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.
Within an environment of confusion, people often tend to see what they want to believe, changing the collapsing buildings into whatever they need them to be to maintain ones sense of "reality", ones ingrained sense of "right and wrong" or "good and bad".
originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: ForteanOrg
First, to those that say the buildings fell at free fall speed, please explain this.
It clearly shows top sections that ARE falling free fall and the remaining building behind that is still suffering from a progressive collapse.
Second, the tower cores were NOT concrete reinforced. There were concrete NON load bearing components IN the core, but the structural steel that supported the tower, in the core, was not concrete reinforced. And this is to show you the tower was built in small sections, Neither the outer "tube" or inner "core" could support itself.
and here are a few examples of the collapse initiation. Does it really look like explosives?
I love this quote
Within an environment of confusion, people often tend to see what they want to believe, changing the collapsing buildings into whatever they need them to be to maintain ones sense of "reality", ones ingrained sense of "right and wrong" or "good and bad".
If you are really interested in truth, check out THIS WEBSITE
It points out the crap in BOTH NIST and CT theories.
And by the way ForteanOrg, Thank You for the civil response. It is refreshing in these forums.
I hope we are all after the truth.
originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: SyxPak
You obviously have not bothered to research the damage to 7. FDNY described a 20 story hole carved out of the heart of 7, they described pieces of the building falling off, and photos show massive damage to the southeast corner...not just a little damage. So, the people that were THERE report massive damage and that they were sure 7 was going to fall.
Why are you so unwilling to accept the evidence?
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: ForteanOrg
First, to those that say the buildings fell at free fall speed, please explain this.
It clearly shows top sections that ARE falling free fall and the remaining building behind that is still suffering from a progressive collapse.
Second, the tower cores were NOT concrete reinforced. There were concrete NON load bearing components IN the core, but the structural steel that supported the tower, in the core, was not concrete reinforced. And this is to show you the tower was built in small sections, Neither the outer "tube" or inner "core" could support itself.
and here are a few examples of the collapse initiation. Does it really look like explosives?
I love this quote
Within an environment of confusion, people often tend to see what they want to believe, changing the collapsing buildings into whatever they need them to be to maintain ones sense of "reality", ones ingrained sense of "right and wrong" or "good and bad".
If you are really interested in truth, check out THIS WEBSITE
It points out the crap in BOTH NIST and CT theories.
And by the way ForteanOrg, Thank You for the civil response. It is refreshing in these forums.
I hope we are all after the truth.
Near free-fall speed.
What does it matter if there was a 3-5 seconds more than free fall?
Within an environment of confusion, people often tend to see what they want to believe, changing the collapsing buildings into whatever they need them to be to maintain ones sense of "reality", ones ingrained sense of "right and wrong" or "good and bad".
originally posted by: ForteanOrg
a reply to: stosh64
Thank you for your informative posting. From what I've learned so far from your and other postings and related sources it is clear that indeed at least in the North tower the central core collapsed first, pulling down the floors and exoskeleton with it. I believe that to be beyond reasonable doubt. If you study the available materials you can see that the radio mast on top sinks in before the edge of the roof follows. Also, you can see the exoskeleton cave in (being pulled to the inside).
But that is a bit mystifying: what made the core collapse like it did?
The impact itself was not sufficient to bring the buliding down. If that had been the case you'd expect the building to come down almost immediately after impact. It did not.
So, something else caused the collapse. What was it? Intense heat? If so, what caused that heat?
originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: MALBOSIA
Thank you.
Here is a better video to examine. Same view though.
The only "blow out" I see is after the initiation of the collapse. You can clearly see the collapse start, and building tilt, before anything is expelled.
Here are a few VERY CLEAR examples of the building failing at the initiation of collapse.
The exterior clearly buckles in at system failure. I wouldn't expect this of explosives.
It all goes back to this I think
Within an environment of confusion, people often tend to see what they want to believe, changing the collapsing buildings into whatever they need them to be to maintain ones sense of "reality", ones ingrained sense of "right and wrong" or "good and bad".
Please visit
A World Trade Center Collapse Investigative Resource
It really is an unbiased resource. It tries to cut through the BS from both sides.
We also know that in both Towers, jet fuel flowed into elevator shafts and exploded....even more damage to the cores.