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.
originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: hellobruce
But, weren't there testimonies of people saying that they heard explosions before the building collapsed?
Also, you don't need that many explosives. All you need is a couple of explosives that would damage the foundations of a building enough for it to go down...
In my opinion, I don't know how can a building collapse due to fire on a couple of floors and a plane wrecks that hit the upper levels of building.
originally posted by: enlightenedservant
originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: hellobruce
But, weren't there testimonies of people saying that they heard explosions before the building collapsed?
Also, you don't need that many explosives. All you need is a couple of explosives that would damage the foundations of a building enough for it to go down...
In my opinion, I don't know how can a building collapse due to fire on a couple of floors and a plane wrecks that hit the upper levels of building.
Haha, don't waste your time. He doesn't listen to reason. I even posted a video earlier in this thread with several minutes worth of live footage from Ground Zero. It was focused on the numerous times people on the scene said they heard explosions; workers in the towers (basement and upper floors) saying they heard multiple explosions; showed firefighters saying they heard explosions; and even had clips with the sounds of explosions in the background, some even interrupting interviews. These were scenes from 9/11 itself & yet dude still insists there were no explosions & that his knowledge of 9/11 is more accurate than the people who were there & the camera footage.
originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Blackmarketeer
It's hard to believe there are still people in the world who haven't seen any of the footage of Building 7. If you have access to the internet and 9-11 was ever any interest at all then Building 7 should have been in your research somewhere.
With so much coverage and controversy about it, it just baffles me that it's still unknown to some.
originally posted by: hellobruce
originally posted by: Debunkology
I suggest you watch this video....
This video better shows Gage's con
originally posted by: Debunkology
originally posted by: intrptr
And yet, once again, not one single shred of proof that explosives were used.
otherwise two thousand proffesional architects and engineers wouldn't have signed a petition for
"...that he knew from the first day that the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 on 9/11 was a classic controlled implosion. Asked how he thought it might have been done he posited, “looking at the building it wouldn’t be a problem — once you gain access to the elevator shafts…then a team of expert loaders would have hidden access to the core columns and beams. The rest can be accomplished with just the right kind of explosives for the job. Thermite can be used as well.”
"I mean, come on, it was complete destruction. I've seen buildings fall like that for years -- that was the end game for me."
originally posted by: stosh64
originally posted by: hellobruce
originally posted by: Debunkology
I suggest you watch this video....
This video better shows Gage's con
OMG, I never took the time to see his little demonstration before....
That little ummm....demonstration by gage is thoroughly discredited by the video from intrptr.
They all claim that the collapse 'defies the laws of physics'. Well, intrptr showed 'physics' in action, gage was peddling to....well, you all decided what his intended audience was with that little demonstration.
But I know little things like evidence will NOT deter the determined.
As I see above The goal posts already moved from wtc7 to thermite evidence in the twin towers.
And the endless dance continues.
I'm out.
originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: nOraKat
Why do people still labor under the inaccuracies like these? Fire and damage killed..7...8 buildings that day. It wasn't just fire, it wasn't just damage. It was BOTH. And, there are PLENTY of examples of steel structures that have failed from fire alone.
originally posted by: sayzaar
How is it possible that people who would claim to be intelligent not know about WTC 7 ? The curious minds of intelligent people should have lead to them wanting to know as much as possible about THE event that made the USA change the world we live in.
I'm dumbfounded as to why these judges would not know, to the point of believing that they are feigning ignorance !!
originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: MALBOSIA
So, you are saying the Marriott wasn't killed that day? And no, it did not completely collapse, but the middle of it that was completely REMOVED from it by the collapse of the Towers did.....and...in case you did not realize it....Hotels are FULL of small rooms that have walls that help support the entire building. So yes, you COULD carve the middle out of a hotel and STILL have the ends of it standing.