+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst 1 6 10 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 190

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

  1. Link to Post #101
    United States Avalon Member Curiosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    21st November 2015
    Age
    67
    Posts
    287
    Thanks
    866
    Thanked 872 times in 226 posts

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

    I just want to throw this out there.

    If a DEW was used and it wasn't the USA that fired it, that would explain why US officials are so bent on cover ups and lies and many other explainable actions.

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

    Eram (2nd February 2016), PurpleLama (2nd February 2016), ThePythonicCow (2nd February 2016)

  3. Link to Post #102
    Canada Avalon Member DeDukshyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    22nd January 2011
    Location
    From 100 Mile House ;-)
    Language
    English
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,394
    Thanks
    29,778
    Thanked 45,445 times in 8,541 posts

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

    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    ...

    Roughly speaking, what I presently figure is that:
    • Conventional pyrotechnics were used to make an impressive sight when the "planes" hit,
    • Conventional explosives were used at the same time, to cut the plane shaped holes in the exterior walls where the "planes" supposedly hit.
    • Either large conventional or micro-nukes were used in the basement, at the same time as the planes hit, to destroy the towers sprinkler systems.
    • Various thermite cutter charges were used, during the subsequent hour, to weaken the building.
    • Other bombs went off here and there, to take out specific targets within the building during that hour.
    • Micro-nukes pulverized the core columns to start the "collapse" of the towers.
    • Directed energy then immediately dustified the "collapsing" towers, before they had a chance to fall.

    Paul ... there's a clear motivation for each of 1 through 6 on your list ... what is the motivation for number 7? This one is not clear to me. Why the need to do this? What wouldn't have been accomplished if this didn't happen?
    Last edited by DeDukshyn; 1st February 2016 at 23:59. Reason: mixed formatting
    When you are one step ahead of the crowd, you are a genius.
    Two steps ahead, and you are deemed a crackpot.

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

    Curiosity (2nd February 2016), Eram (2nd February 2016), ThePythonicCow (2nd February 2016)

  5. Link to Post #103
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,588
    Thanks
    30,506
    Thanked 138,445 times in 21,493 posts

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

    Quote Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    ...

    Roughly speaking, what I presently figure is that:
    7. Directed energy then immediately dustified the "collapsing" towers, before they had a chance to fall.

    Paul ... there's a clear motivation for each of 1 through 6 on your list ... what is the motivation for number 7? This one is not clear to me. Why the need to do this? What wouldn't have been accomplished if this didn't happen?
    The dustification of the towers. converting them to a mushrooming, rapidly expanding, cloud of dense dust, was the "Wow!" factor ... the impossible factor, that enabled the immense fraud of 9/11 to be perpetrated.

    If you do something that people can basically understand, in their full view, there is a practical limit to how much you can lie about what happened.

    If you do something that is beyond their comprehension, then they usually suspend their own understanding, and just accept whatever they are told. They abandon all hope of personal understanding.

    That's why they soft-pedaled the destruction of WTC 7 ... that was apparently mostly done by more ordinary controlled demolition means, so they didn't want it to be a major meme of 9/11. The destruction of the WTC1 and WTC2 towers on the other hand was the "WTF, over?" primary and dominant meme of 9/11. It was the coup de grâce, the ultimate blow to our innocence. The entire event was orchestrated to ensure that as many people as possible, in the US and even world-wide, were watching, live, when those towers "blowed up, real good."

    The dustification of the two main towers was also the key means of impressing those in more important positions, who might doubt or resist ... "There's a bigger force than you know ... shut-up, head-down and don't dare mess with that force!" Someone else is running this show, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. Sometimes I've wondered if even people as high up in the power chain as Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush were taken back by the dustification of the towers ... not expecting it, and fearful of the powers that made that happen.

    (It also made the clean-up easier, and destroyed the physical evidence of the crime better.)
    Last edited by ThePythonicCow; 2nd February 2016 at 01:11.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

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

    Eram (2nd February 2016)

  7. Link to Post #104
    United States Avalon Member Curiosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    21st November 2015
    Age
    67
    Posts
    287
    Thanks
    866
    Thanked 872 times in 226 posts

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

    I can agree with "made the clean-up easier". But what physical evidence did it destroy?

    Why would they use a DEW when conventional demo methods worked fine?

    Maybe we have it backwards.

    The use conventional demo methods was used to cover up or distract from the DEW evidence?

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Curiosity For This Post:

    ThePythonicCow (2nd February 2016)

  9. Link to Post #105
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,588
    Thanks
    30,506
    Thanked 138,445 times in 21,493 posts

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

    Quote Posted by Curiosity (here)
    I can agree with "made the clean-up easier". But what physical evidence did it destroy?

    Why would they use a DEW when conventional demo methods worked fine?
    Conventional demolition would have left a 20 story high pile of ruble, with bits and pieces of the fragmentary remains of the damage caused by conventional explosives.

    ... and my key point was that this was the Wow! factor ... the making of a modern day mythology.

    One of the masterminds of 9/11 was an expert in creating just such mythology: Philip Zelikow.
    Last edited by ThePythonicCow; 2nd February 2016 at 02:01.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

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

    animovado (3rd February 2016), Curiosity (2nd February 2016), drneglector (3rd February 2016), Griff (2nd February 2016)

  11. Link to Post #106
    Netherlands Avalon Member Eram's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th March 2012
    Age
    50
    Posts
    1,479
    Thanks
    65,666
    Thanked 11,038 times in 1,437 posts

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

    Quote Posted by DeDukshyn (here)


    Paul ... there's a clear motivation for each of 1 through 6 on your list ... what is the motivation for number 7? This one is not clear to me. Why the need to do this? What wouldn't have been accomplished if this didn't happen?
    A DEW would also add to the ever present "divide and conquer" tactics.

    An internal dispute over what exactly happened of course weakens the build up for a momentum that could challenge the official narrative.

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Eram For This Post:

    Curiosity (2nd February 2016), DeDukshyn (2nd February 2016), ThePythonicCow (2nd February 2016)

  13. Link to Post #107
    Morocco Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    23rd January 2011
    Location
    Ignoring Your Outrage
    Language
    Discordian
    Posts
    4,888
    Thanks
    29,096
    Thanked 40,082 times in 4,764 posts

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

    I ascribe currently to the idea that it was an op within an op within an op. Perhaps those in charge of the planes didn't expect the demolition, and those in charge of the demolition didn't expect dustification. So the cia flew in some planes, and the oligarchs pulled some buildings, and the Nazis turned that sh!t to dust. Its an idea I picked up from JPF. The exact order was just off the cuff, JPF just said it was an op within an op within an op, although I bet JPF might agree that the Nazis were at the end of the line.
    Last edited by PurpleLama; 2nd February 2016 at 02:14.

  14. Link to Post #108
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,588
    Thanks
    30,506
    Thanked 138,445 times in 21,493 posts

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

    Quote Posted by PurpleLama (here)
    Its an idea I picked up from JPF.
    JPF -- Dr. Joseph P. Farrell, I presume.

    ===

    P.S. -- Yes -- From 9/11 Musings:
    Quote Well, truth to tell my own take has always been that there is an "op within an op within an op"
    ...
    For reasons I shall get into, I believe the middle layer became aware of the existence of the innermost at the moment of the collapse of the Twin Towers. The nature of that collapse, and the fact that it could NOT have been any kind of controlled demotion (conventional [demolitions charged, thermite] or unconventional [chain-molecule fuel air bomb]) was a message sent by "someone" to "our" elite, imo. On this view, the significant evidence is not the airplanes (or lack thereof), but the physics signature of the collapse of the towers themselves.
    Last edited by ThePythonicCow; 2nd February 2016 at 02:47.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ThePythonicCow For This Post:

    Curiosity (2nd February 2016), PurpleLama (2nd February 2016)

  16. Link to Post #109
    Canada Avalon Member DeDukshyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    22nd January 2011
    Location
    From 100 Mile House ;-)
    Language
    English
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,394
    Thanks
    29,778
    Thanked 45,445 times in 8,541 posts

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

    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    Quote Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    ...

    Roughly speaking, what I presently figure is that:
    7. Directed energy then immediately dustified the "collapsing" towers, before they had a chance to fall.

    Paul ... there's a clear motivation for each of 1 through 6 on your list ... what is the motivation for number 7? This one is not clear to me. Why the need to do this? What wouldn't have been accomplished if this didn't happen?
    The dustification of the towers. converting them to a mushrooming, rapidly expanding, cloud of dense dust, was the "Wow!" factor ... the impossible factor, that enabled the immense fraud of 9/11 to be perpetrated.

    If you do something that people can basically understand, in their full view, there is a practical limit to how much you can lie about what happened.

    If you do something that is beyond their comprehension, then they usually suspend their own understanding, and just accept whatever they are told. They abandon all hope of personal understanding.

    That's why they soft-pedaled the destruction of WTC 7 ... that was apparently mostly done by more ordinary controlled demolition means, so they didn't want it to be a major meme of 9/11. The destruction of the WTC1 and WTC2 towers on the other hand was the "WTF, over?" primary and dominant meme of 9/11. It was the coup de grâce, the ultimate blow to our innocence. The entire event was orchestrated to ensure that as many people as possible, in the US and even world-wide, were watching, live, when those towers "blowed up, real good."

    The dustification of the two main towers was also the key means of impressing those in more important positions, who might doubt or resist ... "There's a bigger force than you know ... shut-up, head-down and don't dare mess with that force!" Someone else is running this show, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. Sometimes I've wondered if even people as high up in the power chain as Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush were taken back by the dustification of the towers ... not expecting it, and fearful of the powers that made that happen.

    (It also made the clean-up easier, and destroyed the physical evidence of the crime better.)
    While I do clearly hear you, I'm not sure I fully buy that. I mean the towers coming down was the "wow" factor ... not sure if a giant cloud of dust would be worth the use of very expensive and very specific technology to assist with this "wow' factor, that would have been there, even without the "dustification" process. I do agree with the fact that such tech really does seem to have been used ... but I am not sold on "wow" factor - it would have still existed ... Curiosity's post subsequent makes some sense, but that begs the question ... "why a DEW?" - what about what happened required such technology?

    Perhaps the "dustification" was a mere side effect?
    Last edited by DeDukshyn; 2nd February 2016 at 03:00.
    When you are one step ahead of the crowd, you are a genius.
    Two steps ahead, and you are deemed a crackpot.

  17. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to DeDukshyn For This Post:

    Curiosity (2nd February 2016), M-Albion-3D (2nd February 2016), PurpleLama (2nd February 2016), ThePythonicCow (2nd February 2016), Wind (6th February 2016)

  18. Link to Post #110
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,588
    Thanks
    30,506
    Thanked 138,445 times in 21,493 posts

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

    Quote Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
    While I do clearly hear you, I'm not sure I fully buy that. I mean the towers coming down was the "wow" factor ... not sure if a giant cloud of dust would be worth the use of very expensive and very specific technology to assist with this "wow' factor, that would have been there, even without the "dustification" process. I do agree with the fact that such tech really does seem to have been used ... but I am not sold on "wow" factor - it would have still existed ... Curiosity's post subsequent makes some sense, but that begs the question ... "why a DEW?" - what about what happened required such technology?

    Perhaps the "dustification" was a mere side effect?
    Dr Joseph P Farrell explains it better than I can (thanks to PurpleLama for making that connection), in his blog post that I linked above: 9/11 Musings.

    The dustification was the most immediately obvious visible manifestation of the application of a highly "unconventional" technology ... a spectacle that had no satisfactory explanation by any ordinary, even nuclear, publicly known mechanism.

    It's one thing to destroy the towers. It's another thing to do it by a means that is dramatically impossible by any publicly recognized mechanism. Such is the basis of creating myth, in ancient times and in modern times.

    A few will decide that they can and will understand, and pursue the truth of what really happened, trusting their own ability to observe, analyze and understand. Most will decide that they cannot or choose not to personally reach more reliable insights than what they are told by experts, officials, friends, family and neighbors, and will shrug and accept what they are told (as did I, between 2001 and 2007, when I was more focused on Linux CPU and Memory management for very large multiprocessor systems than I was on 9/11 or other larger affairs.)

    A rich variety of disinformation methods can be, and are being, used to keep understanding marginalized. Our society at large still buys into the myths of 9/11, in some variant or other.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

  19. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ThePythonicCow For This Post:

    DeDukshyn (2nd February 2016), PurpleLama (2nd February 2016)

  20. Link to Post #111
    United States Avalon Member Curiosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    21st November 2015
    Age
    67
    Posts
    287
    Thanks
    866
    Thanked 872 times in 226 posts

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

    DEW? If we are to believe such a weapon was used in 9/11 we have to ask a few questions.

    Who would have access to such?

    How would it work?

    Where would it have been fired from?

    What would it do?

    We're taking the idea that it looked like dustifacation, then saying it must have been some kind of energy weapon without producing credible verifiable information to those questions.

    So lets see what we can come up with.

    here is what I've found on my first attempts .

    http://www.space.com/1934-weapons-di...t-century.html

    http://www.onr.navy.mil/en/Media-Cen...y-Weapons.aspx

    I'm sure Judy Woods must have some info to back these claims, or something to verify the existence of a DEW that could produce such results.

  21. Link to Post #112
    United States Avalon Member Curiosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    21st November 2015
    Age
    67
    Posts
    287
    Thanks
    866
    Thanked 872 times in 226 posts

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

    More on Directed energy weapons. So far I don't see anything that remotely resembles the destruction the alleged DEW did on 9/11. I haven't watched the second video yet.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR_pjzW98dM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug4HMkiH3-E

  22. Link to Post #113
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,588
    Thanks
    30,506
    Thanked 138,445 times in 21,493 posts

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

    Quote Posted by Curiosity (here)
    More on Directed energy weapons. So far I don't see anything that remotely resembles the destruction the alleged DEW did on 9/11. I haven't watched the second video yet.
    You won't find official public releases of whatever was used as the primary source of energy to destroy the towers.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

  23. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ThePythonicCow For This Post:

    Curiosity (2nd February 2016), DeDukshyn (2nd February 2016), PurpleLama (2nd February 2016)

  24. Link to Post #114
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    21st September 2015
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Age
    67
    Posts
    201
    Thanks
    834
    Thanked 672 times in 160 posts

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

    Weighing in here, to me, the entire Judy Woods directed energy weapon thing is nothing more than a trumped up disinformation campaign. A straw man of fallacious concoctions in order to steer new truth seekers into a state of confusion.


    Looking at the evidence (which is no evidence at all) from Woods, she completely avoids and ignores the real evidence established thus far that thermite and nano thermite together with appropriately placed explosives brought down these buildings - period.


    The real perpetrators of 9/11 are running scared as they know their time is coming to an end!


    Christopher Bollyn explains further.


    Last edited by M-Albion-3D; 2nd February 2016 at 17:32.

  25. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to M-Albion-3D For This Post:

    Curiosity (2nd February 2016), Flowerpunkchip (3rd February 2016)

  26. Link to Post #115
    Canada Avalon Member DeDukshyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    22nd January 2011
    Location
    From 100 Mile House ;-)
    Language
    English
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,394
    Thanks
    29,778
    Thanked 45,445 times in 8,541 posts

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

    Quote Posted by Curiosity (here)
    More on Directed energy weapons. So far I don't see anything that remotely resembles the destruction the alleged DEW did on 9/11. I haven't watched the second video yet.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR_pjzW98dM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug4HMkiH3-E

    DEW is a very broad term for any directed energy weapon including already existing microwave weaponry. There were several buildings in the area a DEW could have been fired from (a DEW would fire an invisible beam(s)), technically, it may be possible to fire one from a satellite, there was a mysterious black bomber that circled the area the entire time, the weaponry may have been triggered from inside the buildings themselves and the remains discarded into the ocean along with a lot of the other rubble.

    The main issue is as Target eloquently explained, is that the effects we see in this "dustification" aren't known to be caused by any technology that we know of already existing. And there's plenty I am sure we don't know in this regards. So exactly what type of weapon it was and how it worked are still pretty big variables.

    After watching the concrete and stele beams "dusitify" again in some of the video ... some sort of sublimation seems quite feasible to me ... I still have to find some better videos of that ... I know they are out there ...
    Last edited by DeDukshyn; 2nd February 2016 at 16:41.
    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:

    Curiosity (2nd February 2016), Hervé (2nd February 2016), M-Albion-3D (2nd February 2016), Wind (6th February 2016)

  28. Link to Post #116
    France On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,763
    Thanks
    60,315
    Thanked 95,891 times in 15,481 posts

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

    It's actually pretty plain: Controlled Explosive Decompression:


    ... without the heat.
    Last edited by Hervé; 2nd February 2016 at 18:14.
    "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.

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

    Curiosity (2nd February 2016), M-Albion-3D (2nd February 2016)

  30. Link to Post #117
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,588
    Thanks
    30,506
    Thanked 138,445 times in 21,493 posts

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

    Quote Posted by M-Albion-3D (here)
    Looking at the evidence (which is no evidence at all) from Woods, she completely avoids and ignores the real evidence established thus far that thermite and nano thermite together with appropriately placed explosives brought down these buildings - period.
    Judy Wood has spent far more time than most of us looking at the evidence. Perhaps you should study her book and do the same.

    Thermite likely was present, as were a variety of mechanisms ... but thermite and conventional explosives don't come close to explaining what she documents in her book.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

  31. Link to Post #118
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,588
    Thanks
    30,506
    Thanked 138,445 times in 21,493 posts

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

    Quote Posted by Hervé (here)
    It's actually pretty plain: Controlled Explosive Decompression:
    My guess is that volcanoes hide the key difference, beneath the ground. Volcanic eruptions start with already liquid (molten) material, and only need to eject it, to let it decompress. The energy required to liquify the rocks that end up being emitted as ash and dust from the volcano is first accumulated within the earth over a long period (days, months, years, ... I don't know.)

    The towers started with solid concrete and steel. The towers were de-solidified, in 10 seconds each. That was the hard step, the step requiring immense energy, rapidly applied. Then indeed the decompression looks similar.

    That's why there were so many odd effects, such as melted car engine blocks, weirdly twisted steel girders, and half rusted hulks of cars (but vast reams of unharmed paper), in the blocks surrounding the WTC; that immense, highly unconventional, and rapidly applied energy "leaked" out into the near-by vicinity.

    I would not expect to see such odd effects near volcanoes. If you manage not to get buried in ash or swept up in a lava flow, then you, and your steel car, can survive a volcano in fine shape.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

  32. Link to Post #119
    United States Avalon Member Curiosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    21st November 2015
    Age
    67
    Posts
    287
    Thanks
    866
    Thanked 872 times in 226 posts

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

    Quote Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
    Quote Posted by Curiosity (here)
    More on Directed energy weapons. So far I don't see anything that remotely resembles the destruction the alleged DEW did on 9/11. I haven't watched the second video yet.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR_pjzW98dM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug4HMkiH3-E
    DEW is a very broad term for any directed energy weapon including already existing microwave weaponry. There were several buildings in the area a DEW could have been fired from (a DEW would fire an invisible beam(s)), technically, it may be possible to fire one from a satellite, there was a mysterious black bomber that circled the area the entire time, the weaponry may have been triggered from inside the buildings themselves and the remains discarded into the ocean along with a lot of the other rubble.

    The main issue is as Target eloquently explained, is that the effects we see in this "dustification" aren't known to be caused by any technology that we know of already existing. And there's plenty I am sure we don't know in this regards. So exactly what type of weapon it was and how it worked are still pretty big variables.

    After watching the concrete and stele beams "dusitify" again in some of the video ... some sort of sublimation seems quite feasible to me ... I still have to find some better videos of that ... I know they are out there ...
    I have a problem with some of these ideas.
    DEW or any kind of secret weapon technology would be very expensive and they would not have it where they needed to dispose of it or risk of it being exposed.
    Why would they risk using such a weapon when conventional demo tech was all that was needed?

    "So exactly what type of weapon it was and how it worked are still pretty big variables."
    This is a good point. Not only 'big variables', but a broad variety of unknowns and inaccessible data/weapons, there lies the problem of ever proving such a theory.

    When you start putting together the capabilities of conventional demolitions technology you find that it can heat concrete and hot concrete easily explodes into dust. Steel also melts and vaporizes.

    But that still leaves us with the problem of "The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11"


    Really we will never know if it vanished or not, because nobody gathered the evidence that would back that theory.
    Last edited by Curiosity; 2nd February 2016 at 18:24.

  33. The Following User Says Thank You to Curiosity For This Post:

    DeDukshyn (2nd February 2016)

  34. Link to Post #120
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,588
    Thanks
    30,506
    Thanked 138,445 times in 21,493 posts

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

    Quote Posted by Curiosity (here)
    I have a problem with some of these ideas.
    DEW or any kind of secret weapon technology would be very expensive and they would not have it where they needed to dispose of it or risk of it being exposed.
    Why would they risk using such a weapon when conventional demo tech was all that was needed?
    An inability for someone to explain why someone else did something does not refute evidence that it was done.

    Quote Posted by Curiosity (here)
    Really we will never know if it vanished or not, because nobody gathered the evidence that would back that theory.
    Many have gathered and presented that evidence, including Judy Wood, and this thread. The evidence shows that most of the million tons of concrete and steel that formed the two WTC towers were no longer at the world trade center, after the two towers erupted into a massive dust cloud.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

  35. The Following User Says Thank You to ThePythonicCow For This Post:

    DeDukshyn (2nd February 2016)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst 1 6 10 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