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 impressme
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
Thanks man. And because there was no evidence of explosives being used that day if you really want to get to the bottom of 911, then we have to learn more about how fire effects steel.
Your right there is no evidence of explosives being used that day especially when you refuse to see the evidence, and hear the evidence.
There is no point having this discussion with you when you continually ignore what everyone is showing you. We all know the OS and it has been proven a lie a long time ago by the experts.
My opinion is either your Trolling or you have tunnel vision.
Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by liejunkie01
Again if it happened the way you claim, where is the mass of pancaked floors?
Floors can not be crushed, and ejected out of the footprint, and have enough mass to continue crushing undamaged floors, you can't have it both ways.
I've seen the evidence and heard it, it just doesn't hold up because I'm not part of the gullible internet sheep who believe every conspiracy, wake up dude. Read the updated NIST report (which even refutes the governments original pancake theory push) and they said there is no way a controlled demo took the building down. Keep living in fantasy land truther.edit on 18-6-2011 by SkepticAndBeliever because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by TheUniverse
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
This is incorrect because the weight of the above floors WERE in fact hitting damaged columns. You think the fire only damaged the part of the building that was impacted by the plane? There were fires weakening that steel all over the place.
Apparently even the Impact site of the Plane was quite lacking of Fires and to boot a large amount of Smoke was present which implies a starved FIRE. There is no way the fire was hot enough to Weaken Fire Resistant STEEL!
Originally posted by sgtrocknroll
reply to post by anumohi
He also stated that he meant "pull the people out" of the bldg. not pull the bldg. down. Conspiracy guys will take anything they get and run with it....what a waste of time....
Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
They didn't even investigate controlled demolition, so that is not a valid argument..
Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever
As the WTC-debris samples were examined, large chunks of concrete were found (irregular in shape and size, one was approximately 5cm X 3 cm X 3cm) as well as medium-sized pieces of wall-board (with the binding paper still attached). Thus, the pulverization was in fact NOT to fine dust, and it is a false premise to start with near-complete pulverization to fine powder (as might be expected from a mini-nuke or a “star-wars” beam destroying the Towers). Indeed, much of the mass of the samples were clearly in substantial piecess of concrete and wall-board rather than in fine-dust form...
I've seen the evidence and heard it, it just doesn't hold up because I'm not part of the gullible internet sheep who believe every conspiracy, wake up dude.
Originally posted by Darkwing01
reply to post by Illustronic
A gravity burn incendiary cannot take out vertical columns
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but that idea is as wrong as wrong can be:
Sorry for rehashing old news, but it seems that debunkers don't get the concept that you can't just say random things and claim you have debunked something.
Reality has a nasty way not bending to your crazy ideas.edit on 18-6-2011 by Darkwing01 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by hawkiye
The Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all of the characteristics of destruction by explosives:
1. Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration
2. Improbable symmetry of debris distribution
3. Extremely rapid onset of destruction
4. Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes
5. Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally
6. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking
7. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
8. 1200-foot-diameter debris field: no "pancaked" floors found
9. Isolated explosive ejections 20–40 stories below demolition front
10. Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
11. Several tons of molten metal found under all 3 high-rises
12. Evidence of thermite incendiaries found by FEMA in steel samples
13. Evidence of explosives found in dust samples
And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:
1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer-lasting fires have never collapsed.
End of thread!
edit on 18-6-2011 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)