The Undebunkable Video: Eliminate The Impossible

reply to post by TupacShakur


I would't worry about it, I'm pretty sure that the average reader understands perfectly and can also see how disingenuous these tactics really are. I have faith in people or most of them. They are not easily fooled by attempts at deflection or to obscure.

reply to post by thedman


How ironic you cut and paste my post. I take it you agree with the rest of my post. I thought I clearly explained it to you.

But you respond back with the unnecessary need to focus on "pin point precision" of a demolition protocol.

Let me be very clear. Just because we truthers use the demolition theory doesn't mean it has to be similar to day to day "code enforced" demolitions. The reason we truthers say it looks more of a controlled demolition is because all fours side of the three WTC building disintegrated equally while dropping. One side didn't collapse faster than the other. If it did I can assure thousands more would have died and many more neighboring buildings (aside from the Verizon building ,deutche bank,community college,hilton,one liberty plaza and WTC 3,4,5,6)would have been destroyed.



Again , there is no "set in stone" way in demolishing a building. Its an art. One could make the building collapse,tilt,drop or free fall however he/she would like. With explosive ANYTHING is possible.. And Obviously in a professional situation one has to consider its surroundings.


But I don't expect you to know that. I do suggest you read on construction and the art demolition. Its very interesting. And I mean this with no disrespect.


And I have been many times the NJ and NYC. Went to school in Hartford,Conn. And was born in Philly.


All I ask is to think it thru. The holes in the 911 story are huge. What we are told just doesn't add up.

reply to post by thedman

I am quite aware of the distances involved considering I live only few miles to the west in NJ and travel to the
area frequently

So how many times you been there?

If so are you aware of Barclay St which is a 4 lane road ?

If the building dropped straight down like the conspiracy loons keep claiming why all the damage to the
adjacent buildings ?

I thought that the demolition had all been planned and the building rigged years ago ......

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/1ebef892c56d.jpg[/atsimg] That's a pretty neat pile of debris. Why don't we compare that to the rubble of buildings that have been imploded? [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a81c5ba25f6a.jpg[/atsimg] [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2faee3143001.jpg[/atsimg] [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/183bfae6655b.jpg[/atsimg]

Let's compare those to buildings that collapse without the use of explosives: [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/070296ba0c19.jpg[/atsimg] [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/73d67dd0f566.jpg[/atsimg] [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a6c93c038e4d.jpg[/atsimg]

Facts that back up a controlled demolition:
--It fell at free-fall speed.

--It had a fault, which indicates an implosion.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/10b76f1dd03c.jpg[/atsimg]
--It produced a dust cloud which is similar to that seen in any controlled demolition/implosion.
--It fell symmetrically and vertically into the ground rather than tipping over or falling at an angle.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ac61a07a46d5.jpg[/atsimg]
--Despite the fact that several skyscrapers have had fires that were 20X worse that burned for much longer, WTC7 was the first steel skyscraper to collapse from fire damage.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b7b2800db79f.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/80b56af71143.jpg[/atsimg]
--A controlled demolition expert believes that it looks like exactly like a controlled demolition:

Arguments that it wasn't a controlled demolition:
--Debris hit some nearby buildings
--Some firefighters said the structure looked messed up

Originally posted by thedman
If the building dropped straight down like the conspiracy loons keep claiming why all the damage to the
adjacent buildings ?

Show me one controlled demolition that didn't send debris outside of the footprint? You are being unreasonable, and unrealistic with that claim.

Then show me one natural collapse that concluded with the outside walls sitting on top of the rest of the collapsed building...







You can't claim none of the buildings fell straight down anyway, when there is video of the events.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan

P.S. Thank you and TrickoftheShade both for continuing to advance awareness of 9/11 truth. Keep up the good work!

My pleasure. It's not advancing your awareness much though, since you're obviously unable to come up with answers to the questions I've posed.

Wonder why...

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


Your arguing about someone's testimony. ??? Why. Does it matter , what he/she says.? Even though if ATS decided to do a poll to see how many firefighter stories would side with Truthers or Debunkers(i have a hunch their veiw would side more with the truthers theory). YOU would still refuse to see how wrong you are on the 911 storyline.


So let's stop beating around the bush and look at the logical/physical evidence. If you blindly accept our governments storyline on 911 you haven't researched how buildings are constructed and how buildings are demolished. Once you understand the dynamics of both ends you will automatically begin to see the numerous amount of holes in the 911 storyline. The storyline that you support just doesn't support the logical/physical evidence.


I hope you take the time to research . You can start by using my posts as guides to begin your research . That's if you care?

Originally posted by dilly1
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

Your arguing about someone's testimony. ??? Why. Does it matter , what he/she says.?

Because their testimony directly conflicts with the central ideas advanced in this thread. I think that's quite important.

Even though if ATS decided to do a poll to see how many firefighter stories would side with Truthers or Debunkers(i have a hunch their veiw would side more with the truthers theory).

This just shows how putting too much store by conspiracy sites skews your ability to make rational judgements. The overwhelming majority of firefighters reject "Truther" theories and their testimony directly conflicts with the Truther narratives, as we've seen above.

So let's stop beating around the bush and look at the logical/physical evidence. If you blindly accept our governments storyline on 911 you haven't researched how buildings are constructed and how buildings are demolished. Once you understand the dynamics of both ends you will automatically begin to see the numerous amount of holes in the 911 storyline. The storyline that you support just doesn't support the logical/physical evidence.

I can't see any issue with it. Neither can the vast majority of engineers and physicists. Sure, a few Californian kitchen designers have expressed their doubts, but hundreds of thousands of certified professionals remain resolutely unimpressed.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

Because their testimony directly conflicts with the central ideas advanced in this thread. I think that's quite important.

So we can both agree that eyewitness testimony conflicting with a central idea is quite important, right? How about these credible witnesses whose eyewitness testimony conflicts with the official flight path of the plane that hit the Pentagon? [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/db68089197e5.jpg[/atsimg] [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/282a41d08ad3.jpg[/atsimg] [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/dd95bae31423.jpg[/atsimg] [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c59b8105d30b.jpg[/atsimg] [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bd3dac9c496d.jpg[/atsimg] [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/69a7ac965472.jpg[/atsimg] That is "quite important", wouldn't you agree?

This just shows how putting too much store by conspiracy sites skews your ability to make rational judgements. The overwhelming majority of firefighters reject "Truther" theories and their testimony directly conflicts with the Truther narratives, as we've seen above.

Firefighters for 911 Truth

I can't see any issue with it. Neither can the vast majority of engineers and physicists. Sure, a few Californian kitchen designers have expressed their doubts, but hundreds of thousands of certified professionals remain resolutely unimpressed.

These guys disagree:
--220+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
--1,500+ Engineers and Architects
--250+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals
--400+ Professors Question 9/11
--300+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members
--200+ Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals
--400+ Medical Professionals

So do these 1500+ architects and engineers

As does a huge chunk of the American population: Poll 1
Poll 2
Poll 3
Poll 4
Poll 5

First, any testimony from a fire fighter or policeman or an average joe (on the day of 911) supporting truthers or debunkers is pointless. He or she can change and twist the story over time (or) because of many other influences(which I don't want to get into on this post because its also just theoretical).


And That's my point ,,in the previous post you obviously didn't understand.


Now, if you want to prove the "overwhelming evidence" that all firefighters reject truthers claim; Then gather all the videos of firefighters on the day of 911 (and a couple weeks after,,,no later than that) claiming they heard bombs on the lower floors or Lava like molten medal flowing down. Then you objectively evaluate all the videos and statistically chart how many firefighters reject or confirm the truthers claim. And you can do the same for building 7.


But all that is way too much work for the both of us and at the end of the day it proves what?? Nothing concrete.


What is concrete ,is knowledge of construction and demolition. Which you try to insult me by assuming my knowledge in construction is at par with "kitchen designers". But its fine I can relate to not knowing who the hell is on the other side of monitor. ..I can assure you I was born and raised around construction and architects. That's all I know.


You also claim that there is thousands of certified professionals which remain unimpressed with the truthers claim. I bet you can't give me one General Contractor or Architect that can agree with you and all debunkers. The trick is you would have to prove those certified professionals must not be in no way shape or form an employee for the government (federal) or has(had) currently done work for the government(federal). Those two factors are bit crucial.


Especially in today's market , GC,Architects and Engineers are starving for work. Hell ,they're always starving for work..So many Cert.Professionals back then and now would say anything for a dollar.

In this country , billions of dollars are used for kick backs and favors from politicians and in return projects ,which are not granted to the sharpest tool in the shed ,but to who gives the most fundraisers/bribes etc....

What I am trying to say is certified professional(GC,Arch,Eng) are unfortunately whores, so there testimony is also pointless. I cant blame an architect or any professional for there biased remarks(or an actual report). The truth always has repercussions . And your most certified professional friends(I know they are not your friends,lol) don't want to risk the small amount of project opportunities that come ahead.


So I end this post with repeating ,that you must educate yourself in construction and design. Read on How and Why things are assembled in certain ways. Once you understand, you will see how bogus 911 storyline really is.


But I have a hunch your not going to do that . You rather take the "denial road", the "easy path" which is accepting unknown information given to you so freely and accepting it as the truth. . Its your life . Enjoy.

Originally posted by TupacShakur
So we can both agree that eyewitness testimony conflicting with a central idea is quite important, right? How about these credible witnesses whose eyewitness testimony conflicts with the official flight path of the plane that hit the Pentagon?

This really is OT. But you're ignoring the vast majority who saw a plane and corroborate the flight path as described. In the case of the firefighters wrt WTC7 there are no other opinions. All those in a position of authority agree that they thought the building would fall.

Of course you have more expertise...

Firefighters for 911 Truth

Go to mainstream ff sites, spend some time reading posts there. You'll find that your theories - and those of Firefighters for 9/11 Truth - are not at all popular.

These guys disagree:
--220+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
--1,500+ Engineers and Architects
--250+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals
--400+ Professors Question 9/11
--300+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members
--200+ Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals
--400+ Medical Professionals

So in percentage terms almost nobody. You do know that there are something like a quarter of a million architects and engineers in the USA?

By the way, have you ever checked the credentials of any of the people on these lists? Often they're unimpressive - as I say, kitchen designers and the like. And many of the signatories complain of having been asked to join a petition that turns out to be about CD and missiles and nonsense, when they thought they were signing something asking for investigation into intelligence failures and the like.

As does a huge chunk of the American population: Poll 1
Poll 2
Poll 3
Poll 4
Poll 5

edit on 29-7-2011 by TupacShakur because: To edit my post

Learn some psephology. And look at what happens to your "huge chunk" when you turn off your computer. Not a popular "movement" is it? Political presence - largely nil. Demonstrations - think on the ground. 9/11 Truth is about as popular as a small conservation movement. Not minuscule, but certainly insignificant.

Originally posted by dilly1

Especially in today's market , GC,Architects and Engineers are starving for work. Hell ,they're always starving for work..So many Cert.Professionals back then and now would say anything for a dollar.

But they would when the housing market was booming and they had plenty of work? Which it was in, er, 2007. Six years after 9/11.

Look, your position is ridiculous. The notion that something like 250,000 people are keeping quiet about this for money just doesn't stand up.

What I am trying to say is certified professional(GC,Arch,Eng) are unfortunately whores, so there testimony is also pointless. I cant blame an architect or any professional for there biased remarks(or an actual report). The truth always has repercussions . And your most certified professional friends(I know they are not your friends,lol) don't want to risk the small amount of project opportunities that come ahead.

Sorry, that's so ridiculous it's funny. Every construction professional would keep quiet about 9/11 just to secure future work?

What about the ones who work on private projects? Why would they need to keep silent?

And how come you're more honest than everybody else? Why are you not getting paid? Have you been offered govt money and turned it down? If so what makes it more likely for you to do that - are you just a better person?

So I end this post with repeating ,that you must educate yourself in construction and design. Read on How and Why things are assembled in certain ways. Once you understand, you will see how bogus 911 storyline really
is.

Quite amusing given my professional background.

But I have a hunch your not going to do that . You rather take the "denial road", the "easy path" which is accepting unknown information given to you so freely and accepting it as the truth. . Its your life . Enjoy.

Your information is a joke. Your opinion of what happened is so shot with holes, and requires such enormously unlikely factors to be true that it doesn't merit further discussion.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


i m a fairly new member, so i can't judge your 2000+ posts, but i can judge your attitude in the few 9/11 threads i have read, and the picture i have of you in my mind is this:

you, a king, sitting on a huge throne, letting every 'truther' come to you, one by one. They show you their evidence, giving you the explanation, you look at it, smile, laugh out loud, discard the man and say "next!"

you have the easiest job in the world! Even with facts in front of you, you still ignore. In a way of speaking everyone's sources are untrue, besides yours, of course. Enjoy your throne, sir...you can have and keep it!

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


Its obvious you've never worked in construction/design field. You have no concept of how hard it is to make a living in construction ,design or engineering. The building boom was a fantasy. Wasn't realistic . So before the boom (the majority of)GC's,Arch's and engineers were still hurting. So to even think the boom is reason why some professional would not speak out against there own boss(gov)is a joke. That's a joke.


My position is not ridiculous. Its a sound position. And what 250,000 people are you talking about? Have you ever worked for the federal government? Have you ever been contracted by the federal government? I have . You cross them your done. Done forever.


Private projects? If your going to ask a question about why certified professionals from the private sector are silent. Then answer mine first. Show me or present to me any professional from the private sector that agrees with the 911 storyline. But you can't ,because most professionals one way or the other can be influenced by the government. And most arch./eng. that do come forward are done as for as bidding for any RFP local/state/fed level projects.. Perfect example is the Richard Gage. Whether you agree or despise him is irrelevant. What is relevant is knowing that he (and any other follower) is done doing any contractual work in this country. Yes he mite be able to design a home or two (or some pointless warehouse). But designing a major building is not going to happen . And designing homes isn't really that profitable , unless you get to do the majority of a gated community.


So anyone that speaks out they better stick to there story and sell as many DVD's and book's as possible. Which is what this Richard Gage is doing. I don't him and could give two craps about the guy. I do know he huge balls for what he is doing.


Which begs the question do you even know how hard it is to bid for a job(private or gov). Its sounds like you don't.



Yes I am very honest, and? So what. What do you mean why am I not getting paid?. Turned down gov money? What? ?? I am talking very honestly here in ATS. No one on ATS or any member on ATS knows who I am. So I can be honest. But the moment I reveal myself to ATS or take the "Richard Gage" route : I am done. Does that compute with you. Do you see my point . Your extremely naive and have no concept of how powerful people above you are . Your completely clueless.


What is your professional background?.. See you don't have to believe me when I say I know construction. But I dare you to test me ,cause I'll do circles around you. Cause I know construction. You on the other hand try to debunk very competent people here on ATS and you bring nothing to the table. Nothing. Why would anyone take you seriously. What are your expertise?


So you continue to insult me that my information,my knowledge, everything that I know, everything on how I was raised around to called a JOKE. But you post nothing to back the 911 storyline.


All you do (like all debunkers) is continue to back our government as Saints. Understand, you blindly choose to do that. Not because our government has convinced you. ..How could they truly convince you, when you know nothing about the process on how to kick start a construction project , know nothing the process of constructing a building and you surely know nothing on how to demolish a structure.

You say I have holes but I explain with logic what happens in my profession. And what happened ,ONLY on the structural aspect, on 911.


You see how detailed I am , how honest I am . How easy I make everything look. You want to keep it complex , because you do not want to deal with reality. That's why your dying to end this discussion. You are terrified to continue this debate with me , because you have no idea where this discussion will direct your way of thinking.

All you do is brand my thinking as ridiculous and a joke and hope that this debate will just disappear by me assuming I'll give up. ,,mmmm. I got to tell you sound eerily similar to a government official.

Might it be that contractors who take any loud political standing on anything are considered a “hot potato”.
Not so much they have an anti government standing but they are too political?
Would anyone accept Donald Trump being involved with building a new government building? I don’t think so.
You want a company who has been doing business under the radar.

reply to post by samkent


First it depends on what he/she stands for. If the contractor is a die hard liberal I can assure you ,Bush will not hire him/her. For anything . And your point is??

Hot potato .....Of course it is, because he/she is being political. There is no other reason. If one attacks, disagrees,argues, accuses whatever freaken word you want, the government will make your career path very narrow. If you don't believe me go right ahead and try.


Why would any government want to pick donald in the first place . First donald would never bid for a Govjob because he loves being in control , in this case he wouldn't be in control. Donald Trump is not a contractor ,not an architect nor an engineer not even a project manager. HE'S A DEVELOPER. Do you know what that is?. That's the guy that answer to no one but himself. Trust me he would never bid a gov project.


The government is the developer. The government would only hire an Arch/Eng/GC's.............,,,,,....... Get it.


Your last statement is right. The Gov want someone under the radar. Which includes certified professionals who will think twice before ruining there careers. You know why? Not every Architect is a Frank Loyed Wright, Not every Engineer is Alexander Scordellis not every GC is a Turner Co.


Once the Gov hires you (whether your fresh from college or not) they make you sign many documents that include and discuss this kind of backlash. Your PREeeeewarned. And you're never told what the repercussions are,,,, but you know,,,, you know when you didn't get that bid and you gave the best price , credential were perfect everything was bonded and another group won the bid . Then it hits you , never should have I have burned that bridge. And that goes with everything in life. Don't burn your bridges


Any of these truthers leading the truth-movement , I applaud them because they will not make a lot of money the way they would like to ,,, all because of a stand. That's a lot to ask for in someone to just waste away what they passionately studied in collage because of some conspiracy involving the government.



So it is very possible for a(many) certified professionals from all over this nation : to stay quiet , to never even attempt to be associated with truthers let alone voice your opinion against the validity of the 911 commission. Its very possible. People like us can only do one thing. To voice and vent on ATS. That's it. There's no worries here.

Hello Tupac. I do not know if I can debunk your actual video, but I think I can debunk the whole theory with this question:

What do they burn in a fouundry to melt steel?

reply to post by craig732

Hello Tupac. I do not know if I can debunk your actual video, but I think I can debunk the whole theory with this question:

What do they burn in a fouundry to melt steel?

You bring up a great point, however if it was simply caused by hot fires, why did NIST, FEMA, and the 9/11 Commission all ignore the dozens of witness testimonies of molten steel in both streams and pools, as well as the photographic evidence of it in the rubble?

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

This really is OT. But you're ignoring the vast majority who saw a plane and corroborate the flight path as described.

...But that's exactly what those witnesses that I just posted were doing. They all witnessed the flight path of the airplane, and their testimonies all validate a flight path that's inconsistent with the official story and the one required to cause the light pole damage.

In the case of the firefighters wrt WTC7 there are no other opinions.All those in a position of authority agree that they thought the building would fall.

Really? Why don't you check out this thread that has, among many other things, controlled demolitions experts saying that the collapse of WTC7 had to have been a demolition for it to fall symmetrically at free-fall speed.

You don't even need to be an engineer, architect, controlled demolition expert, or firefighter. Use your common sense: for a building to collapse symmetrically, the damage to the core columns would have to be symmetrical and would have to happen within an instant. For a building to free-fall, there couldn't be stuff in the way for when the top section should hit it, meaning that it was removed.

All signs point to a controlled demolition; none point to a randomly scattered-fire-caused simultaneous core column failure free-fall symmetrical collapse.

Of course you have more expertise...

Of course I don't, but I have an opinion based on facts, evidence, and the opinions of experts.

Go to mainstream ff sites, spend some time reading posts there. You'll find that your theories - and those of Firefighters for 9/11 Truth - are not at all popular.

I will do that, but I want you to also go to ae911truth.org and spend 20-30 minutes reading about what the experts think. Is that fair?

So in percentage terms almost nobody. You do know that there are something like a quarter of a million architects and engineers in the USA?

Lame argument, because those numbers mentioned there are the ones that are actually active members who have joined the group. AE911 and those experts are currently working on a documentary, and it's going to be released in September of this year. That will make Loose Change look like a literal piece of poop shoved in your VCR.

By the way, have you ever checked the credentials of any of the people on these lists? Often they're unimpressive - as I say, kitchen designers and the like. And many of the signatories complain of having been asked to join a petition that turns out to be about CD and missiles and nonsense, when they thought they were signing something asking for investigation into intelligence failures and the like.

Yes I've read through quite a bit, and the majority if not all of the ones I've seen are very credible. But sure, strawman the kitchen designers and generalize that they're all unqualified, that's just as fair.

Learn some psephology. And look at what happens to your "huge chunk" when you turn off your computer. Not a popular "movement" is it?

Um do you realize that the vast majority of the evidence is on the internet? The internet allows people to take the time to analyze the information that a person presents rather than hearing some Engineer say something on TV while pointing at a chart and assume since he's an engineer that's all there is too it because he knows more than you.

Political presence - largely nil.

That's a good thing, because having a political/patriotic bias over this subject makes people 10X less likely to accept the facts.

Originally posted by craig732
Hello Tupac. I do not know if I can debunk your actual video, but I think I can debunk the whole theory with this question:

What do they burn in a fouundry to melt steel?

edit on 30-7-2011 by craig732 because: (no reason given)

I'm not Tupac but I can answer that.

There is a difference between open air and controlled heat. All fuels have a max temperature they will burn at. Fire does not keep getting hotter. So the only way to get ANY fuel to heat to it's max temperature is with a controlled burn where the fuel and oxygen are controlled to produce max heat. Fires in open air will never reach their max temp.

Take this into consideration. Remember the first tower to collapse was on fire for less than an hour...

Of interest is the maximum value which is fairly regularly found. This value turns out to be around 1200°C, although a typical post-flashover room fire will more commonly be 900~1000°C. The time-temperature curve for the standard fire endurance test, ASTM E 119 [13] goes up to 1260°C, but this is reached only in 8 hr. In actual fact, no jurisdiction demands fire endurance periods for over 4 hr, at which point the curve only reaches 1093°C.

www.doctorfire.com...

That is not enough heat to cause thousands of tons of steel to fail, and cause all the resistance of the structure to simply disappear.

reply to post by craig732


You guys keep laying eggs on yourselves. Jesus. Last time I checked the 91st floor of a building isn't the ideal place to construct a home made foundry.


Why would you even ask that question. You start with a sarcastic statement acting all nonchalant then bam! you lay an egg with that question.


You know I'm going to start melting all types of metals at the empire state. I heard they have stronger truss's for holding that jet fuel.