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.
spooky24
I don't want to hear about free fall or beams and struts or any other kind of buzz words or phrases.
Since you all lack skills in criminal investigation I'll explain it to you.
Motive-need to commit the crime Means- ability to commit the crime Opportunely-chance to commit the crime
The Dutch guy said it would need 30-40 people 'at the right time' to plan the explosives or whatever he said. Explain what the 'right time' is. By the way what kind of Dutch is that guy speaking-I can't make out anything-sounds like German and English mashed together. It must be a Belgium dialect or Flemish.
ownbestenemy
reply to post by _BoneZ_
Is it known that this are "as-built" drawings or planned drawings?
jaffo
For crying out loud can this one die already? There was no conspiracy by the government to pull this off. Yeesh...
reply to post by jaffo
Man, there are soooooooo many expert engineers on here, lol.
reply to post by NewAgeMan
So Building 7 was hit with some debris from the "collapse" of the north tower, if i'm not mistaken. There's a couple of photos showing the corner of Bldg 7 gouged out a bit
how precisely, did the raging inferno(s) as reported by NIST, actually take place?
What was the alleged causal mechanism of those fires to begin with, and how were the fires distributed throughout the building, and why and how did they spread, according to NIST?
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
When people represent AE911Truth as a membership org, their trying to pull the wool over your eyes, or they've already had the wool pulled over theirs. This leads me to think poorly of the letter's author.
DrEugeneFixer
reply to post by _BoneZ_
Having a board of directors does not make it a membership organization.
hgfbob
reply to post by jaffo
Man, there are soooooooo many expert engineers on here, lol.
and this is all you have to attempt to discredit what I posted....a personal attack....how bout we take my post apart one by one and you can point out what YOU seem to recognize but fail to respond to, other than the attack at me.
why is it not one person pushing the official claims can use the 10,000+ page NIST report to quote support for those claims...
I made a reference to opening a physics text and reading about gravitational acceleration.....that SAME rate of acceleration seen in WTC7 looks kind of funny next to the claim of "fire we can't see from the windows"....huh
tell me bout this amazing steel eating fire.....
neformore
The membership number sounds impressive in isolation, but is actually a very small percentage of the numbers of such qualified people globally
ownbestenemy
Is it known that this are "as-built" drawings or planned drawings?
• Frankel Steel Limited (1985). Erection Drawings, 7 World Trade Center
• Frankel Steel Limited (1985a). Fabrication Shop Drawings, 7 World Trade Center
The 2,587 files released through FOIA #12-009 include steel erection plans, column schedules, bracing elevations and details. Of these, 22 sheets in PDF format include erection drawings for floors one through 17, and 42 sheets in TIF format include erection drawings for the entire building. The remaining 2,523 sheets in TIF format illustrate various fabrication details throughout the structure.
DrEugeneFixer
reply to post by hgfbob
By trying to change the subject, you have conceded my point.
Steel doesn't eat fire. But it weakens it considerably.
You would know this if you cared about actual facts.
As far as something "not feeling" or "not looking" right, I couldn't care less.
You aren't an expert and your "feelings" mean nothing to me in terms of proving what happened, it's just that simple. If you feel I am attacking you, it's because your ideas have no merit or foundation. Sorry
LaBTop
www.journalof911studies.com...
Refreshing thinking by Graeme MacQueen. He is the first person I found on-line, to understand the immense important technique I introduced many years before. He wrote his above masterpiece on WTC 1 and 2 in 2009.
I introduced this kind of reasoning with my 2005 WTC 7 Cianca photo its NIST time stamp of the east penthouse first roof denting, compared to the LDEO seismic records time stamps of the WTC 7 collapse :
files.abovetopsecret.com...
files.abovetopsecret.com...
He does a much better job than me on the Twin Towers.
I merely indicated in my 2005 WTC 7 thesis that those two towers also showed wide discrepancies in event-start times, when one compared the video and photo records of 9/11 with the LDEO seismic records.
I have re-calculated the two Twin Tower collapses from their LDEO insensitive 100 nm/s sensitivity to the same 10 nm/s sensitivity as that from the WTC 7 collapse :
100 nm/s :
Ten times more sensitive (10 nm/s instead of 100 nm/s) :
files.abovetopsecret.com...
100 nm/s :
Ten times more sensitive (10 nm/s instead of 100 nm/s) :
files.abovetopsecret.com...
As you can see clearly, they used about the same amount of explosive force to bring those three buildings down.
These original WTC 7 10 nm/s graph's starting amplitudes from LDEO are surprisingly identical to my two 10 nm/s graphs their starting amplitudes from the two Twin Tower collapses, above.
I'm really excited to have at last found a fellow 9/11 researcher's precise descriptions and calculations based on the video records of the collapse initiations of both Twin Towers, and his comparison of these with LDEO's seismic records of these two collapses.
I just hope he got his ideas off my 2005 thesis, then I indeed have not done all that work in vain.
I do not understand at all, why there seems to be such a dis-interest in my WTC 7 thesis and this well thought-out Twin Towers thesis of Graeme MacQueen.
In fact, in my opinion, our two separate thesis are by far, enough solid evidence, that the whole day of 9/11 was a set-up from the very first beginning.
Meticulously pre-planned and meticulously executed.
I advice the readers to really deep-read what Graeme wrote in this master piece.
He offers so much doubt towards NIST's reasonings, based on solid evidence accompanying his reasoning all the time; that alone should be enough to kick-start the US Congress into opening a new, independent investigation into the day of 9/11.
So, ask yourself what can be the reason that this will never happen. And then start thinking, reading and developing your own thoughts on 9/11.
Because they are only afraid of one event.
The rise of the well informed masses.