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 AvadaKedavra14
Just a thought here...if your so new to this site...then why on earth would you feel it was even necessary to quantify your response with I am not an existing member creating a new account...now that stands out like a beacon to me...i mean really a new member would not even be concerned with such a thought....would they?
Originally posted by plube
reply to post by AvadaKedavra14
Just a thought here...if your so new to this site...then why on earth would you feel it was even necessary to quantify your response with I am not an existing member creating a new account...now that stands out like a beacon to me...i mean really a new member would not even be concerned with such a thought....would they?
I see a couple of people made new accounts just to comment on this thread, and I suspect they are troll accounts made just to be awkward, but you can make as many troll accounts as you want, you cannot take away what people say in this video, and you cannot deny what you can see, or hear when the tower's collapse.
So maybe you can do better than Bazant when presenting the physics...because i know i have shown him to fail on many levels....and i have written to him as a colleague...And he does not have the common courtesy to reply...Nist lied about freefall times and they finally had to retract their statements as presented by a physics teacher....So i am sorry...but the physics are not clear....AT ALL now are they.edit on 093131p://f04Sunday by plube because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by plube
reply to post by AvadaKedavra14
hey...i have no problem saying they have lied...you know why...if you look into the people who are behind these organizations and how the same investigators were on the Oklahoma bombing....the 1993 truck bombing....and the towers....Not once has it been fair and independent...also if you look into the people on the 911 commission you will notice the pattern of deceit.
Also since you posted that remark.....i can understand your statement for your reply to the changing accounts statement...fair dues to you on that...if someone said it to me i too would defend myself against a remark as such....For me...it is simple...i am am always have had this handle...no matter where i am or what site i am on...so easy to trace.
Also if you read my signature thread you will know i am Anti -Zionist...and for me it is quite clear how the shadow government operate....and who is running the show with their lies and deceit.....so clear ...they are liars....and they have lied to the people...and they have lied their way into two very profitable wars on falsehoods ...I mean they have switch to the hijackers being Saudis.....when have one of these liars stepped forward and said...We are sorry for the loss of thousands of lives for our mistake...We should not have gone into Iraq or Afghanistan based completely on bogus information....have they said to the Iraqi people...or the afghans We have made a mistake and went after the wrong perpetrators....nope they have not...also If people look into Israels past of forging passports and mossads brilliant capabilities for carrying out false flag agendas then maybe they would be more on the right track.....so yes...they have LIED.....NIST and FEMA are complacent non professional partners in these crimes committed against humanity....They should be held responsible for their participation in promoting falsehoods to the public on all accounts.
I hope that is clear for you...I have been at this since day one....I do not do this for money or any kind of kudos...I do this because i know what is right and what is wrong.
Also just a note...your not so new here....you know how i can tell....Your quoting is that of a more advanced user...You see...I never quote in that fashion....it is compartmentalization of replies..and that is done by people who are used to the features of ATS.
but welcome to ATS....but remember people are observant who have been here a while and i have been here for a good couple years...i am no old timer...but i am not new...and i can see your not quite as new as your portraying.edit on 093131p://f42Sunday by plube because: (no reason given)
Cheers i would not assume that, i was clearly stating my point of view alone...and i will give you the benefit of the doubt that you are new here...so welcome to Ats and i hope you enjoy the debates...also from some statements...i don't think you actually believe how the Official story has been presented....but i do hope you can show why you think things are so...rather than just stating the physics makes sense...because for me they don't make sense at all...three different STEEL structures all suffer Asymmetrical damage yet they all collapse symmetrically....south tower has axial rotation that ceases....that right there goes against the physics of a gravity driven collapse as it means resistance was removed below the structure.
also the reason people say about new members is because it happens over and over where people come in with new id's...but they get found out...not only that...they get pinpointed to who exactly who they are within a very short time as writing styles don't change...and they hold true to the same viewpoints.
So since your new here..when questions get ask to be explained...try to explain them...it helps to show your genuine in your replies...i know when i first got on here...i took a lot of abuse because of thing i stated without backing it up fully....i now do not fall into that trap....just friendly advice nothing more than that.
Originally posted by xinkid
reply to post by NWOwned
First post on ATS. I came here for the UFOs but signed up just to post on this 911 topic.
I remember when I was watching it happening on live TV and saw the towers go down, my first gut reaction/thought was "they gave up on the towers and decided to take them down." It was too obvious that it was a controlled demolition. Does common sense matter to the skeptics at all? Are you guys like machines that operate on data only? I know common sense cannot be proof nor do I wish to prove anything with this post. I'm just curious and disappointed that deny ignorance can mean deny common sense. I'm applying it only to the way the towers came down. So please don't go off on a tangent trying to argue why common sense can mean a lot of ignorance in many other situations - I know that.
I also know some people in real life who can't accept that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition. It's not because they don't have common sense but that their life philosophy does not allow for the possibility that our government lied to us. Sure this isn't the kind of post that has any rigorous science but I've described my gut reaction/feeling while watching the towers coming down live on 9/11.
where mf is the mass of one WTC floor, assumed to be 1/110 the mass of an entire WTC
tower, namely mf = (510,000,000 / 110) kg 4,636,000 kg
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
I couldn't even watch this whole video. It's so horribly edited, and even deliberately takes some witnesses statements out of context.
Don't be fooled by the official reports, they were a shambles and designed to hide what really happened
Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by DeeKlassified
Don't be fooled by the official reports, they were a shambles and designed to hide what really happened
Shambles?
Do you mean like the cohesive explanation put forth by the truther community?
Oh wait they don't have one now do they.
Originally posted by psikeyhackr
So if the evidence is so overwhelming why aren't all of the engineering schools pointing that out and what does it mean for society that they are not?
Because if it is physically impossible they should have figured it out in 2002. So they allowed the 9/11 Decade to happen.
Imagine 20 top engineering schools holding a conference in New York in 2002 and announcing to the world that airliners could not possibly have done that. What would the media have done? What would have happened since then?
psik
Sam, do you have anything to say about 24:07 - 24:27?
Originally posted by samkent
Sam, do you have anything to say about 24:07 - 24:27?
Since you asked.
The audio sounds like the low frequencies were amplified to enhance the effects.
To illustrate my point take the fog horn for example. They are designed to emit low frequencies because they travel farther for the given input. If the buildings were emitting that much low frequency sound it would have been heard on every video of the collapse not just this one.
That’s the problem with using Youtube as evidence for anything. You cannot guarantee that the video is accurate. From my point what I heard was steel and concrete tearing itself apart. Just it was amplified.