So how did the building collapse?

reply to post by SLaPPiE


lol like your post laughing from the beginning. I put the video up for a reason.

These are the first three buildings in history to go down from being hit with an aluminum can filled with kerosene. (miracle)

to true to true. it doesn't add up how it weakened the entire structure of the building to the point where it collapsed. It would take hours for a fire with loads of fuel sources to heat steel to its melting point. When the plane hit it was pretty much like laying a stick of dynamite on a steel support, or getting bit by a bee. Plus from where the fire was on the building it would have only messed with the steel on one side, but the fire from the plane couldn't have been hot enough to mess wit it without powerful accelerates. If the building actually fell because the steel supports gave out then it would have fallen one way not straight down. The only way that a building falls like that is because a entire level, or a couple gives way at the same time.

Man i only hope that everyone can visualize/comprehend what I'm trying to say.

I guess it was gravity? I love these threads they are so constructive. Usually starts with someone making an inciteful comment like "truthers suck, or are stupid, etc." Then when people start taking offense to the horrendous pile of crap that the author of the thread is proposing, who obviously spent countless hours painstakingly compiling lucid arguments to his defense, they get removed or banned or penalized in some manner. It is my opinion that this is the goal of these types of discussions. Also, just in case you guys are wondering, I think the OS is crap. It is well documented and agreed upon by virtually everyone outside of the U.S. gov't and some mental 'tards in our midst.

reply to post by masqua


Calling 'truthers' or anyone LIARS from the outset just serves as provocation ? That was the point i was trying to make ! It serves nothing and benefits nothing in debating the events of 911 ! There are two sides to a debate who is to say which one or both are lying ? There are discrepencies to each of the arguments ! I apologise for using a derogatory remark in my post but i was PROVOKED and asked the thread be closed (not alone in that) simply because it IS provocative ! Am I alone again in this line of thinking ?


[edit on 082828p://02America/Chicago05 by ProRipp]

OK lets see if i get what you want me to believe.

1 Four Airplanes Broke track with no responce from NORAD, and the FAA has no tape of the incident.
2 Two planes struck at the World Trade Center and took out THREE Buildings.
3 One plane crash in a field in PA, no wreckage.
4 One plane strikes the pentagon moving so fast that it can't be picked up on camera

That's enough right there for me to scream Bravo Sierra. I know, I should lisson to the Christians. Their Zombie King, water walking, wine maker would never allow them to have an false thought in these matters now would he.

Google Video Link

NORAD Tapes

Do you need any more IGNORANCE denied today?




[edit on 5-2-2010 by mikelee]

reply to post by dino1989


While I will admit some of the "truthers" have changed the story of what they believe, not all have, and by that same token, not all believe the same thing.

Yes, there are some that are just mind blowing that a logical person could think that really happened.

But the simple fact that all "truthers" agree on is that the OS is a fabrication, either in part or in whole.

I would be willing to buy the idea that those two planes brought down building 1 and 2. I will not buy that building 7 fell because of the planes. I also do not buy that a plane hit the pentagon. or that one crashed at Shanksville.

I don't have any fantastical theories as to how it happened though.

On a side note, I do find it quite absurd to post a thread asking for a fight.

Every time I see one of these threads it makes me sad. Not that you believe something different from me, but that people continue to choose this avenue. There are more intellectual ways to go about things.

Myself, you, each poster here, and ATS are ALL better than this thread.

Originally posted by carlos115
OK lets see if i get what you want me to believe.

1 Four Airplanes Broke track with no responce from NORAD, and the FAA has no tape of the incident.
2 Two planes struck at the World Trade Center and took out THREE Buildings.
3 One plane crash in a field in PA, no wreckage.
4 One plane strikes the pentagon moving so fast that it can't be picked up on camera

That's enough right there for me to scream Bravo Sierra. I know, I should lisson to the Christians. Their Zombie King, water walking, wine maker would never allow them to have an false thought in these matters now would he.

Congratulations on making four points which are all false. Well, I suppose 4 is part true but it was caught on a security camera which only takes about a frame a second; as security cameras do.

reply to post by mikelee


hey...where did you get those pics from...

not trying to challenge you, I just want to know so I can have it saved.

reply to post by iamsupermanv2


U2U sent with information.

reply to post by mikelee


Or evidence that demolition crews have acetylene torches (or propane more likely).

But you seem to have more fun thinking that it was super-nano thermite.

So go with that.

reply to post by hooper


Seeing how those columns were discovered in that condition as cited by workers on site during clean up, yes I'll go with that.

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by carlos115
OK lets see if i get what you want me to believe.

1 Four Airplanes Broke track with no responce from NORAD, and the FAA has no tape of the incident.
2 Two planes struck at the World Trade Center and took out THREE Buildings.
3 One plane crash in a field in PA, no wreckage.
4 One plane strikes the pentagon moving so fast that it can't be picked up on camera

That's enough right there for me to scream Bravo Sierra. I know, I should lisson to the Christians. Their Zombie King, water walking, wine maker would never allow them to have an false thought in these matters now would he.

Congratulations on making four points which are all false. Well, I suppose 4 is part true but it was caught on a security camera which only takes about a frame a second; as security cameras do.

I actually think 3 of his points are true....according to the OS

According to the OS, four planes did break track, and NORAD did not intercept because they were told to stand down.

According to the OS, the 2 planes were responsible for all 3 buildings collapsing.

as for the wreckage in PA, I'd venture to say the guy that made that comment meant any convincing wreckage was found (just stating the truth, if I was not told that Shakesville was a plane wreck site, I would never have guessed it on my own)

as far as the pentagon, I thought they would have had better security cameras on one of the most secure places in the country.

reply to post by iamsupermanv2


It just proves by the logic used that no matter what you tell these OS believers regardless if its a fact they will find or come up with some reason to deny it, or call it a lie.

"Every time I see one of these threads it makes me sad. Not that you believe something different from me, but that people continue to choose this avenue. There are more intellectual ways to go about things. Myself, you, each poster here, and ATS are ALL better than this thread."

Obviously, some OS apologists have been reduced to scraping the bottom of the barrel to keep perpetuating the fairy tale. These sort of tactics paint these individuals as irrelevant, since they are not able to contribute anything of significance to the discussion.