posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 07:33 PM
I don't think any one is "nuts". I know "nuts" is politicaly incorect, but you get my drift. A healthy society always questions everything.
Looking at the WTC issue I have tried to consider many options. I looked at the way the building was built, consistant with our general knowledge of
HOW buildings fall down. I have seen nothing that points to the government f****** us on this. I have considered the following based on; (1--had to
take a cursery view, on what would cause a building like the WTC falling almost straight down with a minimum ground level footprint. The building that
utilizes a design for sky scrapers since the 1950's is sometimes called a "curtain" like structure is made that way for economic reasons.
The "main core", elevators, utilities, were bunched with in its area as far from the corners or sides as possible. The Empire State building was hit
by a bomber due to fog late during WW-2. Yes there was damage and people died (from direct fire contact, and having elevator car cable's severed. ESB
is still there... But that points to civil engineering concerns more then anything else. There were no sprinklers in the ESB by the way.
Knowing that the building was kept up almost exclusively from its internal, not wall based or even with a modest degree of "impact" protection on
the side or in the courners by steel gurders, two things are going to happen. The tremendous kinetic force of a wide body plane hitting what was a
very fragile superstructure, would "blow off" the fire proofing on any internal guirders.This same effect would no doubt weaken everything else. At
least one reason so much stuff that showed no evidence of fire was pulverized (2:--The huge amount of jet fuel, a full load considering their wetern
destinations would have burned at 1,5000-2,000 F. but don't quote me about that tempeture I have to look it up, but even much lower tempetures would
in time do the same thing. Burning jet fuel would have softened the supporting I-beams and because of gravity, cause them to bow-in from the buildings
outer walls and corners. As the I-beams seperated from the outer skin, if you were to see the building from a view like looking down/in from the top,
you would be able to see one of the mechanics of failure. Any internal weakening would also bring the building down. But a localized area of a lot of
burning materials in a localized space would create a greater energy source, more to burn close to hand spreading via thermal radiation Not burning
hotter just faster. Just as turning up the heat on a stove(boiling water would make water boil water faster, not hotter) You would have seen the beams
as they softened the beams in the buildings center, then work its way out to the "walls".
It would not take much time at all for the beams to soften, then buckle in, with the inevitable result of their weight following the direction of
gravity, then "pancake" down. This adds the the momentum of imact from the upper most affected floor, come down with greater and greater impact on
the floors below. Also once this happened the effect would also take areas above the impact to come down with nothing below to support them
I would have been very suspicious if the towers DID NOT come down as they did. As many know impact of the largest commercial plane available when the
WTC was designed, the 707 was evaluated as to what would have happened should this size commercial hit. (I don't know about how military aircraft of
comporable kinetic punch like a C-5, B-52, would have had compared to the 707.Of course with a B-52, were not taking one with a bomb load. I need to
check the study on the 707 kinetic impact, thermal effects on structure, to see if this "hypothetical test" would have caused the building to come
down. My money is a fuel loaded 707 WOULD bring the building down with a direct impact. It just may have taken longer.
A host of areas can be reviewed in numerous scince textbooks in the area of inorganic chemistry (applies to building materials), thermal effects,
kinetic/ballistic effects, civil engineering, etc. Ochams* razor apllies here in spades (even of I cant spell "Ocham") I do think that this make the
most sense. I know "conspiracies" do happen, all the time. I just don't think it does here.