Review of Gravy's film at ABOVE TOP SECRET

[A W Smith]

They aren't. They appear to be a non-profit organization that caters to private groups. The legal authority on tour guides would be the Department of Consumer Affairs.

Check it out

Guides marked with a star (٭)

took the test to get a license and earned an exemplary score of 120 or more.​

hey that even rhymes ​

 

[NYCEMT86]

Check it out

hey that even rhymes ​

thats what i was looking for, thanks AW.


And congrates on the score Gravy

 

[njslim]

Wow - a Gold star next to Gravy's name! I knew something was special about him.

 

[njslim]

Maybe I will get a frontal lobotomy just to better understand the twoofers, and their crack-pot ideas... As my father has always told me, the best way to combat an enemy is to learn to think like an enemy... LOL Hmm, on second thought I think I will instead just drink myself into stupidity, at least that way I won't drool as much as with the lobotomy...

Going to ATS - sometimes just have to put brain in neutral and let the waves of
stupidity wash over you like waves breaking on the beach.....

 

[Gravy]

thats what i was looking for, thanks AW.
And congrates on the score Gravy

Thanks. I actually had the highest score in the history of the test (don't know if that's changed since). I used to teach a course that prepared people to take the test, and I believe that all of my students who took the test, passed it.

 

[Unsecured Coins]

Thanks. I actually had the highest score in the history of the test (don't know if that's changed since). I used to teach a course that prepared people to take the test, and I believe that all of my students who took the test, passed it.

by comparrison, I was the first person to score a perfect rating on the writing test in the history of my school, and IIRC, the only person to do so to date. Whatchoo got now, Graaaavay?

 

[Gravy]

by comparrison, I was the first person to score a perfect rating on the writing test in the history of my school, and IIRC, the only person to do so to date.

How long was your school bus again?

Whatchoo got now, Graaaavay?

I won a spelling bee in 5th grade, and I was elected Prom King in high school. Wait...are these supposed to be highlights or lowlights?

 

[Unsecured Coins]

I said a writing test, not a spelling test, mr smarty pants

 

[LashL]

Troofer FloydGreen demonstrates the classic troofer move of shooting from the hip and hitting his own foot.

Indeed. Like most twoofers, he has poor to non-existent research skills and is quick to illegitimately draw false conclusions and post them as factual. I guess we will have to wait to see whether he retracts his errors and his unfounded accusations.

 

[jhunter1163]

I won a spelling bee in 5th grade.. <snip>

Oh yeah? Well, I won every spelling bee I was allowed to participate in when I was in fourth grade. By about the end of January the teacher wouldn't let me be in them any more so the other kids would have a chance to win. In fact, I went through my entire fourth-grade year without misspelling a single word.

I peaked early, it seems.

 

[kookbreaker]

Ah, I see that GreenFlloyd has just been utterly humiliated at ATS over this 'not a tour guide' issue.

Warms my heart to hear a troother squeal like a pig.

 

[Hyperviolet]

Thanks. I actually had the highest score in the history of the test.

You just couldn't help yourself could you? lol

 

[JMarshall]

Oh yeah? Well, I won every spelling bee I was allowed to participate in when I was in fourth grade. By about the end of January the teacher wouldn't let me be in them any more so the other kids would have a chance to win. In fact, I went through my entire fourth-grade year without misspelling a single word.

I peaked early, it seems.

Oh yeah well i scored a 229 on my ASVAB, of course you get points for spelling you name right, and back then the total score was 300, but I is smart dangit!

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Thanks for the writeup! I may do another version and take out the snarky remarks. I guess I was in a bad mood when I made that.

Interesting that the ATS crowd is throwing their hands in the air and saying, "Who says explosives were used?"

Er, David Ray Griffin, Richard Gage, Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan, Jim Hoffman, Alex Jones, Gordon Ross, Frank Legge, William Rodriguez, Webster Tarpley, Eric Hufschmid, Kevin Barrett, Torin Wolf, Crockett Grabbe, Craig Furlong, Tony Szamboti, 911truth.org, NY911truth, WeAreChange, Loose Change (all versions), 9/11 Mysteries, Improbable Collapse, 9/11 Revisited, 9/11 Eyewitness, 9/11 Why the Official Story Can't be True, dozens of YouTube videos, dozens of people who have posted here, and every conspiracist who cites witness accounts of explosions.

Many of these people claim that not only were explosives used, so much explosives were used that giant steel sections were tossed around the site and nearly all the concrete was pulverized. That's the point of my video.

Just so you know where I stand concerning explosives and incendiaries being used in the destruction of the Twin Towers, I believe there was a minimal amount used to get the collapse going and to keep it moving. There was no need for large explosives of the type Mark illustrates in his film. A 1 to 2 lb. properly placed charge can easily cut right through most of the columns in the towers. Additionally, if the central core was demolished it would not be visible as it was surrounded by free space and the perimeter columns. However, the central cores carried the majority of the gravity loads and their demolition, with relatively small charges and/or incendiaries, which do not make noise, would cause the buildings to collapse, without it being very visible or audible. However, we do know that many people who were actually in the towers, like William Rodriguez and some firefighters, claimed to have heard explosions, and some within a close proximity outside claimed to have seen sychronized low level flashes.

I do not believe that explosives were responsible for much of the pulverization or the distance that steel beams or aluminum cladding were thrown from the buildings. I believe the gravitational potential energy released by the cutting of the columns was responsible for most of these phenomena observed.

I explain the reason that it is likely that the columns were cut in my papers on the Journal of 911 Studies.

Mark Roberts' recent video does not represent what is usually done in demolitions of buildings. Large charges are not used. This can be verified by looking up the total weight of the charges used in various demolitions with the number of charges. One instance of a large building demolition used a total of 150 lbs. of explosives split up into 650 different locations.

 

[JMarshall]

Just so you know where I stand concerning explosives and incendiaries being used in the destruction of the Twin Towers, I believe there was a minimal amount used to get the collapse going and to keep it moving. There was no need for large explosives of the type Mark illustrates in his film. A 1 to 2 lb. properly placed charge can easily cut right through most of the columns in the towers. Additionally, if the central core was demolished it would not be visible as it was surrounded by free space and the perimeter columns. However, the central cores carried the majority of the gravity loads and their demolition, with relatively small charges and/or incendiaries, which do not make noise, would cause the buildings to collapse, without it being very visible or audible.

I do not believe that explosives were responsible for much of the pulverization or the distance that steel beams or aluminum cladding were thrown from the buildings. I believe the gravitational potential energy released by the cutting of the columns was responsible for most of these phenomena observed.

I explain the reason that it is likely that the columns were cut in my papers on the Journal of 911 Studies.

Mark Roberts recent video does not represent what is usually done in demolitions of buildings. Large charges are not used. This can be verified by looking up the total weight of the charges used in various demolitions with the number of charges. One instance of a large building demolition used a total of 150 lbs. of explosives split up into 650 different locations.

What do you base the 1-2 lb charge on? Do you have any idea how much C4 is needed to cut through structural steal? Not to mention the amount of prep work that must be done for the smaller charges used in CD's to work?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

What do you base the 1-2 lb charge on? Do you have any idea how much C4 is needed to cut through structural steal? Not to mention the amount of prep work that must be done for the smaller charges used in CD's to work?

I am saying 1 to 2 lbs. based on the pressures generated and the force required for the sizes of the columns in the towers.

If prep work is done and the charge confined in an internal space the amount of explosive on an individual column could be even less. How do you know prep work couldn't have been done clandestinely?

 

[Unsecured Coins]

If "if" was a fifth, we'd all be drunk. I'm not saying, I'm just saying.

 

[PhantomWolf]

realcddeal,

If the collaspe was progressed by a series of timed explosives, then where did the initial dust come from? The photos and footage show large amounts of dust as part of the collapse, but if the collapse was being created by explosives droipping each floor in turn then there would have been no resistance on the way down, and so no dust could have been formed during the collapse. How do you explain this problem? Most Truthers explain by the massive explosive theory, but since you claim that their was no massive explosives, how can you marry the no-resistance argument with the dust created evidence?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

realcddeal,

If the collaspe was progressed by a series of timed explosives, then where did the initial dust come from? The photos and footage show large amounts of dust as part of the collapse, but if the collapse was being created by explosives droipping each floor in turn then there would have been no resistance on the way down, and so no dust could have been formed during the collapse. How do you explain this problem? Most Truthers explain by the massive explosive theory, but since you claim that their was no massive explosives, how can you marry the no-resistance argument with the dust created evidence?

No, this isn't true at all and many are confused by it. The upper stories are already moving when the lower stories are blown and there will be a relative collision. As an example, imagine a car sitting in a lane with barriers on each side. Then imagine a truck moving at 100 ft./sec. approaching from behind the car and the car starts to accelerate at 32.2 ft./sec. when the truck is 67.8 feet behind. What happens 1 second later? The truck and car collide with a relative velocity of 67.8 ft./sec. That is what would have been happening all the way down in the tower and is why there was so much pulverization.

The lower stories simply can't get out of the way fast enough, since their acceleration is limited to that due to gravity, and the upper material has a head start moving, and in this case more than makes up for the distance between them. These collisions are just tens or a few hundreds of microseconds long and would have caused some reduction in the momentum of the upper material and that is why the time to collapse is considered near free fall in a controlled demolition.

 

[PhantomWolf]

No, this isn't true at all and many are confused by it. The upper stories are already moving when the lower stories are blown and there will be a relative collision. As an example, imagine a car sitting in a lane with barriers on each side. Then imagine a truck moving at 100 ft./sec. approaching from behind the car and the car starts to accelerate at 32.2 ft./sec. when the truck is 100 feet behind. What happens 1 second later? The truck and car collide with a relative velocity of 67.8 ft./sec. That is what would have been happening all the way down in the tower and is why there was so much pulverization.

However the floors below the collapse weren't moving at all. Have you watched the video of the start of the collapse? How do you explain the curving in of the columns?