Center steel scrap to be made into something else. Some went to cities in the United States; about 60,000 tons went to companies in China, India, and South Korea. But some steel was recovered from Ground Zero for a different purpose: to be memorialized.

Break

For years, that steel, along with hundreds of other artifacts from that day—crushed police cars, elevator parts, souvenirs, and jewelry from the underground mall—was stored in an 80,000-square-foot hangar at John F. Kennedy International Airport. The 840 pieces of steel were cut to create 2,200 chunks. Since 2008, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has doled out these artifacts to government and nonprofit organizations for free. Now, just 30 remain.

Break

The biggest chunk of steel, weighing 47,000 pounds, was given to the Stephen Siller Tunnel to Towers Foundation, which raises money for first responders injured or killed in the line of duty.

Why does the truth movement rely on falsehoods?

The truth 'movement' does not rely upon falsehoods, they rely upon obvious facts that contradict the official story.

Why does the official tale rely upon falsehoods? Because that is all it has.

You mean like Richard Gage saying the twin towers fell through the path of greatest resistance when video clearly shows vertical columns still standing after the complete collapse of the floor systems?

That paint chips are thermite?

The claims seismic data shows underground WTC explosions when the seismic data does not contain the correct seismic waves?

Claiming first responders suffering from exposure to toxins are suffering from radiation poisoning?

Still can find people claiming the towers fell at the rate of free fall?

The truth movement posting pictures of columns cut by clean up crews as cut by thermite.

AE claiming they could prove WTC 7 was not brought down by fire related collapse, ask for thousands in donations, then the WTC 7 evaluation project is not released.

Claiming there is a peer reviewed thermite paper? Only to find it was published in a pay to play journal, the review bypassed the paper’s referee, and at least one of the reviewers help with the paper’s development!

Yeh, the truth movement is not a bunch of charlatans? Or take donations without fulfilling promises?

a reply to: Salander

When is Mark Basile going to release the results of the promised WTC dust study?

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: turbonium1

A real 757/767 plane is essentially a thin aluminum shell, with engines. It is not designed, or built, to ram into buildings, like a tank. Nor can planes slice through steel like it was balsa wood. I can't remember how many times I heard the media describe how these planes had 'become projectiles'. 'Projectiles' drive through steel like a hot knife through butter. That's why they described the planes as 'missiles'. Impressions of a plane as a missile, which slices through steel like balsa wood.

Explain numb nutz how a lightweight fighter can penetrate side of steel ship ……

USS HINSDALE ( APA 120)

upload.wikimedia.org...


USS STERRETT (DD 407)

www.researcheratlarge.com/Ships/DD407/h98062.jpg

OR a WW II Bomber a solid 11 inch thick masonry wall

upload.wikimedia.org...

One of the motors punched all the way through the building coming out other side to land on roof 1 1/2 block away

Don't seem to be aware of aircraft construction - while skin is quite thin , have number of heavy substantial components

Keel beam - runs length of aircraft provides support to cabin and cargo bays, heaviest strongest piece on aircraft

Jet engines weigh 5 tons each, composed of high strength high temperature alloys

Wing ribs and spars

Fuel - at that speed fuel acts like a solid battering ram

You've made my point here.

All of your examples show that planes do NOT slice entirely through, into the structures.


No kidding.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: turbonium1

A real 757/767 plane is essentially a thin aluminum shell, with engines. It is not designed, or built, to ram into buildings, like a tank. Nor can planes slice through steel like it was balsa wood. I can't remember how many times I heard the media describe how these planes had 'become projectiles'. 'Projectiles' drive through steel like a hot knife through butter. That's why they described the planes as 'missiles'. Impressions of a plane as a missile, which slices through steel like balsa wood.

Explain numb nutz how a lightweight fighter can penetrate side of steel ship ……

USS HINSDALE ( APA 120)

upload.wikimedia.org...


USS STERRETT (DD 407)

www.researcheratlarge.com/Ships/DD407/h98062.jpg

OR a WW II Bomber a solid 11 inch thick masonry wall

upload.wikimedia.org...

One of the motors punched all the way through the building coming out other side to land on roof 1 1/2 block away

Don't seem to be aware of aircraft construction - while skin is quite thin , have number of heavy substantial components

Keel beam - runs length of aircraft provides support to cabin and cargo bays, heaviest strongest piece on aircraft

Jet engines weigh 5 tons each, composed of high strength high temperature alloys

Wing ribs and spars

Fuel - at that speed fuel acts like a solid battering ram

You've made my point here.

All of your examples show that planes do NOT slice entirely through, into the structures.


No kidding.

That your a numb nutz? With absolutely no evidence of holograms? With no proof how explosives and 8,000 gallons of fuel would be staged to create the filmed explosions when the jets hit the towers.

With no explanation how jet wreckage ended up in the street? Proven by pictures posted by waypastvne
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: turbonium1

Perhaps you missed this ……...

B 25 hit EMPIRE STATE BUILDING in July 1945

Plane penetrated solid masonry wall (thought they could not do this ….)

One engine shot through the South side opposite the impact and flew as far as the next block, dropping 900 feet (270 m) and landing on the roof of a nearby building and starting a fire that destroyed a penthouse art studio. The other engine and part of the landing gear plummeted down an elevator shaft. The resulting fire was extinguished in 40 minutes. It is still the only significant fire at such a height to be brought under control.[7]

Parts of the plane penetrated one masonry wall, flew through building to crash through second masonry wall to land block away

Fast Forward September 2001

sites.google.com...

Exterior wall panel knocked out of building - pieces of landing gear embedded in it


QED

Numb Nutz

a reply to: toms54

look at that. By Dimitri Khalezov.

ae911socalledtruth's defenders: please shadd up, you've played, you unable to admit you've been deceived by shills and disinformation agent, deal with it!

www.facebook.com...

a reply to: Bernardo1871

Your post brought me back to see all the activity since my last post here. Doesn't look like much progress in the discussion, just a lot of hostility and name calling. Unfortunate.

9/11 Nuclear Demolition Theory: Censored Wikipedia Article Clear explanation - people that won't read it can look at the pictures.

Nanothermite There clearly was thermite used in some phase of the explosion. For those pesky top floors not pulverized, explains "bowing."

No one even attempted to explain collapse of 7 - not hit by a plane. If one building was wired, they were all wired.

Or you can believe the "crappy weld" theory making these three buildings the only steel framed buildings in the history of the world to collapse due to a fire.

a reply to: toms54

Your post brought me back to see all the activity since my last post here. Doesn't look like much progress in the discussion, just a lot of hostility and name calling. Unfortunate.

Blatant falsehood by. The use of a Nuke is entirely based on pseudoscience and has thoroughly been debunked. It has been debunked in this thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

There is no possible way nukes where used at the WTC.

And thermite is also based on pseudoscience and there is no proof.

a reply to: toms54

Would you like to make anymore false claims?

a reply to: toms54

And you do realizes one of the con artists pushing thermite named Jones debunked the use of nukes at the WTC.

a reply to: neutronflux

where we here? metabunk or a conspiracy nuts forum? still amazed by people who are at forums like above top secret but
either who still believe that 9/11 was done by 'alqaeda'
either who deny the controlled demolition by nukes.

dummy, you just have to look to the photos to admit that explosives, regular, military ones, semtex or whatever cannot be able to do what happened. the steel of the bottom of the south and north towers were intact, yet they disappeared, they turned into dust. nanothermite cannot do that.

of course that con artist pushing thermite like Jones denies (sic) the use of nukes at the WTC, he worked on cold fusion in the 1980s! doesn't that seem obvious that steven jones is a famous 9/11 so-called researcher because he doesn't say the truth, ie the nuclear attack.

his arguments have been easily countered, questions have been asked in return, of course he has never heard of them, he doesn't care, his goal is to divert the people from the truth, the real truth, ie the nuclear attack.

only nukes could have done that:
i.imgur.com...
i.imgur.com...
i.imgur.com...
i.imgur.com...

you just don't want to be proven wrong, so you will keep denying the truth for that reason. gatekeeper!

a reply to: Bernardo1871

only nukes could have done that:

You have to be a bot or someone who has never seen a nuke go off

It look nothing like a nuke.

2nd point.

never has a controlled demolition done so much collateral damage because its ........."controlled"

then when buildings are taken out using explosives its done from the bottom up so it fall into its own footprint, you know the same thing so many idiots say about the towers yet they destroyed numerous buildings on their way down.

either who deny the controlled demolition by nukes.

Some people have brains that helps them use their senses such as sight.

I feel sorry for the blind that can only repeat what things look like after being told yet not see things for themselves.


Why post pictures when you cannot see them yourself or have you really never seen a nuke go off?

dust cloud that starts to drop compared to a nuclear explosion where its plume travels up.

are you just messing around or for real?

a reply to: InhaleExhale

is that a conspiracy nuts forum or a shill forum, or a dummy forum? above top secret sounds like conspiracy nuts, but are there so many slaves defending the 9/11 PsyOp of jet fuel melting steel beams?

i guess you start from what corporate media tell you to believe, then you disregard anything that contradicts your false belief?

you should have waited to get your own belief, waited to have listened to the many testimonies, data and video documents.

9/11 surfer? you don't care.
Hurricane-like winds inside the North Tower saved the live of firefighter Pasquale Buzzelli during his 50 m freefall from the 22nd floor down.
He landed unharmed on a pile of rubble, approximately 7 stories high.
The Miracle of the 9/11 Surfer was possible because parts of the building were still standing, the strong up winds were canalized and vertically surrounded by the building.
The 9/11 surfer sank down in this wind tunnel until reaching the height of the pile of debris when the storm winds caused by the pressure compensation subsided.
@8:12
www.youtube.com...

The Miracle of Stairwell B was possible because the fireman were very close to the outlet which is just like being close to the muzzle of a machine gun or next to an eruption crater of a hot water fountain – just not in front of it but with a lateral offset.

Levitation effect on 9/11? you have never heard of it!

i guess your *steel beams can't melt jetfuel' cannot explain what happened to the 9/11 surfer. you don't care, you stick with your false belief!

just messing around? nah, just here to help fellows who have accepted the truth, ie that 9/11 was a nuclear attack. against the truth, there are:
slaves who will believe until they rot that 'steel beams can melt jetfuel',
9/11 troofers who stick with their false belief regarding the nanothermite narrative, already debunked. that was precisely the objective: to get a 9/11 troofers movement condemned to false narrative.

not here to make fun of slaves or of troofers! how dare you! :-)

a reply to: Bernardo1871

Yet the suffer didn’t get radiation poisoning?

Your delusional.......

a reply to: Bernardo1871

I didn’t know miracles and sufferers were part of nuclear reactions.

Do you have actual evidence of nuclear reactions at the WTC that resulted in collapse.


Below is a link that contains video of WTC 2’s collapse initiation.

the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/
www.metabunk.org...

How are nukes responsible for initiating the collapse of WTC 2.

Funny you want to talk about anything than the video, audio, and seismic activity of the actual collapse initiation.

a reply to: Bernardo1871

9/11 surfer? you don't care.
Hurricane-like winds inside the North Tower

Maybe heat from fires rises, and the incoming air causes an updraft.

Why would nuclear reactions and thermite cause a more powerful updraft than a large building fire? Are you saying a nuclear blast caused the updraft? Which would be different than a shockwave if from detonation.

a reply to: Bernardo1871

In fact, it had to be cool air from an updraft caused by fire sucking in air. If it was a nuclear source heating the air below to cause it to rise, wouldn’t the draft up the shaft be hot enough to kill the person? With the radiation?

a reply to: Bernardo1871

sorry bud I tried reading your nonsense but its way to beyond.

is that a conspiracy nuts forum or a shill forum, or a dummy forum? above top secret sounds like conspiracy nuts, but are there so many slaves defending the 9/11 PsyOp of jet fuel melting steel beams?

How many questions are you asking here?

Is what a conspiracy nuts forum?

I don't get what you asking about, maybe clear your thoughts and write something legible.

i guess you start from what corporate media tell you to believe, then you disregard anything that contradicts your false belief?

You can guess all you like.

Its seems guessing is all you have, thinking and making conclusions based on knowledge is just too much of a strain on your brain maybe?

I ask as its what I observe in your reply.

you should have waited to get your own belief, waited to have listened to the many testimonies, data and video documents.

beliefs?

this isn't religion we are talking about.

But you can believe in whatever you please.

Do you know that 9/11 attack happened 17 years ago?

How much longer do I have to wait, is there more witness testimony that has never seen the light of day?

Is this what you are saying?

Or are you just assuming that in 17 years only you have covered all the information available, which you posts indicate you haven't but a youtube video or 2?

just messing around? nah, just here to help fellows who have accepted the truth, ie that 9/11 was a nuclear attack.

so I guess its a NO then to the questions asked.

That makes sense



since you like YouTube why not view some nukes going off.

IN all honesty if you can say they look like the twin towers when they were collapsing then you have a very nice day sir.

a reply to: neutronflux

Thousands of first responders in New York have been exposed to deadly radiation over the years.

Did the decontamination of Ground Zero prevent cancer?
nah, in the first years after 9/11 fatal (radiation-related) leukemia and bone cancers developed.
A second wave of lung cancers is currently caused by asbestos, a carcinogenic substance that acts mechanically.

WTC Ground Zero Decontamination
www.youtube.com...

The USGS detected two always radioactive elements in the WTC dust samples:

uranium, mean concentration 3.29 ppm

thorium, mean concentration 9.31 ppm

source? take that for data! :-)
pubs.usgs.gov...

sprayers were also used to cool the high temperature debris before it left the site. Several trucks were returned to the site for additional cooling because the law enforcement officers would not let them through the tunnels leaving Manhattan until they stopped steaming.
source? web.archive.org...://911encyclopedia.com/wiki/index.php/World_Trade_Center_Hot_Spots

i'll come back to play with ya! :-)