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 Has2bJohn , If you really are who you claim to be then use some of your internet time to look up the WTC work of Dr F Greening PhD Physist (amongst other quals)
Originally posted by Pootie
Most of the material was being ejected over the sides and the KE of that material is UNAVAILABLE for any of the energy sinks I have pointed out
Originally posted by Has2b
Learn and report back why his calculations are wrong!
Originally posted by DarkStormCrow
I thought it was a controlled demolition and the building fell into its footprint?
Originally posted by DarkStormCrow
I thought it was a controlled demolition and the building fell into its footprint?
Originally posted by Griff
Well, first, he assumes an un-impeeded drop of 12 feet.
Originally posted by Pootie
Your posts in this thread have shown that you may need to do a little studying before trying to call me out.
Originally posted by DarkStormCrow
Yes I will get out of this thread and stop questioning?
Forgive me please!
Originally posted by Tiloke
I can turn concrete into powder in my backyard with just a sledgehammer, I don't need any squibs, thermite, etc.
Or are you saying the forces at work on September 11th were less that the forces I can create with a hammer?
Originally posted by Tiloke
Your right, and there was exactly enough energy to do that and no more......
So, to sum things up:
There was enough energy released to be detected on seismographs 2 states away.
Originally posted by russ1969
So to sum it all up... The towers where brought down by an underground explosion.
Originally posted by russ1969
When the towers hit the ground, there was no seismic reading because even with that much force, the impact was absorbed by the surrounding buildings. these statements where made by seismologist Arthur lerner lam and Won young kim Of columbia university. i tend to believe them because they are experts.
"There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers," Lerner-Lam tells PM. "That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context."
Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Then why did they fall from the TOP down?
Originally posted by Griff
Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Then why did they fall from the TOP down?
Do I really need to explain this? Once again?
Originally posted by DarkStormCrow
Actually I have asked 3 questions in this thread and been insulted 3 times for asking the questions. If the question are so simple to answer why not just answer them without slinging an insult?
Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Griff...sorry if i missed your explanation. If you would like to post the link. I will read it.
Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Seems you don't like that I state facts. Geologists state that the seismic data does NOT support the bomb in the basement theories. Please let me know what evidence I have posted that is not accurate. I will be sure to withdraw any statement I posted that is wrong.