NIST Investigation Violated National Fire Code, page 3

reply to post by angel of lightangelo

---

Please list the questions I have dodged.

And yes, when you ask anyone what started the fires in the WTC... I believe you will get 99.9% of the people saying that it was two planes.

Now, if you ask then what caused the collapse, I would assume that this number may need some adjusting.

Originally posted by CameronFox
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

---

Please list the questions I have dodged.

start here on the first page

originally posted by Griff

Now, if they did such a great job at fresh kills, why would the government admit that it botched the investigation? Why would new laws have to be written to ensure they don't botch another investigation?

back to TY-

And yes, when you ask anyone what started the fires in the WTC... I believe you will get 99.9% of the people saying that it was two planes.

Now, if you ask then what caused the collapse, I would assume that this number may need some adjusting.

So you can just say whatever you believe and I should believe it because you said it twice? So, when I ask what integrity your posts have when you seem to mistake what you think for facts, the answer is a repeat of the line that made me question it to begin with. OK Keep saying things you think until they become true. Please U2U me when it happens.

Originally posted by SPreston

posted by SPreston
Why did they lie to New Yorkers and tell them the dust was safe immediately after 9-11?

posted by jthomas
And just where do you think the data came from that showed the dust was unsafe for everyone????

Get a clue and do your research on those independent dust studies, Mr. Preston.

Can't you read jthomas? New York officially linked a death to the 9-11 toxic dust in 2007.

Can't you read, SPreston? Just where do you think the data came from that showed the dust was unsafe for everyone???? Out of the thin blue sky?

The lying criminal Bush Regime and that scumbag Christine Todd Whitman told them it was safe to go back in 2001 and 2002.

You mean this?

September 14, 2001

"The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration today announced that the majority of air and dust samples monitored in New York's financial district do not indicate levels of concern for asbestos.
...
"Air samples taken on September 13th inside buildings in New York's financial district were negative for asbestos."
...
"'EPA will be deploying sixteen vacuum trucks this weekend in an effort to remove as much of the dust and debris as possible from the site where the samples were obtained said EPA Administrator, Christine Whitman. 'In addition, we will be moving six continuous air monitoring stations into the area. We will put five near ground zero and one on Canal Street. The good news continues to be that the air samples have all been at levels that cause us no concern." (4 days after the event, in the financial district.)

www.osha.gov...

Can't you read, SPreston? "Obviously, you never bothered to research all of the independent studies done on the dust right after 9/11 to determine the dust's exact physical and chemical composition so as to evaluate the potential harmful effects to first responders and cleanup crews."

Are you going to continue to pretend that there were NO independent studies done to determine the toxicity of the dust in your effort to pretend the Federal Government suppressed dust studies and their toxic effects?

No wonder you won't do any research. Once again, I have to do all YOUR work for you. Get back to us after you have studied the following:

Health Effects from the Collapse of the World Trade Center

Characterization of the Dust/Smoke Aerosol that Settled East of the World Trade Center (WTC) in Lower Manhattan after the Collapse of the WTC 11 September 2001

Characterization of the Dust/Smoke Aerosol that Settled East of the World Trade Center (WTC) in Lower Manhattan after the Collapse of the WTC 11 September 2001

Health and Environmental Consequences of the World Trade Center Disaster

Health Effects from the Collapse of the World Trade Center

Materials characterization of dusts generated by the collapse of the world trade center

Determination of a Diagnostic Signature for World Trade Center Dust using Scanning Electron Microscopy Point Counting Techniques

YOUR hated EPA:

"The tragedy of the September 11, 2001, collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers and other buildings in and adjacent to the WTC site produced a dust cloud that was visible from space and covered much of lower Manhattan in millimeters to centimeters of extremely fine powdered material. This material was inhaled and ingested by thousands of people on the day of the event and for several days afterward. In addition, thousands of apartments, offices, and public buildings were contaminated by the dust through a variety of pathways. The short-term medical effects of this exposure were manifested in what became known as the World Trade Center (WTC) cough, documented as respiratory and other health problems among many of those who were exposed (Gavett and others, 2003; Prezant and others, 2002). Potential long-term medical effects of this event may not be known for many years. Several studies have examined various components of the dusts generated by the collapse of the WTC (Meeker and others, 2005; Plumlee and others, 2005; Badger and others, 2004; Yiin and others, 2004; McGee, 2003; Offenberg and others, 2003; Chatfield and Kominsky, 2002; Lioy and others, 2002, Millette and others, 2002; Clark and others, 2001)."

Inorganic chemical composition and chemical reactivity of settled dust generated by the world trade center building collapse

THE GEOCHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND REACTIVITY OF DUSTS DEPOSITED BY THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 WORLD TRADE CENTER COLLAPSE

Analysis of Aerosols from the World Trade Center Collapse Site, New York, October 2 to October 30, 2001

Evaluation of potential human exposures to airborne particulate matter following the collapse of the world trade center towers

Health Consequences of the September 11 World Trade Center Attacks: A Review

Persistent organic pollutants in dusts that settled indoors in lower Manhattan after September 11, 2001

A comprehensive list of links on the dust studies at Ground Zero

So much for your claims that the "government" was trying to suppress dust studies when they've been there all along just for you.

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by jthomas
Obviously, you never bothered to research all of the independent studies done on the dust right after 9/11 to determine the dust's exact physical and chemical composition so as to evaluate the potential harmful effects to first responders and cleanup crews.

Obviously, you never bothered to research the difference between a chemical (compound) and an element. If you had, you'd know the difference.

What confuses you about "the dust's exact physical and chemical composition?

Do you? Do you know the difference between a chemical and an element?

What still confuses you about studies "to determine the dust's exact physical and chemical composition?"

"The major inorganic components of the dusts generated from the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings on September 11, 2001 were concrete materials, gypsum, and man-made vitreous fibers. These components were likely derived from lightweight Portland cement concrete floors, gypsum wallboard, and spray-on fireproofing and ceiling tiles, respectively. All of the 36 samples collected by the USGS team had these materials as the three major inorganic components of the dust. Components found at minor and trace levels include chrysotile asbestos, lead, crystalline silica, and particles of iron and zinc oxides. Other heavy metals, such as lead, bismuth, copper, molybdenum, chromium, and nickel, were present at much lower levels occurring in a variety of chemical forms. Several of these materials have health implications based on their chemical composition, morphology, and bioaccessibility."

cat.inist.fr...

See the list above in my previous post and get back to us if you don't understand something.

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by jthomas
And just where do you think the data came from that showed the dust was unsafe for everyone????

Just because the EPA finally had to come clean (no pun intended) doesn't negate the fact that they covered it up in the beginning. Trying to re-write history again?

Show us the cover up and why you think there were NO independent studies done of the dust.

Show us that anyone, including the EPA, said there were NO health effects of the dust.

Would you like a little help? OK, here is what studies were showing:

July 2002:

Characterization of the Dust/Smoke Aerosol that Settled East of the World Trade Center (WTC) in Lower Manhattan after the Collapse of the WTC 11 September 2001

Conclusions
The analyses of the three settled dust samples
collected from areas downwind of the
collapsed WTC have provided information
that is valuable in assessing exposures of
workers and residents to related dusts. These
exposures have occurred during resuspension
of such dusts, both outdoors and indoors, in
the course of rescue, cleanup, and routine
day-to-day activities. The vast majority of
the mass was pulverized building and
construction materials including cement,
cellulose, and glass fibers. However, the fires
produced aerosol particles that contained
products of incomplete combustion.
Toxicants with significant concentrations or
potential surface loadings included asbestos,
glass fibers, lead, and PAHs. Further, many
of these particles had much smaller particles
agglomerated on the surface. The identification
of these major components is important
for assessing acute inhalation of resuspendable
dust and smoke, or direct inhalation
during the first week after the attack.
Because the material also settled indoors, if
indoor locations are not cleaned properly,
there is a potential for long-term inhalation
contact or ingestion contact.

Cover up, Griff?

Originally posted by jthomas
Characterization of the Dust/Smoke Aerosol that Settled East of the World Trade Center (WTC) in Lower Manhattan after the Collapse of the WTC 11 September 2001

Nice wording here.

The explosion and collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) was a catastrophic event that produced
an aerosol plume impacting many workers, residents, and commuters during the first few
days after 11 September 2001.

Notice they don't just call it a collapse, but an explosion and collapse.




[edit on 12/17/2008 by Griff]

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by jthomas
Characterization of the Dust/Smoke Aerosol that Settled East of the World Trade Center (WTC) in Lower Manhattan after the Collapse of the WTC 11 September 2001

Nice wording here.

The explosion and collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) was a catastrophic event that produced
an aerosol plume impacting many workers, residents, and commuters during the first few
days after 11 September 2001.

Notice they don't just call it's a collapse, but an explosion and collapse.

So, your evasion of the topic begins. I am not surprised.

Originally posted by jthomas
1. Health Effects from the Collapse of the World Trade Center

2. Characterization of the Dust/Smoke Aerosol that Settled East of the World Trade Center (WTC) in Lower Manhattan after the Collapse of the WTC 11 September 2001

3. Characterization of the Dust/Smoke Aerosol that Settled East of the World Trade Center (WTC) in Lower Manhattan after the Collapse of the WTC 11 September 2001

4. Health and Environmental Consequences of the World Trade Center Disaster

5. Health Effects from the Collapse of the World Trade Center

6. Materials characterization of dusts generated by the collapse of the world trade center

7. Determination of a Diagnostic Signature for World Trade Center Dust using Scanning Electron Microscopy Point Counting Techniques

8. Inorganic chemical composition and chemical reactivity of settled dust generated by the world trade center building collapse

9. THE GEOCHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND REACTIVITY OF DUSTS DEPOSITED BY THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 WORLD TRADE CENTER COLLAPSE

10. Analysis of Aerosols from the World Trade Center Collapse Site, New York, October 2 to October 30, 2001

11. Evaluation of potential human exposures to airborne particulate matter following the collapse of the world trade center towers

12. Health Consequences of the September 11 World Trade Center Attacks: A Review

13. Persistent organic pollutants in dusts that settled indoors in lower Manhattan after September 11, 2001

14. A comprehensive list of links on the dust studies at Ground Zero

So much for your claims that the "government" was trying to suppress dust studies when they've been there all along just for you.

1. Copyright 2008 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved

2. October 27-30 2002. 13 Months later

3. Volume 43 Issue 3 2009

4. 2005, vol. 919, pp. 190-237 [48 page(s) (article)]

5. 2007 Impact Factor: 2.106 (© Thomson Reuters, Journal Citation Reports®, 2008)

6. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology (2004) 14, 164–172. doi:10.1038/sj.jea.7500310

7. The only thing I saw pertaining to sample reporting as I perused this site was an OSHA study in October 2002 13 months later.

8. 2005, vol. 919, pp. 238-276 [39 page(s) (article)]

9. October 27-30 2002 13 months later.

From this point on, I'm starting to see a pattern of you linking to about 4 different studies (included above) about 4 times each? Did you have to make the list longer by linking to the same article 4 different times?

Anyway, back to my point. Please show a report from when the workers were actually there. Because the closest thing you linked to was in October 2002. 13 Months later. And as Cameron already pointed out, the last steel was taken out in May of 2002. 5 months before any of your reports came out.

On a side note: I wasn't aware of some of those reports where they actually do list compounds and not just the elements. But, most of them just list the elements from what I saw scanning through your "list".

reply to post by CameronFox

---

So as long as a page separates your responses, it is ok if they directly contradict each other? I read your response but since it did not match at all what you were originally saying, I guess I just assumed I was seeing things. You would not contradict yourself now would you?

I do not need not need to tell you what started the fires. It is your attitude of assuming 99.9% is accurate and assuming what started each and every fire. I would not assume so much but that is just me. I would have let the standard investigations happen to determine the cause of each and every fire that happened that day - as is usual protocol. I know, tinfoil hat wearing moonbat stuff right?

reply to post by angel of lightangelo

---

I tell you what. Look at my name and avatar. You see that little word that say's "ignore?" I suggest you click on it.

Thank you.

Originally posted by Griff
How do you know that the fires were started by the disbursement of fuel when there was no investigation into it? Could it not be possible for terrorists to light fires in all the chaos? If this is a possibility, then why wasn't it investigated?

Griff, it was investigated, and was mentioned in the NIST report:

wtc.nist.gov...

For the North Tower:

The Jet Fuel 2.4

Another fact:

Of the evacuees interviewed by NIST, 72% reported the smell of fuel fumes in the stairwells of the north tower, and 63% in the south tower. (NIST NCSTAR 1-7A p. 17)

In regards to terrorists running around starting fires? Dude... come on. You are SO much smarter than that. First of all...not one report of ANYONE seeing someone running around with accelerates starting fires.

If a plane crashes in a field and then there is a fire 2 football fields away, should we investigate the fire or just automatically blame it on the plane crash?

I guess that all depends on if millions of people were watching the plane debris cascading across the 2 football fields.

Especially if the fire looks like this?

Yes, I was the one who first posted the video of the green flame here at ATS... *takes a bow*

The green flame was actually pretty impressive. However not unusual. Can I explain it 100%? Nope, I am not a chemist or a professional firefighter. I do know that a good amount of copper will burn green like that. People actually make their own green fires by adding some copper sulfite to rolled up newspapers.

In addition to copper, a mixture of other chemicals can easily cause green flames. Methenol and Boric Acid (was this a storage room?)

I think it would be important to find out what floor that was and what offices were in there. Cubicles and computers are filled with copper wiring from typical A/C conductors to CAT-5 cable to computer hardware...lots of copper.

Again, I have no idea for certain what caused the green flame. Are you aware if indeed thermite burns a green color? Do any other types of accelerates burn green? Perhaps some other members here are knowledgeable with this?

Let me add once again Griff, I do agree that it is a shame that all the steel from WTC-7 was removed and not examined by NIST. Not only would answers be much more definitive, I would have to assume it would have saved us taxpayers a few bucks.

Originally posted by CameronFox
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

---

I tell you what. Look at my name and avatar. You see that little word that say's "ignore?" I suggest you click on it.

Thank you.

Ok thanks. I thought that when people contradict themselves to make their point that is usually because they have to lie to win their case. If pointing that out is a problem for you then I sure better hit ignore. I expect people here to be able to stand by the things they say, or own up to them. Thanks for letting me know you are not honest and will not be.

Originally posted by CameronFox
Griff, it was investigated, and was mentioned in the NIST report:

Really now, was it?

wtc.nist.gov...

For the North Tower:

The Jet Fuel 2.4

Another fact:

Of the evacuees interviewed by NIST, 72% reported the smell of fuel fumes in the stairwells of the north tower, and 63% in the south tower. (NIST NCSTAR 1-7A p. 17)

The smell of jet fuel in the air does jack diddly squat in pin-pointing the exact cause of fires.

Almost any finely divided organic substance will produce an explosive mixture in an air suspension. For military use, so-called hyperbaric or thermobaric fuel-air bombs have been produced that work by initially creating a mist of jet fuel (kerosene) or diesel fuel, then igniting the mist.

en.wikipedia.org...

I think it would be important to find out what floor that was and what offices were in there.

Hmm. A real fire investigation would have answered your questions here.

Are you aware if indeed thermite burns a green color?

Did I say anything about thermite?

Do any other types of accelerates burn green? Perhaps some other members here are knowledgeable with this?

Lots of pyrotechnics burn green and could also have been used for arson.

Again. A real investigation would have answered these questions.

9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 14 days ago with 14 member flags

9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 7 days ago with 13 member flags

An Overview and Debunking of the AE9/11T\'s List of Demolition Signs
  Posted 16 days ago with 12 member flags

Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 18 days ago with 11 member flags

Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 15 days ago with 6 member flags

new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 9 days ago with 6 member flags

Final Decision: Court sanctions lawyers behind September 11 conspiracy case
  Posted 9 days ago with 6 member flags

you must try this youre self ????
  Posted 14 days ago with 4 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: