+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 1 4 9 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 172

Thread: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

  1. Link to Post #61
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,719
    Thanks
    59,824
    Thanked 94,578 times in 15,428 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    This one needs some particular attention: Look at what's falling and, equally, at what is still standing...

    Last edited by Hervé; 30th January 2016 at 20:33.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Curiosity (31st January 2016), Eram (30th January 2016), TargeT (30th January 2016)

  3. Link to Post #62
    UK Avalon Member Star Mariner's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th November 2011
    Location
    Southwest UK
    Posts
    1,628
    Thanks
    8,757
    Thanked 10,364 times in 1,549 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Hervé (here)
    [/IMG]
    Look at this. As well as dust being carried off with the wind, or covering the streets, the cars, and the people in inches of grey powder, judging by this picture, I think you'd also find a vast amount of dust is lying in sediment at the bottom of the Hudson.
    "When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace."
    ~ Jimi Hendrix

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Star Mariner For This Post:

    Eram (30th January 2016), Ewan (30th January 2016), Hervé (30th January 2016)

  5. Link to Post #63
    Scotland Avalon Member Ewan's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th February 2015
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,274
    Thanks
    11,862
    Thanked 7,740 times in 1,233 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Having now watched all the videos presented via this thread I have to say it is pretty convincing stuff. The evidence is strong.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Ewan For This Post:

    Eram (30th January 2016)

  7. Link to Post #64
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,719
    Thanks
    59,824
    Thanked 94,578 times in 15,428 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Hi Whitelove, I merged your thread with this pre-existing one on that same subject
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  8. Link to Post #65
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    71
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,155 times in 20,634 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Hervé (here)
    This one needs some particular attention: Look at what's falling and, equally, at what is still standing...
    Can you tell us what you are seeing in these images?

  9. Link to Post #66
    Netherlands Avalon Member Eram's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th March 2012
    Age
    46
    Posts
    1,478
    Thanks
    65,641
    Thanked 10,991 times in 1,435 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Ewan (here)
    Having now watched all the videos presented via this thread I have to say it is pretty convincing stuff. ....
    Yes, She makes a convincing presentation.
    ... but... If you start to dig into other information about 9-11( like I have been doing for the past three days), you also soon realize that she leaves out important evidence that does not support her theory for a DEW (Directed Energy weapon) and I find that disturbing.

    Like for instance the many eye witness accounts of people (firefighters, policemen, office workers, and such) who claim to have heard and even experience explosions going of in the 3 WTC towers (1,2 & 7) before, during and after the impact of the supposed air planes. Or for instance satellite pictures that showed intense heat spots on ground zero for many weeks. You cannot simply ignore or sweep of the table without argument such evidence and this is what she seems to be doing with more then a little data and evidence.

    It's quite clear that large parts of the buildings turned to dust that day, but as far as I can establish, this was mostly the concrete, gypsum, marble and office furniture. Most if not all of the steel-work landed on the ground, which is clearly visible in Pauls photographs.

    The forces that turned all this into dust and managed to eject steel columns hundreds of meters away, and in an arch like path of flight remains unclear. Maybe there was an exotic weapon used and Judy Woods definitely presented a possibility to consider. Still, there is evidence out there that contradicts her theory in some ways, so maybe (Like Paul suggests) there were different techniques for destruction in play, of which some sort of DEW might be one.

    I truly hope that there will come a day that the truth comes out or that we will be able to figure it out for ourselves beyond the point of doubt. It will be an ongoing and difficult effort and we have to be careful to avoid the trap of self identification with theories in such a way that we close our minds to common sense and objective evidence.
    Last edited by Eram; 30th January 2016 at 22:43.

  10. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Eram For This Post:

    Curiosity (31st January 2016), Ewan (31st January 2016), Wind (6th February 2016), winstonsmith (31st January 2016)

  11. Link to Post #67
    United States Avalon Member ghostrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2011
    Location
    Sand Springs Ok
    Age
    54
    Posts
    7,428
    Thanks
    9,893
    Thanked 28,582 times in 6,628 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    The plejaren looked into 911 , they said two CIA agents and one supervisor brought information to then president Bush and he chose to ignore it ... regardless of how or who did it , George Bush is responsible for the lives lost on that day ...they refer to him as a stupid idoit ....
    Raiding the Matrix One Mind at a Time ...

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to ghostrider For This Post:

    Eram (30th January 2016)

  13. Link to Post #68
    Scotland Avalon Member Ewan's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th February 2015
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,274
    Thanks
    11,862
    Thanked 7,740 times in 1,233 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Eram (here)
    Quote Posted by Ewan (here)
    Having now watched all the videos presented via this thread I have to say it is pretty convincing stuff. ....
    Yes, She makes a convincing presentation.
    ... but... If you start to dig into other information about 9-11( like I have been doing for the past three days), you also soon realize that she leaves out important evidence that does not support her theory for a DEW (Directed Energy weapon) and I find that disturbing.

    Like for instance the many eye witness accounts of people (firefighters, policemen, office workers, and such) who claim to have heard and even experience explosions going of in the 3 WTC towers (1,2 & 7) before, during and after the impact of the supposed air planes. Or for instance satellite pictures that showed intense heat spots on ground zero for many weeks. You cannot simply ignore or sweep of the table without argument such evidence and this is what she seems to be doing with more then a little data and evidence.

    It's quite clear that large parts of the buildings turned to dust that day, but as far as I can establish, this was mostly the concrete, gypsum, marble and office furniture. Most if not all of the steel-work landed on the ground, which is clearly visible in Pauls photographs.

    The forces that turned all this into dust and managed to eject steel columns hundreds of meters away, and in an arch like path of flight remains unclear. Maybe there was an exotic weapon used and Judy Woods definitely presented a possibility to consider. Still, there is evidence out there that contradicts her theory in some ways, so maybe (Like Paul suggests) there were different techniques for destruction in play, of which some sort of DEW might be one.

    I truly hope that there will come a day that the truth comes out or that we will be able to figure it out for ourselves beyond the point of doubt. It will be an ongoing and difficult effort and we have to be careful to avoid the trap of self identification with theories in such a way that we close our minds to common sense and objective evidence.
    They may well have had both games in play, explosions and exotic technology. It would be prudent probably.

    Sounds of explosions could be things popping under incredible stress I suppose. (Just musing aloud).

    Though there are also videos showing people ducking at loud bangs as they run down the street.

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ewan For This Post:

    Eram (31st January 2016), TargeT (31st January 2016)

  15. Link to Post #69
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,719
    Thanks
    59,824
    Thanked 94,578 times in 15,428 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    Quote Posted by Hervé (here)
    This one needs some particular attention: Look at what's falling and, equally, at what is still standing...
    Can you tell us what you are seeing in these images?
    Top Photo, below center: Whole panels falling as giant ladder-like pieces (WTC-1) [no thermite/thermate cuts for those]

    Top and bottom photo, center-right: A whole corner remaining standing while the rest of WTC-1 is falling. It is that particular corner that is seen "dustifying" in numerous videos.

    Good luck trying to find those in here (I haven't found those bits there, although they maybe there):

    Last edited by Hervé; 31st January 2016 at 00:54.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Eram (31st January 2016), TargeT (31st January 2016)

  17. Link to Post #70
    Netherlands Avalon Member Eram's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th March 2012
    Age
    46
    Posts
    1,478
    Thanks
    65,641
    Thanked 10,991 times in 1,435 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Hervé (here)
    [no thermite/thermate cuts for those]
    Are you sure about that Hervé?

    If not for termite or another force of destruction, what could have made that section to suddenly start coming straight down (instead of falling sideways, which would make more sense)? A sudden sink hole perhaps?

    I've been looking for that section too, but haven't found it either. It also seems like it is breaking into different pieces when it is falling, so unsure what to look for exactly.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Eram For This Post:

    Hervé (31st January 2016)

  19. Link to Post #71
    Netherlands Avalon Member Eram's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th March 2012
    Age
    46
    Posts
    1,478
    Thanks
    65,641
    Thanked 10,991 times in 1,435 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    If you start in the middle of your marker with: 1 WTC North Tower and go 3 cm to the left, then 1 cm up. That might be a piece of it.
    At least, that is the section that had that column standing after the rest of the building had already collapsed.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Eram For This Post:

    Hervé (31st January 2016)

  21. Link to Post #72
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,719
    Thanks
    59,824
    Thanked 94,578 times in 15,428 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Eram (here)
    If you start in the middle of your marker with: 1 WTC North Tower and go 3 cm to the left, then 1 cm up. That might be a piece of it.
    At least, that is the section that had that column standing after the rest of the building had already collapsed.
    If you look at the video (here), that "spire" is taller than WTC-7 and "fell" inward whereas what we find in the aftermath is the outside shell of the building that fell outward or remained standing.



    WTC-1, -6 and -7 in background.


    Notice the hole in that corner... sinkhole, indeed!


    Controlled demolition:

    Before...


    ... after.
    Last edited by Hervé; 31st January 2016 at 02:49.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Curiosity (31st January 2016), Eram (31st January 2016)

  23. Link to Post #73
    Netherlands Avalon Member Eram's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th March 2012
    Age
    46
    Posts
    1,478
    Thanks
    65,641
    Thanked 10,991 times in 1,435 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    You know?
    I've always mistaken that standing spire to be part of the outer column of WTC 1 until now. It's because most of the footage that shows it places the column of smoke so far to the side of the spire that had me confused.

    Just now is also the first time that I watched your youtube all the way till the end where you see the spire fall down one more time from a different angle.
    I must confess that this looks eerily like dustification.

    And indeed, little to no evidence of that inner columns laying there on the ground in the photo's.

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Eram For This Post:

    Hervé (31st January 2016), Mike (31st January 2016)

  25. Link to Post #74
    Avalon Member lucidity's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2014
    Posts
    1,089
    Thanks
    1,029
    Thanked 4,749 times in 956 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
    Quote Posted by lucidity (here)
    Quote Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
    Quote Posted by tomfellows (here)
    I'm saying that the original dust cloud, doesn't have enough dust
    in it to account for the mass of the buildings.
    Note there is a difference between pulverization and vaporization. I think the argument re: the topic is mostly for the case of vaporization.
    When you vaporise something, you heat it until it turns to a gas.

    Dr Judy Wood specifically considered this 'vaporisation' question.
    She rejected vaporisation because of the obvious absence of heat.

    be happy

    lucidity
    Being a Canadian and having to deal with 6 months of snow, I do understand well the concept of sublimation, in the sense solid turns to vapour. A dry (on the barometer) day can "vaporize" a decent amount of snow, skipping the liquid stage altogether, especially when a wind is present. Heat is not a required factor for this process to occur.
    Congratulations on being a Canadian. :-)
    Well done for understanding sublimation.

    There insufficient heat to vaporize concrete and steel.

    be happy

    lucidity

  26. Link to Post #75
    Canada Avalon Member DeDukshyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    22nd January 2011
    Location
    From 100 Mile House ;-)
    Language
    English
    Age
    45
    Posts
    7,738
    Thanks
    24,821
    Thanked 32,118 times in 6,926 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by lucidity (here)
    Quote Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
    Quote Posted by lucidity (here)
    Quote Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
    Quote Posted by tomfellows (here)
    I'm saying that the original dust cloud, doesn't have enough dust
    in it to account for the mass of the buildings.
    Note there is a difference between pulverization and vaporization. I think the argument re: the topic is mostly for the case of vaporization.
    When you vaporise something, you heat it until it turns to a gas.

    Dr Judy Wood specifically considered this 'vaporisation' question.
    She rejected vaporisation because of the obvious absence of heat.

    be happy

    lucidity
    Being a Canadian and having to deal with 6 months of snow, I do understand well the concept of sublimation, in the sense solid turns to vapour. A dry (on the barometer) day can "vaporize" a decent amount of snow, skipping the liquid stage altogether, especially when a wind is present. Heat is not a required factor for this process to occur.
    Congratulations on being a Canadian. :-)
    Well done for understanding sublimation.

    There insufficient heat to vaporize concrete and steel.

    be happy

    lucidity
    Well I do understand that many of the "effects" we are talking about require technology pretty much beyond our detailed understanding, therefore the effects or mechanics of such technology aren't known. My comment existed within this context. Sorry it was not clear to you If we knew what happened or exactly what technology was used ... the debate would probably be over ...

    Is there a weapon or technology that can cause the sublimation of dense matter (such as concrete and steel?) besides the natural effects we see with water? I don't know the answer to that; but I do know that what I have seen in the specific beam / support column "vaporisation" videos, where less "dust" is made from a concrete column than you would expect, you have to wonder what is really going on, if the claims of no heat are true.

    If you have evidence that no such technology possibly could exist, it behooves you to present it.
    Last edited by DeDukshyn; 31st January 2016 at 05:04.
    When you are one step ahead of the crowd, you are a genius.
    Two steps ahead, and you are deemed a crackpot.

  27. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to DeDukshyn For This Post:

    drneglector (1st February 2016), Eram (31st January 2016), Paul (31st January 2016), TargeT (31st January 2016)

  28. Link to Post #76
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    71
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,155 times in 20,634 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
    If we knew what happened or exactly what technology was used ... the debate would probably be over ...

    Is there a weapon or technology that can cause the sublimation of dense matter besides the natural effects we see with water? I don't know the answer to that. If you have evidence that no such technology exists, it behooves you to present it.
    Well said .

  29. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    DeDukshyn (31st January 2016), drneglector (1st February 2016), Eram (31st January 2016), TargeT (31st January 2016)

  30. Link to Post #77
    Virgin Islands Avalon Member TargeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th June 2011
    Location
    St. Croix
    Age
    40
    Posts
    7,515
    Thanks
    21,385
    Thanked 39,712 times in 7,043 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
    If you have evidence that no such technology possibly could exist, it behooves you to present it.
    unfortunately this is the realm that we are regulated to.... strong logical conclusions based on substantive "collateral" evidence with a heavy skew to the sources that are the "least" connected.


    THIS makes it difficult,l because any "actor" (as in "action" not fake persona) can give a convincing set of statements that (after 14 years of evidence observation) can be extremely solid.

    To me, the further we get form an event (time wise) the better the "propaganda" works; at least for the vast majority of the population.

    In conjunction with that, the more side "veins" of the original theory; the better (to confuse and derail the topic...) youi see these "people" relay and plan on one thing ( one very powerful thing).... "eye witnesses" are NOTORIOUSLY subjective and easily manupluated... yet the "thing" (evidence) the majority of the public relies on.

    Why? because it has the "perfect" hook into our psyche... the unwavering ability for humans to consider themselves in the "right" and the "knowers". Nearly every topic that is passionately defended falls into this category.. manipulated belief.

    This is what chases a lot of informed so called "truthers" into the atheist movement, they (we) consider that since we have been lied to on a certain heavily corrupted topic that the WHOLE THING must be tossed out ( we are EASILY polarized (good/bad pretty/ugly fat/skinny... pick a topic, there will be a polarized views based on little but mythos which seems to be intended to divide and conquer the (at least somewhat) critically thinking population).

    We ARE powerful, we CAN make a difference... BUT


    BUT

    we are fighting our selves bcause we have been so heavily compromised.

    A few slip out, many do not; this is the hierarchical filtering system "we" have all lived under/with for hundreds if not thousands of years. And it's all based on a DEEP understanding of what we all can find out for our selves, if we were given the opportunity.


    We aren't given the opportunity, we are given the failing option of "100% employment" or the lack of... IE: get a good J O B or be shunned from society, take a step back in your career and suffer the same fate; the label of "failure" even though you are one of the few that stepped out side the corporate zeitgeist to offer a desired product (typical free market strategy).

    How many of those we often hear have "left the work force" or "taken lesser paying jobs" are accurately reported? In that case the Ego will be such a strong influence (pride in accomplishment, which is good when "in check" and terrible when not) I think our "under employed" and "given up on employment" numbers are probably F A R worse than indicated & the trend will continue as automation takes the global economy by storm.


    The only solution I have to this is the same "weak" one I've had for years.... be an E X E L E N T example in your community (I have the trust of STRANGERS because of my work with animals here... they give me the logical fallacy "appeal to authority" on topics that even I consider WILDLY separate from "authority" talking points. Why does this happen? Because our formative years (0-6) are "willingly" given to the state, which teaches from the very first day "appeal to authority" as a meaningful argument and basis for a belief system.

    I can't help but think this is all by design.
    Hard times create strong men, Strong men create good times, Good times create weak men, Weak men create hard times.
    Where are you?

  31. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to TargeT For This Post:

    DeDukshyn (31st January 2016), drneglector (1st February 2016), Eram (31st January 2016), Ernie Nemeth (31st January 2016), Ewan (31st January 2016), Paul (31st January 2016)

  32. Link to Post #78
    Scotland Avalon Member Ewan's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th February 2015
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,274
    Thanks
    11,862
    Thanked 7,740 times in 1,233 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Very wothwhile points there TargeT.

    The formative years are the most vulnerable ones and it is well known and recognised. Even the parents take part in the conditioning albeit mostly unaware. I wonder how a child would cope without any kind of conditioning, what would it be like to discover a world with no borders or boundaries?

  33. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ewan For This Post:

    Eram (31st January 2016), Paul (31st January 2016)

  34. Link to Post #79
    Avalon Member winstonsmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    11th November 2015
    Posts
    50
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked 184 times in 43 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Steel wasn't turned to powder. It was scattered all over the site, up to 300 foot radius.

    Here is a photo with a large portion of the exterior panels circled, (maybe west facade), that fell nearly intact toward the NW across West Street. This is the kind of real debris that crushed firefighters.

    https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resi...nt=photo%2cpng



    If you want to rely on a few fuzzy videos or photos as the evidence of "dustification" caused by some exotic weapon that nobody knows about, then you will end up with fuzzy logic.

    I prefer to rely on HI-res imagery**, taken during or soon after the crime was committed. If you watch this video taken during the destruction of WTC1, you will see (@ mark 1:25 ) very distinct, focused, limited range demolition charges being set off along the SW facade CORNER ONLY, racing down the building faster than gravity is pulling the debris. Those are internal in origin, exploding outward, not some space based platform with an unknown power source.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKYW89xEYg0

    Could this be the same set of panels that came to rest facing the Winter Garden?

    ** I am quite certain that an even better quality copy of this clip is available. The imagery NIST provided is purposely degraded, sometimes upwards of 82% in both video and audio specs. If you want to go after the first generation copies of these network news videos, please contact me.

  35. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to winstonsmith For This Post:

    Curiosity (31st January 2016), Eram (31st January 2016)

  36. Link to Post #80
    UK Avalon Member Star Mariner's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th November 2011
    Location
    Southwest UK
    Posts
    1,628
    Thanks
    8,757
    Thanked 10,364 times in 1,549 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    I'm still with Dr Wood on her theory of 'dustification', or whatever other exotic effect made the towers just simply 'go away'. Here's a reasonable comparison to make, suggesting something extraordiary happened on this site:

    The 'Pile' of WTC. Looking at this, is it any wonder people ask 'where DID the towers go?' I'm not an engineer or a scientist, but personally I'd imagine there to be a lot more debris than there is for two 100 storey buildings.


    Compare it with WTC7, a building half the size of just one of the WTC towers.
    Here's the wreckage of it. It is four or five storeys high.
    "When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace."
    ~ Jimi Hendrix

  37. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Star Mariner For This Post:

    DeDukshyn (31st January 2016), drneglector (1st February 2016), Eram (31st January 2016), Ewan (31st January 2016), Hervé (31st January 2016)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 1 4 9 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts