University of Alaska Fairbanks Professor Launches New 9/11 Research Project

a reply to: Doctor Smith


Lets look at the events of the day the North Tower was hit first, the South Tower second lets look at the impact locations.

The NT was struck higher up and almost mid elevation and debris travelled through and out the opposite side.

This drawing below shows impact area in relation to column trees of the wall structure.



The ST was struck lower down more to one side and debris & damage could be seen on the wall to the right of the impact.



Now lets have a look at the impacts in relation to the CORE steel of the buildings.



So lets see ST although hit second falls first GREATER load above impact location and starts to fall towards that direction, the NT hit first falls almost exactly straight down due to impact location and smaller load above impact point.

Then WTC 7 has a chunk removed from the SW CORNER due to the NT collapse and also a 20 storey rip in the South Elevation also due to the NT collapse. Guess what it fell more to that side

Comments from Firemen

So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post.

Link here for you Firehouse 9.11.01 Reports

So are YOU calling these HEROES liars because it sure sounds like you are.

Also keep in mind that THERMAL loading on Steel Frames was not calculated accurately, assumptions were made and fireproofing added. That has now changed.

The trouble with the internet is some IDIOT with no qualifications or experience and the most technical thing they have to deal with at work is does the customer want fries with that can start a website or blog with stupid claims that then become facts and the truth to others.

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Again, you say fire never destroyed a skyscraper so it's impossible. Show me where a building over 50 stories was brought down by controlled explosive demolition. Show me a cortolled demolition with explosives that only used explosives on one or two floors mid building.

Are you serious? On September 11, 2001 a 47 story building was brought down by controlled demolition, and just 6 or 7 hours previously on the same day and at the same location, two 110 story towers were brought down by controlled demolition.

Wake up and smell the napalm.

I was wondering when one of you would realize this fact. Not officially (yet) in the United States mainstream media.

a reply to: wmd_2008

Link here for you Firehouse 9.11.01 Reports

Gee. That link is from 2002 just before the first anniversary of 911. Before the whitewash. Before everyone realized we were never going to be allowed to find out who was really behind this.

So are YOU calling these HEROES liars because it sure sounds like you are.

No. I'm sure they reported exactly what they thought they saw. Just following orders and doing their jobs from higher central control elites.

Also keep in mind that THERMAL loading on Steel Frames was not calculated accurately, assumptions were made and fireproofing added. That has now changed.

According to Joe eyeball on the internet.

The trouble with the internet is some IDIOT with no qualifications or experience and the most technical thing they have to deal with at work is does the customer want fries with that can start a website or blog with stupid claims that then become facts and the truth to others.

Look what this idiot (according to your kind) posted on Utube. How dare he give a voice to the firemen that were caught in a secondary explosion way after the initial impact. Think hard. An explosion in the Lobby that blew out the windows. Are you calling these firemen liars. I hope not for your sake.



We wouldn't want to hear all these eye witness accounts to confuse us with the facts. Like explosions in building 7 throughout the day. Before it was predicted to come down.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

I've asked before and I'll ask again.

Show us where those two firemen say the explosions they heard were caused by explosives.

You keep posting that video like it doesn't fit with the official explanation.

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Doctor Smith

I've asked before and I'll ask again.

Show us where those two firemen say the explosions they heard were caused by explosives.

You keep posting that video like it doesn't fit with the official explanation.

They are clearly talking about bombs. Explosion in the lobby. Listen at 1:30 (it isn't over anyone of these buildings can blow up).

a reply to: Doctor Smith

They are clearly talking about bombs.

In your mind they are.

I heard them say explosions.

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Doctor Smith

They are clearly talking about bombs.

In your mind they are.

I heard them say explosions.

And if a girl says she wants to suck you off. You think she's talking about eating sushi with you.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Joe Eyeball as you put it was ARUP Engineers for a post I posted back in 2012.

From the Arup report

This is an understandable emotion driven response but we would propose instead that designing a structure with fire as a design load provides a more robust design solution.Simply increasing fire proofing thickness without understanding the actual structural response to heat provides no guarantees of increased safety.

Look at this piece of text below again from the Arup report, this may be a shock to many with NO construction experience or even some with

The important part bold and underlined!!!!

Seismic design relies on modelling, risk analysis and changes to the structural stiffness. Wind design relies on additional structural members and wind tunnel tests. Current fire design relies on very simple, single element tests and adding insulating material to the frame. Thermal induced forces are not calculated or designed for.

That report was obviously wriiten after 9/11 AND at that point we still didn't do calculations for thermal forces on buildings DUE TO FIRE SO GUESS WHAT NONE were done for the towers or WTC7.

How many times have you heard someone commenting on a loud noise and saying it sounded like an explosion.

For example Hit By Tornado

From above link

Next thing you know, we’re standing in the living room and the curtain just flew back and lost it,” Logan said. “Debris just started flying everywhere. It sounded like an explosion.

When large structural components fail they make a lot of noise and people under stress of the events will use the easiest word that comes to mind.

a reply to: wmd_2008

Just for the hell of it:
www.google.com...

a reply to: Phage

Problem is. Eye witnesses say these explosions happened 70 or so stories below the plane impact. Some in the basement.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Eye witnesses say these explosions happened 70 or so stories below the plane impact. Some in the basement.

Fuel and elevator shafts.

Look at it another way:
If you were planning a secret demo of WTC you would want all the charges to go off from the point of impact and downward at the selected time.
You wouldn't want charges going off on floor 10 while people are leaving. These people would report back that there was no damage then all of a sudden the rooms behind them blew up for no reason. No fuel. No fire.
These charges going off 10's of minutes before the final collapse suggests something went wrong in the plan.
If these charges went off early then others would fail to go off.
The debris sifters would find the evidence.

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
a reply to: Phage

Problem is. Eye witnesses say these explosions happened 70 or so stories below the plane impact. Some in the basement.

So where did the fuel that went down the lift shafts finish up? The basement obviously....

You really have done zero research on 9/11!

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
a reply to: Phage

Problem is. Eye witnesses say these explosions happened 70 or so stories below the plane impact. Some in the basement.

So where did the fuel that went down the lift shafts finish up? The basement obviously....

You really have done zero research on 9/11!

Jet Fuel - is kerosene based and is treated to make it harder for static to ignite it. With an autoignition temperature of 210 °C (410 °F). Not likely that enough of it could make it the huge distance down. Only a few shafts going all the way.



Incendiary explosions in the lobby and in the basement levels accompanied the destruction of the North Tower of the World Trade Center (WTC). The evidence for these incendiary explosions is significant and includes numerous eyewitness testimonies and photographic evidence. The official, government investigation conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) did not address these phenomena in any meaningful way and offered only a weak suggestion that is demonstrably false.

NIST admitted to the presence of an incendiary explosion at the concourse level and to the deaths and injuries caused by it, stating, a “fireball killed or injured several occupants in the Concourse Level lobby (NIST NCSTAR 1-7, p 73).” However, a scientific explanation was never provided. Instead, an untested hypothesis was given as fact.

“There are numerous media reports of building occupants being burned in the ground-floor lobby of WTC 1 following the aircraft impact. Numerous eyewitness accounts describe a large flash fire on the concourse floor lobby at the time of aircraft impact, that came from one or more of the elevator shafts that ran from the concourse floor of the tower past the floors where the aircraft impact took place. This observation suggests that sufficient burning liquid aviation fuel entered at least one of these elevator shafts to continue burning, while it fell roughly 1,175 feet. Even after falling this distance, sufficient unburned fuel was available to create the overpressure that opened the elevator shaft at the concourse level and forced additional unburned fuel into the lobby area, creating the extensive flash fire observed.” NIST NCSTAR 1-5A, p 80

It would have been easy to test this “jet fuel bolus” hypothesis but, as with the other features of the official account, no testing was done. That’s probably because the scientists at NIST knew that this hypothesis was very improbable to begin with.

Consider WTC1, where the plane hit the center of the north face, and all of the approximately 10,000 gallons of jet fuel was located in the wing tanks (i.e. none in the center tank according to NIST). There were three elevator shafts that served most of the floors and ran down to the concourse.

For the jet fuel bolus hypothesis to be even remotely reasonable, the following five challenges would have to be overcome.

1) The jet fuel that was available to flow down and away via openings, after accounting for the external fireballs and impact zone fires, was estimated by FEMA to be about 3,500 gallons. And NIST stated that, “No evidence or analysis emerged that significantly altered the FEMA estimate” (NCSTAR 1-5F, p 56). The 3,500 gallons would need to flow evenly across the entire, acre-wide area of the impact floors.

2) The impact damage would have had to fully open, and leave exposed, the 22 elevator shafts in the core area of the impact zone (or the 30+ in the WTC2 impact zone). The shafts that were most important would be for cars #6, #7, and #50, the express elevators traveling the entire distance from top to bottom. In WTC1, these were located at the opposite side of the core from the impact zone.

3) We must assume that no more than a proportionate amount of jet fuel flowed into the express elevator shafts on the opposite side, after traveling through more than half of floor space of the tower. This would be one-22nd of the total available, or 159 gallons. There were also 12 in x 18 in telephone cable openings between floors, however, and holes in the floors made by the impacting aircraft, through which fuel would have been lost. A realistic maximum therefore might be 120 gallons in each shaft, assuming an equal amount of the spilling jet fuel made it all the way across to the express elevator side.

IMG_13044) The jet fuel would have adhered to the surface of the elevator shaft as it traveled downward. The elevator shafts were lined with 2-inch thick gypsum planking and the low surface tension jet fuel would have wetted this thoroughly. An estimate of the surface area in an express shaft is 60,000 square feet. A quick experiment shows that gypsum board soaks up approximately 0.03 gallons of kerosene per square foot. All the available jet fuel (120 gallons) would have been lost in this process before the jet fuel bolus reached the mid-point of its fall.

Therefore the jet fuel that was available to flow down and away from the floors of impact could not have reached the concourse level of the WTC towers.

5) However, a lot of damage was attributed to this impossible jet fuel bolus. Eyewitnesses stated that there were intense elevator area fires in the lower half of the building. There were fires on the 40th floor, and the 22nd floor, and witnesses said that the elevator doors on the 22nd floor had been blown out from fires or explosions in the elevator shafts. Even if a highly disproportionate quantity of jet fuel from the aircraft had somehow caused these fires and the related damage, there certainly would not have have been any left to reach the lobby.

All of this ignores the questions of how unburned jet fuel could make its way around the elevator cabs in the shafts, how it could re-accumulate at the lower level, and how the supposed fuel/air mix could become optimum and then ignite. It also ignores how much jet fuel would be required to produce the explosive energy needed to destroy so much of the lobby, including the huge windows and the massive granite wall coverings, and kill people in that area.

The jet fuel bolus hypothesis also ignores the eyewitness testimonies of massive explosions within the lobby.

If NIST had done even a minimal amount of physical testing to support its weak fuel bolus suggestion, the hypothesis would have been easily disproven. But that would have left people to wonder what actually did cause these incendiary fires and the ones in the basement levels. The answers to those questions would almost certainly add to the other, extensive evidence for the presence of energetic, incendiary materials at the WTC.

Jet fuel myth

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
Incendiary explosions in the lobby and in the basement levels accompanied the destruction of the North Tower of the World Trade Center (WTC). The evidence for these incendiary explosions is significant and includes numerous eyewitness testimonies and photographic evidence.

More crap from you, just burning fuel

The official, government investigation conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) did not address these phenomena in any meaningful way

They did, but as it totally destroys your silly conspiracy theory you just ignore it!

NIST admitted to the presence of an incendiary explosion at the concourse level and to the deaths and injuries caused by it, stating, a “fireball killed or injured several occupants in the Concourse Level lobby

Wrong again, they never mentioned a "incendiary explosion", just a fireball caused by burning fuel.

All the available jet fuel (120 gallons) would have been lost in this process before the jet fuel bolus reached the mid-point of its fall.

You make the silly assumption all the jet fuel flowed down the walls....

The jet fuel bolus hypothesis also ignores the eyewitness testimonies of massive explosions within the lobby.

Wrong again, they saw a jet fuel fireball....

You continue to fail.

a reply to: hellobruce

Sorry Bruce. Even NIST said it was unlikely. Their wasn't enough fuel to find a broken shaft and go down 1700 ft. Even under the worst circumstances. More likely the elevators were blown up by bombs to keep as many victims in the building as possible.

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Doctor Smith

I've asked before and I'll ask again.

Show us where those two firemen say the explosions they heard were caused by explosives.

You keep posting that video like it doesn't fit with the official explanation.

Wow, this is how desperate it has become to defend the official story. Very sad.

a reply to: Doctor Smith


Tell the survivors that

She was stepping off the elevator when the plane hit," Wertz recalls. "There was an explosion on top of the elevator as if someone had thrown a hand grenade. I jumped out, fell to the floor and looked behind me. I saw the elevator disintegrate in a ball of flames and fall down (the shaft). There was a big hole in the ceiling above the elevator. I saw the cables fold up as if they'd become detached. It took no more than two seconds."

That empty elevator probably plummeted 14 floors into a pit on the 77th floor. Wertz and Lawrence evacuated safely down the stairs, as did 18 other people from the 91st floor.

Cantor Fitzgerald tax lawyer Harry Waizer, 50, was alone in a burning elevator that performed as it was programmed to do in an emergency: It returned to its lowest floor — the 78th — and opened its doors. Waizer survived with burns over 40% of his body. He walked the rest of the way down.

More here Elevators were disaster within disaster

From another source

Lobby & 3rd floor: Firefighter Peter Blaich
As we got to the third floor of the B stairway, we forced open an elevator door which was burnt on all three sides.

Then the revolving door turned with a suctioning sound followed by a hot burst of wind, and in came a mannequin of the future. A woman, naked, dazed, her arms outstretched. She was so badly burned that Ronnie had no idea what race she was or how old she might be. She clawed the air with fingernails turned porcelain-white. The zipper of what had once been a sweater had melted into her chest, as if it were the zipper to her own body. Her hair had been singed to a crisp steel wool. With her, in the gust of the door, came a pungent odour, the smell of kerosene or paraffin, Ronnie thought.

In the stalled lift in which Ian Robb was trapped, routine exasperation had given way to rising alarm as the sprinkler system slowly began to flood it. Those inside prised the doors open to discover that they were still on the ground floor. A fireman told him that the lift he'd just missed had crashed to the bottom of its shaft

This one is important

I saw a couple of elevators in free fall; you could hear them whizzing down and as they crashed, there was this huge explosion, like a fireball exploding out of the bank of elevators,” Kravette said. “People were engulfed in flames.”

Loads more here

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
a reply to: hellobruce

Sorry Bruce. Even NIST said it was unlikely. Their wasn't enough fuel to find a broken shaft and go down 1700 ft. Even under the worst circumstances. More likely the elevators were blown up by bombs to keep as many victims in the building as possible.

Top floor of the towers was 1350 feet. You were only off by more than 21%.

Who is desperate. Controlled demo is only a narritive backed by what college or university? Based on what physical evidence? Bless those that found thousands of fragmented remains, yet no trace of explosives.

And no verified audio recording of charges being set off. And you need to stop contradicting your arguments. Thermite was used because explosives were too noisy yet you have explosions caused by demolitions on recorded audio? Which is it. Silent thermite or noisy demolitions? Again, one camp of truthers speculation discredited by another camp of truthers speculation.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
a reply to: hellobruce

Sorry Bruce. Even NIST said it was unlikely. Their wasn't enough fuel to find a broken shaft and go down 1700 ft. Even under the worst circumstances. More likely the elevators were blown up by bombs to keep as many victims in the building as possible.

Top floor of the towers was 1350 feet. You were only off by more than 21%.

Who is desperate. Controlled demo is only a narritive backed by what college or university? Based on what physical evidence? Bless those that found thousands of fragmented remains, yet no trace of explosives.

It was actually 1,175 feet. I guess I left out the 1 and rounded it to 1700. Still very far down, over a thousand feet. It is possible that the jet fuel could have caused some of the explosions. The important thing is the vapor.

That's an important difference between the High Road Truthers and the OFS backers. The truthers are looking for the actual truth. They will admit when a minor mistake is made.