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 LeftBehind
Why do people keep claiming that the building fell into it's own footprint. If it hit buildings across the street, that means that it did not fall perfectly into it's footprint.
[edit on 21-3-2007 by LeftBehind]
Originally posted by brisa
Straight down? To the East? Not critical. What is critical is the rate of collapse. The roof hits the street in 6.5 seconds. This is free fall rate. In order for this to be the case, all structural integrity necessarily must be eliminated ahead of the collapse wave.
There us just no way that rate of collapse could be achieved unless all the support columns were simultaneously wiped out. It's called conservation of momentum.....Physics 101.
Originally posted by Ahabstar
Please check my math on first post of page 5 of this thread. See if your calculation for unrestricted free fall of 570 ft is about the same.
Originally posted by bsbray11
And so it did fold into itself to prevent collateral damage.
Originally posted by LeftBehind
Well then, why did it still hit other buildings?
If that was the plan then they failed miserably on that aspect.
Originally posted by Pootie
When CDI imploded the Hudson's building in Detroit they hit all sorts of intact structures (re: people mover, neighboring buildings) and that was still considered VERY successful by demolition terms.
Originally posted by LeftBehind
Secondly, if it was the same people who brought down the towers, why would they only worry about collateral damage with 7?
Originally posted by Spoodily
The entire center of the Oklahoma City building was blown out and the building stayed standing, and it was WAY more damaged than #7.
Originally posted by Slap Nuts
Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
But the blob seems to have grown more solid and gotten bigger with each successive publication from them, reaching farther and farther in towards critical components deep in the building.
They need the blob to be big enough to affect "transfer trusses" #1 and #2 for their upcoming half assed theory to even look half assed to a half wit.
The blob on the SW corner is too small in ther drawing and the center blob should bot exist at all IMHO.
[edit on 18-9-2006 by Slap Nuts]
Originally posted by Slap Nuts
Originally posted by bsbray11
"Debunkers" may not be responding to this thread, but how many of you want to bet that they won't hesitate to reference the supermassive hole in the South face next time WTC7 comes up anyway? As if this post never existed.
I will be here.
I will remember.
I will bring this post back to the top for them...
Originally posted by exponent
reply to post by thegameisup
This is a three year old thread. The evidence in this thread shows you to be wrong, why are you bringing it back from the dead by repeating an old claim?
There are photos of the damage in this thread, there are discussions of the damage in this thread. A single person not seeing the damage means little when there is direct evidence of it.
edit: I should say, it's a 3-6 year old thread. I think it deserves to die.edit on 6/7/12 by exponent because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Six Sigma
reply to post by exponent
I got sad when I opened this.... Ultima1 has a post on the top of the page...poor truther died back over a year ago.