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.
University of Alaska Fairbanks Professor Launches New 9/11 Research Project
page: 19share:
What is obvious?
www.facebook.com...
The video breakdown of WHY it's not the truth we know.
]edit on 25-5-2016 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)
www.facebook.com...
The video breakdown of WHY it's not the truth we know.
]edit on 25-5-2016 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-5-2016 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)
a reply to: Informer1958
Evidence of demolition explosions on video? Any evidence through metallurgy of steel being worked on by Thermite or demolitions? Again, don't need dust samples. Any evidence of shells for directing Thermite or explosives. Any evidence of blasting cap. Any evidence of a detonation system? Any evidence steel columns being drilled for Thermite or explosives?
Evidence of demolition explosions on video? Any evidence through metallurgy of steel being worked on by Thermite or demolitions? Again, don't need dust samples. Any evidence of shells for directing Thermite or explosives. Any evidence of blasting cap. Any evidence of a detonation system? Any evidence steel columns being drilled for Thermite or explosives?
edit on 25-5-2016 by neutronflux because: (no reason given)
Repeat.
edit on 25-5-2016 by neutronflux because: (no reason given)
a reply to: cavtrooper7
What? University, colleges, and engineering societies that care about how the WTC buildings to improve building safety determine the cause of collapse was fire. If steel is impregnable to fire, why insulate it for fire?
What? University, colleges, and engineering societies that care about how the WTC buildings to improve building safety determine the cause of collapse was fire. If steel is impregnable to fire, why insulate it for fire?
If Jones research was clinically correct, only a component of thermite was found that is used in other industrial applications. Like if a same had
calcium it must have been from a bone? Did he ever find aluminum.
edit on 25-5-2016 by neutronflux because: (no reason given)
a reply to: neutronflux
Yes there is documents to were the WTC dust came from and when, why, and how.
You need to go back and read Jones paper again.
Another fact is, Jones NEVER Photoshop anything, and you have no concrete evidence of that.
The fact is, NIST has proven themselves as lairs when they wrote the WTC papers It's called pseudo science. NIST science cannot, and will not stand up to real science period.
Call it what you want, but I have made no unfounded allegations.
There is no documentation of where the samples were kept and how there were preserved for 4 or 5 years. It's well documented, is it benthem science, will publish anything. The fact Jones would Photoshop anything and pass it as evidence put his credibility in the toilet. Still calling all the engineers at NIST ASME criminals. Talk about unfounded aligations.
Yes there is documents to were the WTC dust came from and when, why, and how.
You need to go back and read Jones paper again.
Another fact is, Jones NEVER Photoshop anything, and you have no concrete evidence of that.
The fact is, NIST has proven themselves as lairs when they wrote the WTC papers It's called pseudo science. NIST science cannot, and will not stand up to real science period.
Call it what you want, but I have made no unfounded allegations.
edit on 25-5-2016 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)
a reply to: neutronflux
Do you have any evidence of negativeness?
Evidence of demolition explosions on video? Any evidence through metallurgy of steel being worked on by Thermite or demolitions? Again, don't need dust samples. Any evidence of shells for directing Thermite or explosives. Any evidence of blasting cap. Any evidence of a detonation system? Any evidence steel columns being drilled for Thermite or explosives?
Do you have any evidence of negativeness?
a reply to: neutronflux
Not thermite.
IT IS resistant to the temps at which air fuel burns.
I wouldn't need a degree to tell me steel won't melt without a forge or thermite.
Not thermite.
IT IS resistant to the temps at which air fuel burns.
I wouldn't need a degree to tell me steel won't melt without a forge or thermite.
edit on 25-5-2016 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason
given)
edit on 25-5-2016 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)
a reply to: Informer1958
Same for the lack of aluminum in Jones samples. WTC investigation looked for evidence and found none for explosives. For the sounds of demolition explosions on video, don't you think truthers have tried to find it. If there was anything credible, it would be all over the Internet with links to the video. Pretty short sighted comment.
Same for the lack of aluminum in Jones samples. WTC investigation looked for evidence and found none for explosives. For the sounds of demolition explosions on video, don't you think truthers have tried to find it. If there was anything credible, it would be all over the Internet with links to the video. Pretty short sighted comment.
a reply to: cavtrooper7
There was no melted steel at the site and steel does not have to melt to be bent. Did I post the steel melted to bring down the buildings. Better read the Purdue and university of Edinburgh models. Do you melt steel to bend horse shoes. Around 800 degrees Fahrenheit steel looses 50 percent of its resistance to load. Heat makes steel workable under strain.
There was no melted steel at the site and steel does not have to melt to be bent. Did I post the steel melted to bring down the buildings. Better read the Purdue and university of Edinburgh models. Do you melt steel to bend horse shoes. Around 800 degrees Fahrenheit steel looses 50 percent of its resistance to load. Heat makes steel workable under strain.
edit on 25-5-2016 by neutronflux because: (no reason given)
a reply to: neutronflux
Weird ,how in the world, these skyscrapers are the only ones that have burned down by fire.
VERY weird.
Weird ,how in the world, these skyscrapers are the only ones that have burned down by fire.
VERY weird.
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Informer1958
Jones peer review are a frauds. Why don't you believe any of the peer review papers that shoot Jones hypothesis down? You believe in the peer review?
Because their isn't any. Show us if I'm wrong.
originally posted by: Doctor Smith
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Informer1958
Jones peer review are a frauds. Why don't you believe any of the peer review papers that shoot Jones hypothesis down? You believe in the peer review?
Because their isn't any. Show us if I'm wrong.
The results of the perdue and university of Edinburgh models do show you are wrong.
Good debunking series here .
mylespower.co.uk...
originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: neutronflux
Weird ,how in the world, these skyscrapers are the only ones that have burned down by fire.
VERY weird.
Didn't say they burnt down. The steel holding the floors up become week and sagged to the point they failed. Parts of the structure was already heated and loss the strength to stop the falling floor. On top of added stress in the columns from uneven heating.
Evidence of molten steel! Impossible according to the official story! Only Thermate could do that!
a reply to: cavtrooper7
Weird how these were the only buildings hit by loaded 767's.
VERY weird.
Weird ,how in the world, these skyscrapers are the only ones that have burned down by fire.
VERY weird.
Weird how these were the only buildings hit by loaded 767's.
VERY weird.
originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: cavtrooper7
Weird ,how in the world, these skyscrapers are the only ones that have burned down by fire.
VERY weird.
Weird how these were the only buildings hit by loaded 767's.
VERY weird.
Weird how you fail to understand building 7 wasn't hit by a 767. And even if it was it could never fall straight down into its foot print at free fall speed. Show us an example of any steel frame sky scraper falling into its foot print for any reason other than controlled demolition.
a reply to: Doctor Smith
Believe what you want to believe. But everything you present had been debunked, had no physical evidence, or discredited by other eyewitnesses. I side with Purdue University and engineers that seek the science of the WTC buildings to make safer structures. Sad you don't know science and that eyewitnesses accounts need physical proof for verification. I am still waiting for you to debunk I can fly like Superman?
Believe what you want to believe. But everything you present had been debunked, had no physical evidence, or discredited by other eyewitnesses. I side with Purdue University and engineers that seek the science of the WTC buildings to make safer structures. Sad you don't know science and that eyewitnesses accounts need physical proof for verification. I am still waiting for you to debunk I can fly like Superman?
a reply to: Doctor Smith
Its been proven over and over again gravity pulls straight down and the buildings did not fall into its own footprint.
Its been proven over and over again gravity pulls straight down and the buildings did not fall into its own footprint.