1200 Architects And Engineers

Ok, one more special engineer

Richard F. Humenn, PE

Senior Project Design Engineer in charge of the design of the electrical systems for the World Trade Center Complex. Former Senior Vice President of Joseph R. Loring & Associates. Retired Licensed Professional Engineer, States of New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and in Washington, DC.

Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"I was Senior Project Design Engineer in charge of the design of the electrical systems for the WTC Complex in NY.

Employed by the consulting and engineering firm, Joseph R. Loring & Associates, Inc., I was also a licensed Professional Engineer and was directly associated with ongoing projects at WTC for some 35 years before retiring in mid 1997.

Though an electrical engineer by trade, I was also very familiar with the structures and their conceptual design parameters.

On September 11, I watched the live TV broadcast of the progressive collapse of the World Trade Towers with disbelief, as the mass and strength of the structure should have survived the localized damage caused by the planes and burning jet fuel.

I viewed the presentation of Richard Gage and other related material, which compels me to believe that the fuel and planes alone did not bring the Towers down. I, therefore, support the proposal to form an international group of professionals to investigate all plausible causes for the virtual freefall and the almost total destruction of the WTC structures."

Originally posted by rival

Someone should bring these organizations together under one umbrella
of solidarity. It would give them much more clout.

Now in Amerika when you bring groups together it just paints a
giant target on them for disinfo Ops.

Better to stay separate for now and perhaps one of the several
groups will make a break through, and in the worse case maybe
at least one will survive the Ad hominem attacks.

Originally posted by esdad71

How many Nobel prize winners are on your list?

Al Gore won a nobel prize and he has been proven to be a liar.

Our Liar in chief won a nobel prize for peace, what a joke.

The nobel prize has become a piece of propaganda.

Originally posted by conar

Originally posted by 54v!0r531f
the fireproofing was knocked off or burned off by the fires or collisions.

But why put fireproofing on steel?

Steel does not give a @#"!#! about fire....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 25-8-2010 by conar]

dood i dont know, i rarely concern myself with the fireproofing, other than as a reason to have the buildings brought down because of the asbestos orientation of the fireproofing.

Originally posted by etcorngods

Originally posted by hmmmbeer
reply to post by etcorngods

 

How did the buildings - all 3 including tower 7 - accelerate at freefall speeds? Please explain the total power outages in the towers in the weeks leading up to 911, and the security breakdowns, and the very low occupancy rates.
Simple physics, only plausible explanantion consistent with all evidence is controlled demolition.

Wrong: There is a third alternative, which is consistent with all the facts. 911 was an "act of god". God can break the laws of physics, and cause free fall speeds. God can cause smart people like the 1200 A&E's to wrongly believe that it was Controlled Demolition -- when certain things couldn't have happened, but they did -- like free fall collapse, No Noise due to explosives, and many other things couldn’t have happened, but they did.

God’s hidden language in the English language – applied to 911/2001/AD converts to the word “Religion”..

See the websites listed after my signature.

etcorngods, please quit typing.

if everything is of gods will, that does not relinquish us from bringing the ones 'following gods orders' to 'justice'

and, if everything happens within the channel of gods will, then i #ing hate god. which 'he' already knew i would.

reply to post by mnemeth1


The fact that many EE's exist that believe the towers were demolished, only further destroys the credibility of all the people who claim the explosions were caused by exploding transformers and that kind of bull. EE's know that transformer explosions are caused by current overloads, which doesn't make sense at all with the idea that damage sustained by fires or plane impacts caused them to happen. Current overloads literally superheat the metals to the point of becoming molten and exploding, but again, fires and impacts don't cause this. Fire or a plane impact would only sever circuits, leading to open circuits, not short circuits to lead to current overloading, not to mention all the safety mechanisms that would have to also fail. People who are not familiar with engineering trades don't realize how many safety measures are taken in all fields to avoid disasters like this. Which is what makes it all the more bizarre that no more money was spent or any more effort put into investigating all the "anomalous" issues surrounding these worst engineering disasters in modern history.

Other posters have already mentioned that all engineers learn the same math and basic physics before branching off and specializing. What we are arguing here is basic physics, not structural calculations (impossible due to lack of public data) or electrical schematics (same) or anything else outside of basic mechanics, 101 and 102 stuff, Newtonian stuff that's hundreds of years old and tried and true. Free-fall and its relation to energy conservation is one of those tried-and-true laws.

[edit on 25-8-2010 by VirginiaRisesYetAgain]

Again, all you need to know that the government lied repeatedly
is in the film 9/11 press for truth.

It shows that they government lied over and over again.

Google Video Link

The ppl that are anxiously defending the official story are somehow
invested in the current power structure.

They will defend it blindly and lie themselves because the alternative
does not have room for the ppl that followed this agenda.

This event will be one of the elements that lead to our 2nd civil war.

As I have said before, when the shooting starts I am heading for the hills.

Good Luck to all the good ppl !

[edit on 25-8-2010 by Ex_MislTech]

Well everyone here that thinks someone with the title "engineer" in his/her name atuomatically makes the person superbly knowledgable in all aspects that are "assumed" by that title, please STOP and THINK for a second. I'll just give a little important point that for some reason everyone overlooks.

We all know what a doctor is correct? Now, do you think a doctor that specializes in heart surgery will have just as much knowledge and experience in brain surgery? Would you want a brain surgeon to drill and fill a cavity for you? Go for it if you want.

Lets go farther. A person with a PhD is called a Doctor as well. Ok, so is a Dr. Smith with a doctorate in physics just as qualified to do heart surgery as a heart surgeon.

Would you want a rocket scientist with a PhD do brain surgery? Is he qualified? Tell you folks what, next time you need to have major surgery, ask for a Doctorate in Physics to be your surgeon. He's got a PhD, just like a medical doctor, so get to it! Or better yet, get a Doctorate in medicine, then apply for a job at the partical accelerator as a theoretical physicist. try and use your PhD degree to get in.

reply to post by GenRadek


Any doctor, brain surgeon, heart surgeon, ANY competent doctor, should be able to tell the symptoms of a common cold. That is a more accurate metaphor here.

It does not require specialization to understand Newtonian physics, like free-fall speeds and conservation of energy. Every engineer has to have physics. Even psychology majors have to have physics! It's a basic required course.

The real reason there is division here is because half of you are in classic traumatic denial.

9/11 was traumatic enough to begin with. Followed immediately by all the zealous, brain-dead flag-waving and "Let's go Turn the Middle East into a Parking Lot!" hooplah. To then learn that your own government has lied to you repeatedly up and down the whole scope of these events is infinitely more disturbing. It is very simple why people such as yourself can't comprehend this. It's just plain disbelief. You don't need a reason to outright refuse to believe something when you're dealing with denial.

But when you've become an engineer or other technical professional, you've gained enough confidence in your independent ability to look at things right that almost no amount of handwaving by the media can overcome what you know is right.

You look to your own opinion and analysis first, not the talking head's. That's why they beat you up so hard in engineering school. So that you have that confidence.

Now maybe there's an engineer or other technically qualified person who believes the official story. I haven't met this individual yet but anything's possible ...

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Did you pick him at random?

Because when I randomly pulled out a few AE911 members most were kitchen designers or interior decorators. Several were unemployed, including one whose only building design had been a temporary shed made out of hay bales.

You pulled out a few, please post this. I'm asking because "a few" in English just means a measly 3. How can that be 'most' if all involved is 1200?
Since your math verbiage is awful, should we discount you as well?
Also what have you built let alone blew up?
My point: If we go by your logic, we should be discounting you since you have not backed up what you claimed. If you require it, you should follow suit.
Also just because someone is unemployed doesn't mean they don't know anything. Again, flawed logic.

Originally posted by SurefireII
If you had half the experience I do in any of the fields of work you still would be mediocre at best.

Hilarious given you apparently can't even read a website. You just got done saying none of these truthers have experience in the field, just to have a number of them more relevant than yourself respond on this very thread. Richard Gage himself, the most vocal and prominent member of AE911, has worked on multi-million dollar architectural projects, like I told you earlier. What was the last multi-million dollar architectural or engineering project you oversaw?

90% of "debunkers" on this website are just full of themselves and seem to come here to let their ego out to play.

reply to post by VirginiaRisesYetAgain


But what are you exactly doing then?

These "professionals" do have the education, experience, and knowledge in their respective fields, but so what? What weight does someone with a "degree" in architecture who built log houses, over someone who has been doing demoliton work of tall and large buildings for nearly 20-30 years? Who am I going to ask about this? The log designer, or the demolition professional? So you will take the word of a log house builder and designer, over the word of someone who actively does controlled demolition?

Ah and back to that doctor analogy: Ok, so you take a kid that is sniffling, sneezing, has a fever, vomits, is tired, etc, where will you take this child for a diagnosis? To a neurologist, a cardiologist, a proctologist, or a physician? Now say you went to the neuologist and he says, oh well to me this looks like a common cold, dont worry about it, will you believe it just the same and perscribe whatever he reccomends? Say you then go to the physican who diagnosis the child as having a serious virus that is threatening his/her life, are you going to ignore that physican and go with the neurologist's "diagnosis"? I sure hope not.

Same here. You have a log house architect who builds log houses. Fine, he's got some physics education, but what relevance does a log house have to a 110 story steel and concrete structure with a tube-in-tube design? And how exactly did he come to the conclusion that it may have been demoed? He watched a video of it? Wow! gee thats like instead of going to the doctor, you go on Skype, and have your sick child talk with the doctor, on Skype, and just from watching the child sneeze and sniffle, diagnosing that the child has the flu. And then ignoring the doctor that makes a house visit and properly diagnosis the child as having something much more severe.

I'm loving this little "Bizzaro" style world of thinking. It makes me laugh.

reply to post by mnemeth1


I'll post these previously posted simulations. Basically, you can have pancaking and falling into the footprint. And the heats and environmental conditions could allow the production of thermite-like reactions.

Personally I think the demo conspiracy is nothing more than an attempt at dividing us from the truth. The fact that they either were irresponsible or simply did not care about us enough to act. Not to mention they took advantage of the events as well.

In any case, some simulations.





[edit on 25-8-2010 by Gorman91]

reply to post by GenRadek


You must spend all your day laughing at yourself then, cause you employ this bizarro thinking in every single post you make...

Tell us again how fires weakened the steel, leading to a sudden catastrophic failure that provided enough kinetic energy to pulverize the entire contents of the building into Powder and annihilated steel that had not been weakened in any way whatsoever.

Explain how all of the debris that has turned to dust has such amazing power to smash incredibly strong upright steel beams into nothingness as well.

Tell me how fires that are on very high floors, and that clearly would have been on TOP of the debris pile got underneath the entire pile,, ONLY.

I have kicked apart many fires, but somehow this one stayed alight while being blown apart and then re-ignited underneath all of the debris at temperatures far beyond that of the fires in the buildings.

For that matter, even try to explain how the fires would not have been completely extinguished due to the total dissolving of the space it was occupying, and being swallowed by dust and everything else.

Oh, maybe it was the super duper hot steel that "weakened" that lit everything back on fire.

And certainly fires that noone can see can travel down through thousands of tons of rubble and just keep burning.

Originally posted by Azp420

Hi there Six Sigma.

Hi there Azp!

May I ask what makes you more qualified than Dennis or how his mention of his hobby makes him under-qualified? Or does specializing in log architecture somehow negate his degree? Many engineers specialize in timber, doesn't mean they have no idea about the forces etc involved in other materials or how they behave.

You can ask me anything you can!

I never said his degree was negated in any way. I was looking at his qualifications. Let me ask you, sir; If you were in need of open heart surgery, would you have your urologist perform it?

The man has an architecture degree. Good for him. He builds log cabins and stain glass windows. As I have asked so many times, I will ask again. Where is his scientific, peer reviewed explanation of the events at the towers?

His personal statement is correct. The manor of each collapse resembled a controlled demolition to a much greater degree than what would be expected from a collapse due to jet liner impacts and gravity alone (at least that's how I interpreted it).

Really? There is not a single controlled demolition expert on this planet the believes the twin towers resemble a controlled demolition. Those are the experts that count. I will not go by the words of a guy that builds log cabins.

Now, before you bring up Danny Jowenko. He said that WTC 1 & 2 were NOT controlled demolitions. So, if you want to take his word as Gospel regarding WTC-7, you have to take it all. Something thruthers often ignore.

I had a hard time interpreting what he was saying as well, but who is he or you for that matter that knows what a building should look like when it collapses from getting hit by a speeding plane?

3.25 seconds is an enormous amount of time for a structure to spend in free fall (are you sure that's right?), and at near free fall for most of the rest of the collapse. ANY large accelerations should not have been possible (I proved this in the Physics of 9/11 thread)

Actually I was wrong. It was 2.25 seconds.

If you "proved" anything that disputes the findings of the collapse, please submit your work through the appropriate channels. If not, please supply me the link to your work and I will have some structural engineers have a look at. I am not a structural engineer.

Molten metal could be seen pouring out of one of the towers. It is a bit difficult to perform a scientific analysis on the chemical makeup using tv footage alone, but it is highly unlikely it is contaminated molten aluminum IMO.

Well, your opinion means nothing.... please don't take that personally. Research shows that the room where you see the molten material flowing downward was more than likely a mixture of many materials including the UPS system batteries for FUJI bank.

I agree there is a lot of nonsense spouted by some about space lasers etc.

I would, however, like to hear your honest researched opinion as to how you think the top section of the North tower was able to crush the bottom section by applying less force than when it was stationary.

I would also say that super secret nano thermite along with conventional explosives covertly buried in 3 large skyscrapers to implode them after planes are flow into them is just as loony as Space Beams and Mini-Nukes.


You want me to explain the collapse? That would take up too much space here. I can point you to some peer reviewed papers that do explain this. Please let me know if you are interested.

Here ya go: Destruction of the World Trade Center North Tower and Fundamental Physics

The science presented in this paper is more than sound in my professional opinion.

Apparently you misunderstood what I was seeking. PEER REVIEWED. This means it is accepted by the scientific community. Putting your paper in an obviously biased conspiracy theory website is far from accepted.

If Mr. Chandler was so sure about his work, he would have it published. That's what true professionals do. Perhaps you can write him?

The Journal of 9/11 Studies, a peer-reviewed, open-access, electronic-only journal, covering the whole of research related to the events of 11 September, 2001.

LMFAO... Truthers checking other truthers work. Why don't you contact Gregory Urich who was published at that website? He was told that no more papers will be accepted there.

Refereed papers have already been published in mainstream peer-reviewed journals: Fourteen Points...[Bentham] and Environmental Anomalies at the World Trade Center: Evidence for energetic materials [SpringerLink], and Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe [The Open Chemical Physics Journal].

Fourteen points...... Why did you edit the title??

For those that are reading along, this is the name of the paper:

Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction

Bentham Paper

The other article you mention was not peer reviewed. It was published in a Vanity journal where Mr. Jones paid to have it published. Ask Mr. Jones why he refuses to have his work reviewed by reputable scientists.

Originally posted by Gorman91
In any case, some simulations.

Excellent simulations.

The above simulated dynamic collisions prove the WTC fell like a house-of-cards (or 55 gallon drums), stacked upon each other and never connected to each other.

The only problem here, is that the REAL WTC has actual connections among their steel.

So, what severed those connections?

(by the way, you need to tell the producer of the second video to change his cam near focus point as it cut off some of the graphics in one scene)

[edit on 25-8-2010 by TiffanyInLA]

Why 2 planes hitting the WTC?

If one plane hit, likely no one would have filmed it. If they did, it would have been questionable, aka, "It was planned."

If two hit, it gives time for some news agencies to get on the scene with cameras. Plane 1 hits. News agencies start filming. Plane 2 hits. American people can see the plane hit, the buildings collapse, "Obviously it was the planes."

Obviously explosives were used. I wonder why the U.S. just didn't wanna say the terrorists used them? I guess affirming that explosives were used would have picked up on the trail that the CIA created, and could possibly lead back to them.

I hope everyone involved in 9/11 gets held accountable if possible.

reply to post by TiffanyInLA


Well as you saw because they were not connected horizontally they did not all fall at the same rate. Had a welding command been used they would have fallen like cards.

Basically, as stated, the conditions in the wtc were sufficient for thermite. Gypsum dust from shattered dry wall would under go several reactions to separate the the sulfur. Then the sulfur would find its way to the zinc melting off the iron, and bam.


Thermite.

Thermite plus weakened steel from the fires and you've got yourself not strength in the core structure.

With a hole on the outer structure and an unstable inner structure, the mass of the above falls on the bellow, and really you are not going to have a structure resist that fall.

reply to post by againuntodust


Or they wanted to hit our economic political and military capitals. Why would an organization powerful enough to hit 3 miss out on 4?

Again, more than likely this conspiracy on demos and everything is to divert attention to the fact our government failed to care about us and did not care. To add insult to injury they started 2 wars that, for all intensive purposes, gained us nothing.



[edit on 25-8-2010 by Gorman91]

Originally posted by againuntodust
Why 2 planes hitting the WTC?

If one plane hit, likely no one would have filmed it. If they did, it would have been questionable, aka, "It was planned."

Um... well there were two towers.

Oh... and the first plane hitting was filmed.