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.
The program did well, airing 678 times in 32% of all U.S. television households, reaching a gross audience of 2,731,200 viewers. .PDF file attached
A five minute version of the newly-released documentary, “Architects & Engineers – Solving the Mystery of WTC 7,” is now showing on National Public Television stations across the United States. The mini-doc will run as part of the “Spotlight On” series of educational, short five minute programs that have been broadcasting nationally on Public Television for 19 years. *Narrated by Ed Asner.
Spotlight On: A Strong Alternative to Advertising. Public Awareness Programming.
- Guaranteed 500 National Airings on Public Television
- Guaranteed 3 Million Viewers
- Confirmed Nielson-based Monitoring Report
- Approximately 40%-60% airings in Prime Time
Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
You guys are crazy! WTC7 wasn't brought down by controlled demolition, fire brought it down! Fire is what caused the building to collapse symmetrically in a way that parallels demolitions, by symmetrically severing the core columns at the exact same moment to ensure symmetry.
And this happened on several floors, allowing the building to free-fall during it's collapse. Because fire is capable of doing that. If there's anything we know about fire, it's that it burns perfectly symmetrically. In fact, it's so predictable and uniform in it's damage, that it could caused several core columns to fail within less than a second of each other allowing the symmetry and free-fall. That's completely possible, and that's what happened. Just ask NIST, the mainstream media, and George Bush.
If you disagree with them, even if you're a structural engineer or high-rise architect with decades of experience, you're nothing more than a charlatan peddling conspiracy theories in order to fool gullible idiots into buying your film, because a career in architecture or engineering definitely doesn't pay good, so they need to make a couple hundred bucks for doing an interview.
Originally posted by Q:1984A:1776
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
Wow, that's cool. I was just saying that PBS is the only truly free media outlet left on television. Perhaps this is why Mitt Romney wants to destroy them.
Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
And they always say things like "fire has never brought down a steel-framed skyscraper in history", but hello, planes hit the Twin Towers! And there were no sprinklers working in WTC7! So it was really hot in there! I mean, in the skyscraper fires in the past, where the fires burnt for much longer, covering a larger area of the building, clearly since they were burning for much longer without collapsing, the sprinklers must have been on, but cooling the fires just to the point that the building didn't collapse, but the fires still managed to keep burning, just at a lower temperature. That totally is what happened. And the structure was different too in those steel-framed structures, making them impervious to collapse, unlike these steel-framed structures.
edit on 16-1-2012 by TupacShakur because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Q:1984A:1776
PBS is the only truly free media outlet left on television
Originally posted by David134
If it ever came to light, and yes I know thats not going to happen, but if it ever did. Can you begin to fathom the fall out there would be.They can never let it out because the whole world would turn on us. We could never recover. How would we explain the wars, and what the American people have been put through. That day and every day since. I still say its all in the documents that were destoryed
Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
You guys are crazy! WTC7 wasn't brought down by controlled demolition, fire brought it down! Fire is what caused the building to collapse symmetrically in a way that parallels demolitions, by symmetrically severing the core columns at the exact same moment to ensure symmetry.
And this happened on several floors, allowing the building to free-fall during it's collapse. Because fire is capable of doing that. If there's anything we know about fire, it's that it burns perfectly symmetrically. In fact, it's so predictable and uniform in it's damage, that it could caused several core columns to fail within less than a second of each other allowing the symmetry and free-fall. That's completely possible, and that's what happened. Just ask NIST, the mainstream media, and George Bush.
If you disagree with them, even if you're a structural engineer or high-rise architect with decades of experience, you're nothing more than a charlatan peddling conspiracy theories in order to fool gullible idiots into buying your film, because a career in architecture or engineering definitely doesn't pay good, so they need to make a couple hundred bucks for doing an interview.
And the BBC reporting it's collapse before it happened? That was just some confusion, that's all. They weren't handed a script that was read at the wrong time, because they were playing their role in the agenda, they were just confused, because it was a chaotic day. I know when I'm confused, I can accurately predict events that have never happened in history, such as steel-framed skyscrapers collapsing entirely from fire damage.
Those dozens of people who reported explosions, many of which explicity stated things like "I know what explosions sound like. It wasn't the sound of a building collapsing that I mistook for explosions, they were without a doubt explosions", are all lying. They just heard the building collapsing, that's all. 100 witnesses reporting the same thing, 200 witnesses, who cares. They're all wrong about hearing explosions, and me, one person, is right, and am in the position to tell all of them that they're incorrect.edit on 16-1-2012 by TupacShakur because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
You guys are crazy! WTC7 wasn't brought down by controlled demolition, fire brought it down! Fire is what caused the building to collapse symmetrically in a way that parallels demolitions, by symmetrically severing the core columns at the exact same moment to ensure symmetry.
And this happened on several floors, allowing the building to free-fall during it's collapse. Because fire is capable of doing that. If there's anything we know about fire, it's that it burns perfectly symmetrically. In fact, it's so predictable and uniform in it's damage, that it could caused several core columns to fail within less than a second of each other allowing the symmetry and free-fall. That's completely possible, and that's what happened. Just ask NIST, the mainstream media, and George Bush.
If you disagree with them, even if you're a structural engineer or high-rise architect with decades of experience, you're nothing more than a charlatan peddling conspiracy theories in order to fool gullible idiots into buying your film, because a career in architecture or engineering definitely doesn't pay good, so they need to make a couple hundred bucks for doing an interview.
And the BBC reporting it's collapse before it happened? That was just some confusion, that's all. They weren't handed a script that was read at the wrong time, because they were playing their role in the agenda, they were just confused, because it was a chaotic day. I know when I'm confused, I can accurately predict events that have never happened in history, such as steel-framed skyscrapers collapsing entirely from fire damage.
Those dozens of people who reported explosions, many of which explicity stated things like "I know what explosions sound like. It wasn't the sound of a building collapsing that I mistook for explosions, they were without a doubt explosions", are all lying. They just heard the building collapsing, that's all. 100 witnesses reporting the same thing, 200 witnesses, who cares. They're all wrong about hearing explosions, and me, one person, is right, and am in the position to tell all of them that they're incorrect.edit on 16-1-2012 by TupacShakur because: (no reason given)