http://www.national911memorial.org/site ... t_EarthCam
Well, they have started some construction, haven't they?
Rolling With the Sim-Floors
-
- Banned
- Posts: 288
- Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 11:52 am
- Contact:
Yes, I misread the sentence and thought you were mocking the logic of virtually vacated towers. All else followed.nonhocapito @ Sep 6 2010, 05:02 AM wrote: P.s. In case it was not clear, "maybe not the strongest argument" refers to my own words following the parenthesis.
And now, chagrined, I lapse into silence.
-
- Member
- Posts: 557
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:34 am
- Contact:
I visited NYC 11 years ago and went to the top of WTC.SmokingGunII @ Sep 6 2010, 11:13 AM wrote: My own experience of WTC was in 2000. Having made our way mostly on foot to the towers to visit the Windows of the World, I was refused entry at the lobby as the time had just turned 1630 after which I was informed that you could not enter in shorts.
There was no way to see if there was any activity in the buildings or not, except for the tourists heading for the observation deck - elevators brought us up through the buildings, so for all I know they might have been empty and gutted instead of soaring with business activity. It's a fun thought and at least a bit more logical than "space based weapon systems" with regards to lacking debris etc.
At this point I am open to consider any possibilities.
9/11 was after all a huge hoax/magic trick.
-
- Member
- Posts: 2579
- Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
- Location: Italy
- Contact:
This is what I wanted to know... Even an almost-empty tower could be visited by tourists. Do you remember the lobby to be busy at all?MartinL @ Sep 6 2010, 11:18 AM wrote: There was no way to see if there was any activity in the buildings or not, except for the tourists heading for the observation deck - elevators brought us up through the buildings, so for all I know they might have been empty and gutted instead of soaring with business activity. It's a fun thought and at least a bit more logical than "space based weapon systems" with regards to lacking debris etc.
Bottom line I guess the tourist argument proves little (maybe that the towers had elevators! :D)
As a tourist, I have been on the Empire State Building in 2003 and now that I think about it, tourists had a different entrance, different elevators and I don't remember seeing anyone except crew and tourists. which makes sense, why a top-manager should risk being mixed with the sheeple (I also recall they took everyone's picture individually as we ascended to the observation deck, for anti-terror purposes. Disgusting, not just for having to submit to someone orders and look at a camera (as it happens now at the airport too), but for the quiet, passive, way everyone submitted to that. People *smiled* at the damn camera. It really made me wanna get out and forget about the pretty view)
-
- Member
- Posts: 557
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:34 am
- Contact:
This is what I wanted to know... Even an almost-empty tower could be visited by tourists. Do you remember the lobby to be busy at all?
During my curtailed visit the lobby was distinctly quiet considering one would expect many of the "50,000 inhabitants" to be taking off early. In fact, the reason for my being refused entry was that my shorts would evidently offend the business community!
Unfortunately, this was our last day of the break so I never got the chance to return.
During my curtailed visit the lobby was distinctly quiet considering one would expect many of the "50,000 inhabitants" to be taking off early. In fact, the reason for my being refused entry was that my shorts would evidently offend the business community!
Unfortunately, this was our last day of the break so I never got the chance to return.