Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
W Tell

WTC exploding man. Anyone seen this?

142 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Another one I'm not sure of. Has anyone else seen this footage?

It happens around the one minute mark, but they replay it several times at the end.

Edited by W Tell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That could be a man, that could be fabric being blown out of a window.

Where, exactly, is the conspiracy??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That could be a man, that could be fabric being blown out of a window.

I agree, it could be many things, but a man is at the bottom of my list of possibilities.

Where, exactly, is the conspiracy??

In their heads, and it simply won't go away no matter what. There was a conspiracy by the Gods and no amount of reasoning can convince them otherwise.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, it could be many things, but a man is at the bottom of my list of possibilities.

I also agree. It could be anything. The part to pay attention to is... "was that an explosion"? IDK. It's why I posted it as a seperate post. I was curious what others had to say about it. There's a lot of smart people on this board and I just wanted some opnions.

In their heads, and it simply won't go away no matter what. There was a conspiracy by the Gods and no amount of reasoning can convince them otherwise.

Another intellagent post by Boony......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really doesn't look like an explosion to me - more like a pressure build up that blew out a window.

Even if it were an explosion, it really doesn't give any credence to the demolition conspiracy camp. There are all kinds of things in buildings that can explode when there is a fire.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really doesn't look like an explosion to me - more like a pressure build up that blew out a window.

You can't have an explosion without pressure buildup.

Since the building hadn't collapsed yet, what built up pressure and then released it?

Even if it were an explosion, it really doesn't give any credence to the demolition conspiracy camp. There are all kinds of things in buildings that can explode when there is a fire.

Yeah, there's that. Anytime any evidence is shown of something odd, the official comeback is .."That could have been anything".

I will still be accepting of any evidence showing it as CGI at this point. That would put it down once and for all. Or even a confession from someone that created it.

But without that, we'll call it a pressure build up. AKA.. an explosion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, there's that. Anytime any evidence is shown of something odd, the official comeback is .."That could have been anything".

Perhaps that's because honest people aren't willing to attribute a final answer to such things. Perhaps not "anything," but it really could have been a great many things. Do you disagree with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps that's because honest people aren't willing to attribute a final answer to such things. Perhaps not "anything," but it really could have been a great many things. Do you disagree with that?

Don't think I'm not being honost. I didn't bring this in as evidence in an already established thread. I want to know what people think about this footage. If it's debunked, then here's the place to do so.

Even if it was just air, it had to build up some how. It's not air pressure from the collapse, that comes later. It's an explosion of something isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't think I'm not being honost. I didn't bring this in as evidence in an already established thread. I want to know what people think about this footage. If it's debunked, then here's the place to do so.

Even if it was just air, it had to build up some how. It's not air pressure from the collapse, that comes later. It's an explosion of something isn't it?

Assuming it is air, why is a partially collapsed ceiling not sufficient for an explanation? Supposing it is some kind of actual explosion, how are the myriad possible pieces of equipment of statically held explosive containers not sufficient for an explanation?

Assuming it is a demolition charge... why did it not go off with the rest of the supposed demolitions and why didn't it cause a more demolishing impact than what we see in the video?

We could speculate all day about this video and it would lead absolutely nowhere. Just like the truth movement as a whole has experienced.

People really should just give up on this BS already.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming it is air, why is a partially collapsed ceiling not sufficient for an explanation? Supposing it is some kind of actual explosion, how are the myriad possible pieces of equipment of statically held explosive containers not sufficient for an explanation?

Assuming it is a demolition charge... why did it not go off with the rest of the supposed demolitions and why didn't it cause a more demolishing impact than what we see in the video?

All good questions. I suppose you have one you prefer of the other. What is it?
We could speculate all day about this video and it would lead absolutely nowhere. Just like the truth movement as a whole has experienced.
The one thing I've learned over the years is how any eveidence "truthers" bring to the table "could" be anything in the eyes of the OCT. I've also learned that a lot of what "OCT" brings to the table is often flimsy and debatabull.
People really should just give up on this BS already.

You include yourself as people right?:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All good questions. I suppose you have one you prefer of the other. What is it?

I don't have one that I prefer. I do find the demolition argument to be ridiculous though, so I guess that almost any other explanation than that would seem potentially plausible to me.

The one thing I've learned over the years is how any eveidence "truthers" bring to the table "could" be anything in the eyes of the OCT. I've also learned that a lot of what "OCT" brings to the table is often flimsy and debatabull.

Want to know what I've learned? The truthers have absolutely nothing of substance and rely solely on speculative and questionable interpretations of everything.

You include yourself as people right? :)

I am a person, if that is what you're asking. I'd also be more than happy to drop these ridiculous 911 discussions altogether were it not for my morbid curiosity about just how ridiculous other people allow themselves to get.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't have an explosion without pressure buildup.

Err, say what? Explosions obviously don't require an air pressure buildup to happen.. but I'm guessing you probably just said it backwards. But I'm afraid you can have an explosion without *significant* air pressure buildup. If there *is* a significant blast of air, it is most likely to be from a collapsing ceiling segment. There are also some, but not many, 'explosive' sources within buildings that might be responsible.. But even assuming that the conspiracy was true - any explosive that caused *that* was clearly a complete failure - such charges are extremely tightly directed and *very* unlikely to waste their energy blowing lots of air outwards...

It's not air pressure from the collapse, that comes later.

That's just silly - the area is obviously suffering from a great deal of damage, there are fires blazing - collapsing walls and ceilings, or even combustible chemicals in, say a cleaning cupboard could be causing all sorts of effects and blowouts. What's more a bit of lateral thinking should tell you that with things like liftshafts and air con ducts, there are numerous connections between floors, and a presure buildup in some areas might take quite a convoluted path before finding the weakest escape point.

I'm sure you would rather dismiss such musings with simplistic one line claims that try to reduce very complex scenarios to little black and white cameos.. But that isn't how the real world works. And it's why armchair 'expert' pronoucements count for pretty much nuthin. Mine are equally valuable, of course, but I'll let the esteemed readers judge who has put a bit of thought into their work, and who hasn't..

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you guys handled my response quite effectively. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have one that I prefer. I do find the demolition argument to be ridiculous though, so I guess that almost any other explanation than that would seem potentially plausible to me.

Anything "but a demolition is fine by you. Cool.
Want to know what I've learned? The truthers have absolutely nothing of substance and rely solely on speculative and questionable interpretations of everything.
Truthers haven't got that market covered. As you've shown above, you'll take "anything" over a demolition.
I am a person, if that is what you're asking. I'd also be more than happy to drop these ridiculous 911 discussions altogether were it not for my morbid curiosity about just how ridiculous other people allow themselves to get.

Truthfull, to say the most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Another intellagent post by Boony......

That's "intelligent".

If you're going to attempt a sarcastic remark about someone, and attack the intelligence of their post, one might at least spell the word correctly. :w00t:

Oh, and by the way, we'd take proof of a demolition, if that wasn't simply imaginative constructs of CT mindsets..

But it is, and all these years later, not a one of you has presented anything but speculation about your contention.

Edited by MID
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

That's "intelligent".

If you're going to attempt a sarcastic remark about someone, and attack the intelligence of their post, one might at least spell the word correctly. :w00t:

How does mispelling a word detract from a conversation.
Oh, and by the way, we'd take proof of a demolition, if that wasn't simply imaginative constructs of CT mindsets..

But it is, and all these years later, not a one of you has presented anything but speculation about your contention.

"We'd". Really "We'd"? Dud honostly....

Edited by W Tell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Err, say what? Explosions obviously don't require an air pressure buildup to happen.. but I'm guessing you probably just said it backwards. But I'm afraid you can have an explosion without *significant* air pressure buildup. If there *is* a significant blast of air, it is most likely to be from a collapsing ceiling segment. There are also some, but not many, 'explosive' sources within buildings that might be responsible.. But even assuming that the conspiracy was true - any explosive that caused *that* was clearly a complete failure - such charges are extremely tightly directed and *very* unlikely to waste their energy blowing lots of air outwards...

You know what an explosion is. There's a reason we don't just throw a bullet on top of some gunpowder light it, and expect it to go somewhere.. Don't play dumb.
That's just silly - the area is obviously suffering from a great deal of damage, there are fires blazing - collapsing walls and ceilings, or even combustible chemicals in, say a cleaning cupboard could be causing all sorts of effects and blowouts. What's more a bit of lateral thinking should tell you that with things like liftshafts and air con ducts, there are numerous connections between floors, and a presure buildup in some areas might take quite a convoluted path before finding the weakest escape point.
What's silly is making an excuse that any force would be directed through A/C ducts and liftshafts. They'll dillute the effect, as those systems are not focused on one spot but the outlets are disperesed through out the many floors. Even more silly is combustible chemicals in a closet creating that effect. Rather than trying to pull something out of your..., I would be interested in a real analysis of the video.
I'm sure you would rather dismiss such musings with simplistic one line claims that try to reduce very complex scenarios to little black and white cameos.. But that isn't how the real world works. And it's why armchair 'expert' pronoucements count for pretty much nuthin. Mine are equally valuable, of course, but I'll let the esteemed readers judge who has put a bit of thought into their work, and who hasn't..

Thanks for being condecending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything "but a demolition is fine by you. Cool.

That's not what I said. Go back and read it again or have someone fluent in English explain it to you. Link to post.

Truthers haven't got that market covered. As you've shown above, you'll take "anything" over a demolition.

That's not what I said. Go back and read it again or have someone fluent in English explain it to you. Link to post.

Truthfull, to say the most.

And?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's silly is making an excuse that any force would be directed through A/C ducts and liftshafts. They'll dillute the effect, as those systems are not focused on one spot but the outlets are disperesed through out the many floors.

This gibberish is why you will not be getting further bites from me. First you dismiss it as silly, but then you admit it will have some effect but don't bother trying to quantify it.. and in the process reveal you haven't a CLUE about how AC ducts work and how they DO focus air movements. And yes, I imagine you don't know why I say that - but folks who do know the topic will know.. Try thinking about it.

And I'm absolutely certain that no-one noticed that you completely avoided the bits about the more likely ceiling collapse cause. Don't worry, I won't bring it up again so your methods are safely hidden... :D

Even more silly

Yes, your comments are just that.

And like I said, the readers will judge.

Thanks for being condecending.

Oh, how quaint and ironic..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why it's absolutely no point arguing with conspiracy theorists. Their position is always "you prove that it's not whatever I want it to be", and a one-frame clip on a video is enough to provide all the evidence they could possibly need to prove their argument, but if anyone else can't say for sure what it might be (on account of it being far too brief and fuzzy to be able to make anything at all out), then that means that it must be what the conspiracy Theorist wants it to be.

I'm sure this is entirely logical, in the minds of the people who wish to promote Conspiracies, at any rate.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why it's absolutely no point arguing with conspiracy theorists. Their position is always "you prove that it's not whatever I want it to be", and a one-frame clip on a video is enough to provide all the evidence they could possibly need to prove their argument, but if anyone else can't say for sure what it might be (on account of it being far too brief and fuzzy to be able to make anything at all out), then that means that it must be what the conspiracy Theorist wants it to be.

I'm sure this is entirely logical, in the minds of the people who wish to promote Conspiracies, at any rate.

7,

This rather re-states a theory I put forth some time ago regarding CTs and HBs. One which I have re-stated many times:

CT people WANT TO BELIEVE.

They don't want to know, they ant to believe, and they construct anything out of nothing in order to support their desire to believe.

:tsu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does mispelling a word detract from a conversation.

When you attack someone's intelligence...you'd better be intelligent.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Funny. I post a thread showing an explosion. I ask for opinions of what it may be. I'm still waiting for anyone to debunk it, but in the meantime I get attacked.

I'm open to options, though Chriz's opinion of air ducts are useless, his floor collapse makes a bit of since.

Guy's, dubunk the video. Quit attacking the messenger. I'm looking for a sane resolution to this..

What are we seeing?

Edited by W Tell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This gibberish is why you will not be getting further bites from me. First you dismiss it as silly, but then you admit it will have some effect but don't bother trying to quantify it.. and in the process reveal you haven't a CLUE about how AC ducts work and how they DO focus air movements. And yes, I imagine you don't know why I say that - but folks who do know the topic will know.. Try thinking about it.

And I'm absolutely certain that no-one noticed that you completely avoided the bits about the more likely ceiling collapse cause. Don't worry, I won't bring it up again so your methods are safely hidden... :D

Yes, your comments are just that.

And like I said, the readers will judge.

Oh, how quaint and ironic..

Bye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you attack someone's intelligence...you'd better be intelligent.

Or a good spell check...right? Grammer Nazis are the same no matter where we go. Never bring anything to the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.