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 plube
reply to post by liejunkie01
asimple answer...it all takes energy to wehter it is a little amount or a large amount.....every little bit adds up in the system...every connection...and every weld...nut ...bolt...will all take energy to rip it apart....you cannot for one second discount the laws of physics and that is where you failed.
you can argue your points...and that is fine...but soon as you discount the physics...and you should know with your experience the force involved in ripping out evey seat...the upper 10th cannot take out the lower 90%...
You are wrong about Newton's Laws. They completely explain how the upper mass while accelerating and picking up momentem can subject the construction materials well pass their design specifications.
Once it is damaged its design specs are altered.
Originally posted by plube
now if you look in the OP vid you will see his top down vid with no Explosives used...so we assume there aren't any explosive...then the upper section would and should have acted like a rigid block...that is why i doubt things...because i have look at it carefully....and also if you watch the sauret video....before for the collapse the camera (in a fixed position) shakes...yet at no time during the collapse does it shake.
Originally posted by Varemia
Originally posted by plube
now if you look in the OP vid you will see his top down vid with no Explosives used...so we assume there aren't any explosive...then the upper section would and should have acted like a rigid block...that is why i doubt things...because i have look at it carefully....and also if you watch the sauret video....before for the collapse the camera (in a fixed position) shakes...yet at no time during the collapse does it shake.
The only thing I might point out here is that in the top-down no-explosive videos, the buildings are nearly purely concrete structures. This means that the falling structures really are solid blocks.
With 9/11, this was not the case, as each floor was separate and only connected by vertical steel columns which could twist and break apart. This means that only one floor would be destroyed at a time (the destruction maintaining much of the original mass of both floors), but the weight from above would remain extremely high for the entire collapse.
Originally posted by plube
reply to post by liejunkie01
wow....see we can agree on something....lol.
bitchy GF and two kids getting in the way of discussing life changing events....
So we are not that different after allbut as far as physics goes....it does not expalin what happened...in my post to canoli i gave him a link to an analysis i did on some videos footage with some anomalies....now you might actually go and take a look at it,
www.abovetopsecret.com...
now the two anomalies are explained...i am listening to you about your single florr senario...but if you look at the images...the upper bloclk is crushing on itself before the collapse of the floors below.
also in the first section the antenna is dropping before the roofline which is on the hat truss....so the senario imo is not occuring in the way your believing it is....if you look at the second set the lower floors stay in tact befor upper flor impacts it...not also know all this is in less than a second as this vid was approx 29frames a second.
as you i do not just take peoples words...i go and do my own analysis....and draw my own conclusions.
now if you look in the OP vid you will see his top down vid with no Explosives used...so we assume there aren't any explosive...then the upper section would and should have acted like a rigid block...that is why i doubt things...because i have look at it carefully....and also if you watch the sauret video....before for the collapse the camera (in a fixed position) shakes...yet at no time during the collapse does it shake.
.
Originally posted by Blaine91555
Originally posted by smurfy
Blaine what you say just fortifies the thread as being null and void since it is about dishonesty. not what anyone may believe, rightly or wrongly.
One thing pointed out here, perhaps not as well as it could have been, is that those still pushing the nonsensical parts of the Truther agenda, are doing so for nefarious reasons. Some I'm convinced are pushing it based on their support of, or involvement in the same Terrorist agenda behind the lunatics who flew those planes into the towers. Some are doing it and even knowingly spreading lies because they hate America and Americans and are perfectly willing to lie or pretend false evidence is real. The Conspiracy Theory has become the real Conspiracy.
Perhaps we need a Forum for the 9/11 Truther Conspiracy, Conspiracy (...and no I'm not stuttering).