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.
No matter how good the hypothesis sounds it has no evidence, at all. I never can understand this desire to stubbornly stick to an opinion when there is no basis for it.
The aluminum is not going to fall off from some rust on it's surface. If the corrosion was that bad you would see it, as it would be eating through the aluminum if it was that bad. You would see white powder all over the aluminum.
And what has it got to do with missing bodies, I don't understand your point on that, maybe I missed a post?
Originally posted by septic
I feel your pain...on ATS it is more important to discuss the same old subjects that have not progressed for a decade, than to discuss alternative explanations.
Originally posted by trebor451
Originally posted by septic
I feel your pain...on ATS it is more important to discuss the same old subjects that have not progressed for a decade, than to discuss alternative explanations.
I don't think it is so much a discussion of the "same old subjects", but rather we prefer subjects that have a modicum of truth to them, where at least a scintilla of intelligence is about them, or a at the very least a shred of reality is displayed. This thread you have created has none of the above. Plenty of guffaw factor with it, though.
Not that there aren't "alternative explanations" here. We'll just add yours to the list that includes hurricane-powered/el-destructo-laser-beams from space/invisible airplane flown by CIA midgets with forward-spraying-fuel-sprayers firing a missile into the building to detonate painted on explosives that had been applied that afternoon because of a power-down the previous month after bomb-sniffing dogs were removed by Barbara Bush at the behest of Queen Elizabeth, who was George Bush's third cousin 4 time removed.
Thanks for playing.
Originally posted by ANOK
Where is the evidence for this corrosion?
You do realise that the aluminum would not have been directly against the steel right? That is a big no no that all engineers know about, dissimilar metals are never put directly in contact with each other, unless for a specific reason. There would have been spacers between the steel and the aluminum.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by ANOK
Where is the evidence for this corrosion?
You do realise that the aluminum would not have been directly against the steel right? That is a big no no that all engineers know about, dissimilar metals are never put directly in contact with each other, unless for a specific reason. There would have been spacers between the steel and the aluminum.
I stand corrected...but nonetheless you're missing the entire point. The NYPA had full time engineers and inspectors on the lookout for the standard wear and tear that every other building in existence has, and in their day to day duties they would have spotted any of these imaginary controlled demolitions right away. If an electrician tracing a cable found a mysterious new junction box that wasn't there before and in a spot that it had no logical reason for being there, guess what- he's going to want to know what the heck it is and where the heck it came from.
There is no way, shape, or form that controlled demolitions can be planted in an occupied building without anyone noticing them, so the truthers might as well stop fantasizing about that now.
Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by septic
Your logic and reasoning skills may need some help.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
I stand corrected...but nonetheless you're missing the entire point.
Originally posted by septic
If they had such plans, the buildings would have been emptied of their contents as any demolition would be pre-demolished, explaining the surprisingly small debris pile, and lack of bodies.
Originally posted by ANOK
Originally posted by septic
If they had such plans, the buildings would have been emptied of their contents as any demolition would be pre-demolished, explaining the surprisingly small debris pile, and lack of bodies.
Why? Emptying the building is not a requirement for demolition, it just makes the job easier.
911 was not a conventional demolition event, they had to make it look like the planes and fire did it, so no they wouldn't have emptied the towers.
Originally posted by ANOK
Originally posted by septic
If they had such plans, the buildings would have been emptied of their contents as any demolition would be pre-demolished, explaining the surprisingly small debris pile, and lack of bodies.
Why? Emptying the building is not a requirement for demolition, it just makes the job easier.
911 was not a conventional demolition event, they had to make it look like the planes and fire did it, so no they wouldn't have emptied the towers.
it was probably not so bad as to justify the murder of innocent civilians.
Originally posted by septic
I think you're misunderstanding the reaction. Galvanic corrosion would be unnoticed except in areas where the aluminum came in contact with the steel in the presence of an electrolyte, in this case, the salt air was the electrolyte.
Originally posted by waypastvne
This is what makes the truth movement so entertaining. They discover something rest of the world has known for centuries and it becomes part of their conspiracy, no matter how ridicules it is.
a blizzard of conspiracy web sites that instigate abject paranoia
Originally posted by septic
reply to post by Varemia
it was probably not so bad as to justify the murder of innocent civilians.
You mean, all those civilians murdered in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Libya weren't innocent?
What would be easier to stomach, a fake terrorist attack that was planned to not kill any civilians, or one that was planned to kill 3000 of them?
All that matters is the truth, and there is nowhere that suggests that the towers were emptied before the total destruction occurred.