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.


Looking for a little help

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 01:13 AM
I am in a very lively discussion with a poorly disguised shill. I remember reading a report written by independent physicists regarding the collapse. If I remember correctly the scientists were in Utah.

I am kinda new to this, and when reading the report I did not own a computer, so no bookmark.

Any additional scientific evidence and or reports would be appreciated, As would ANY from government sources that later changed there tune...

My apologies if this is not the correct way to approach this, but as I said I am kinda new to this.


posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 02:11 AM
Yeah, a little Google search would probably suffice, but since the thread is begun - I'm no expert on the issue but Utah makes me think Stephen Jones of BYU and Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Take that to a search and you should have it.
Good luck with the "shill."

posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 02:22 AM
Although i have recieved nothing here, I have found some very powerful ammunition, including NIST's report.

Start with disclaimers, no guarantees that tests were applied to relevent or even similar materials.

Can't hold NIST responsible for any info contained in report.

picking and choosing what safety and construction reports and plans, then refusing to identify what documents contained. Just trust me.

Then on page 205 stated clearly that the could not replicate the collapse, or pulling in of the outer walls.

We know it happened this way, we just can't prove it. SWEET

new topics

log in