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 fastfingersfunk
Originally posted by jprophet420
i've seen plenty of statmements from people who where there that say there were no explosions pertaining to the collapse of WTC7
Whenever it becomes a valid or rational statement to say someone didnt witness something therefore it didnt happen, let me know.
i didn't say they didn't witness it. i'm saying they did witness the incident and what they witnessed was a collapse due to damage and that nothing of a CD was heard.
when you can comprehend what i'm saying, let me know.
Originally posted by fastfingersfunk
reply to post by jprophet420
then don't bring up NIST in one instance if you are going to dicredit them in another instance. the bottom line on NIST is that they said there is no evidence of a CD and their final report is going to conclude the same "working theory" they've had. they have access to WAY more evidence than you have so it's seems ironic that you are calling them out on the amount of evidence they've had access to. but at the same time you proclaim to know that WTC7 could have only come down like that under a CD
Originally posted by cashlink
reply to post by fastfingersfunk
(Where you there?) I heard plenty of people say they heard explosions
The firmen, police, first responders, office workers that made it out of the building as it was BLOWN up.
I guess all these people are liers.
Are they Liers?
Show us proof that they are all lying?
Originally posted by jprophet420
You cant see a non explosion, as it is nothing. You cannot witness a non event. In other words to say there were no explosions is to say they did not observe explosions. There are also people who claim the same thing about wtc1 and 2 even tho you can see the actual explosions on you tube.
When you comprehend what you're saying, let us know.
Originally posted by fastfingersfunk
reply to post by jprophet420
explosions in WTC1&2? caused by what?
Great question. Deserves an answer and hasnt been explained yet. Plenty of First and second hand evidence to support it.
the only thing i see is flames being pushed out caused by tremendous force.
where they are admittedly unexplained (nist)
i hope you don't believe explosives survived on the impact floors only to be detonated on queue.
hope in one hand and deficate in the other and see which one gets full
and nice way to dodge the question on WTC7.
i ansered the question directly
i believe the same exact things brought it down. so does everyone. i take that as a filibuster unless you care to explain an actual theory.
filibuster to what? I have to have a CT of my own to not believe the official story (which by definition is a CT as it is still a 'working hypothesis')
you keep bringing up explosions
i keep responding to your statements about the lack of explosions
but then you say you aren't claiming a controlled demolition. SO THEN WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
the fact that the story portrayed is implausible, and that literally hundreds of experts have the same opinion.
[edit on 2-7-2008 by fastfingersfunk]
Originally posted by fastfingersfunk
reply to post by jprophet420
so you don't have a plausible theory? you just question the "official story" which in your words isn't even official yet. you really aren't making any sense. but you have all the catch phrases down.
similarly i guess, i question your "official story" that it's not plausible that it came down due to structural failure. but i can actually offer a theory.
if you look at the structure of the building and acknowledge the damage, you can easily come to the conclusion that many top SE's & PE's come to, which is that it most certainly fell due to an intitial local failure of support 79 which led to the drop of the east penthouse. this started a horizontal failure which led to the west penthouse falling. these collapsed the main supports on stories 5 to 7 which led to a global collapse. much like is explained here by ramon gilsanz, who btw, is a on the NIST.
www.structuremag.org...
Richard Gage, AIA, Architect – Member, American Institute of Architects. A practicing Architect for 20 years who has worked on most types of building construction including numerous fire-proofed steel-framed buildings. Founding member of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
Speech at Sonoma State University 4/20/07: "Another 2006 poll by Scripps Howard, Ohio University, which found that a shocking 16% believe that the World Trade Center's Twin Towers were brought down by explosives. Unfortunately, my research has also concluded that this is true. Tonight I will present to you the very clear evidence that all three World Trade Center high-rise buildings, the Twin Towers and Building 7 were destroyed not by fire as our government has told us, but by controlled demolition with explosives." ae911truth.org...
Editor's note: WTC Building 7 was 610 feet tall, 47 stories. It would have been the tallest building in 33 states. Although it was not hit by an airplane, it completely collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than 7 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on 9/11, seven hours after the collapses of the Twin Towers. However, no mention of its collapse appears in the 9/11 Commission's "full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks." Watch the collapse video here. And six years after 9/11, the Federal government has yet to publish its promised final report that explains the cause of its collapse.