Originally posted by HowardRoark
Apparently you mised this post on the other page, so I'll repeat it here for you. Have you ever bothered look at the data and read the actual report,
or do your relly entirely on what is posted on Rense.com?
You have refered to Rense.com more than once in your rebuttals, I wonder who here is relying on Rense.com? Thats is certainly not my primary, nor my
only source of information, and given your obvious disliking for that source, it shouldn't be your only source of critique. While totally ignoring
the reports of explosions, you suggest that the seismic readings do not
show anything questionable in regards to the collapse of the buildings. However, I repeat
myself...
"The Palisades seismic record shows that — as the collapses began — a huge seismic "spike" marked the moment the greatest energy went into the
ground. The strongest jolts were all registered at the beginning of the collapses, well before the falling debris struck the earth."
This, along with the numerous reports of explosions from witnesses, survivors, and fire fighters, how much more evidence do you need? Why would fire
fighters claim to have heard explosions? I suppose the reason they were not allowed to testify before the 9-11 Comission was because they were so
intent upon misrepresenting themselves in regards to the
explosions? ONce again, I ask you, if fire was the primary cause of the collapses, how does the falling debris nearly reach terminal velocity,
wouldn't the lower floors provide some resistance? Wouldn't the seismic spikes have registered when the debris hit the ground rather than at the
beginning of the collapses, Yes of course they would, unless it was a
controlled demolition.
Originally posted by HowardRoark
I did, and look what I found:
A truck bomb at the WTC in 1993, in which approximately 0.5 tons of explosive were detonated, was not detected seismically, even at a station
only 16 km away.
WOW a half ton explosion in 1993 and it wasn’t picked up by the seismograph that was even closer then the ones that were in operation on 9/11.
Logically, then that must mean that your “seismic spikes picked up BEFORE each collapse” were the result of even larger blasts. Please explain how
this can be.
LOL How is the truck bomb in 1993 relevant? Explain it? Ok, a truck bomb explodes on the surface causing minimal seismic readings, while explosions
within a subterrain basement, or explosions on steel structures anchored deep into the ground would. A very basic understanding of resonance would
show this to be not only a contradiction, but evidence in support of demolition, I thank you for pointing that out.
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Please point out the “seismic spikes picked up BEFORE each collapse”
Where are these “major readings in the instants BEFORE each collapse” that you insist exist? I am waiting for you to explain this.
BTW, you can upload your pic to ATS as long as it is under 100 kb.
As soon as I figure out how to upload them, the pics are on the way. Here is another piece for you to debunk...
Bombs in the World Trade Center # 3
by Victor Thorn
As we’ve seen, once science and physics enter into the 9-11 equation, the
official explanation for why the WTC towers collapsed doesn’t seem to hold
as much water. Of particular interest is some seismic data that originates
from Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades,
New York, which is 21 miles from NYC. It seems that when the two
“hijacked” jets crashed into the WTC towers on the morning of 9-11, they
made virtually no registration on Columbia’s seismic equipment. Nor did
the failed 1993 WTC truck bomb. Last but not least, when the two
towers ultimately pancaked to the ground that morning, their registration was also negligible. But what did create two extreme spikes on the seismic
equipment were the circumstances which occurred BEFORE the towers collapsed (www.world-exposed.com...). Yes, you read that correctly –
before they crashed to the ground. In fact, in the moments before the South Tower fell at 9:59:04 am, something happened to register a magnitude of
2.1 on Columbia’s seismic equipment. Likewise, moments before the North Tower was brought down, something
registered a seismic spike on the magnitude of 2.3 on Columbia’s equipment. So, let’s step back a moment and examine what we’ve discovered. Planes
hitting the WTC towers didn’t create a seismic spike, nor did a failed truck bomb or the towers’ collapse. But what does create a spike on the
magnitude of 1.0-2.0 every time at Columbia’s
observatory are the underground explosions at a quarry 20 miles away (Source: seismologist Won-Young Kim in Christopher Bollyn’s article for The
American Free Press
– New Seismic Data
Refutes Official Explanation – September 3, 2002). This
is interesting, for if we rule out fire as the cause of the towers’
collapse, and consider that huge spikes occurred right BEFORE the towers
fell, what does this open the door to? Some type of underground explosion, similar to that which occurs at a quarry.
Arthur Lerner-Lam, director of Columbia University’s Center for Hazard and
Risk Research, stated in the above-mentioned article, “Only a small
fraction of the energy from the collapsing towers was converted into
ground motion. The ground shaking that resulted from the collapse of the
towers was extremely small.”
He then went on to explain that what did create the huge seismic data was an energy source beneath the towers that preceded their collapse. The
biggest question we must ask ourselves now is: shouldn’t the spikes have taken place when the buildings actually HIT the ground,
not before they fell?
Now, there would be an extremely easy way to prove whether or not there
were explosive devices planted at the WTC’s base. All we’d need to do is
thoroughly inspect the fallen steel girders. But guess what? All of the
girders were immediately hauled away without being tested by engineers or FEMA to detect any trace of explosives. Why was there no investigation?
Bill Manning, editor of Fire Engineering magazine said in its January 2002
edition, “The ‘official investigation’ blessed by FEMA and run by the
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) is a half-baked farce that may
have already been commandeered by political forces whose primary
interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure.”
Considering how many firemen and innocent civilians lost their lives that
day, you would think that we’d STILL be studying every scrap of evidence
from that fateful event. But Dr. W. Gene Corley, who headed FEMAs
engineering assessment of the WTC fallout, admitted that no tests were
performed on the girders to see if explosives were present. (Source: Randy
Lavello - Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Theory' is
a Conspiracy Fact) This is also the very same man who was in charge of
covering-up evidence and hauling it away after both the Waco tragedy and
the OKC bombing. Think about it – absolutely NO forensic tests were
performed on the steel girders. If the above evidence doesn’t make you suspicious, consider that three different World Trade Center engineers have
publicly announced that they built those towers to withstand the
impact of a jumbo jetliner. The first was Lee Robertson, WTC structural engineer: “I designed it for a 707 to hit it.” He also pointed out that even
though a 767 was used on the morning of 9-11, a 707 holds 23,000 gallons of fuel, while a 767 holds only slightly more at 23,980 gallons.
Secondly, Aaron Swirski, a WTC architect, told Jerusalem Post Radio, “It
was designed around that eventuality to survive this kind of attack.”
(Christopher Petherick – The American Free
Press – December 2, 2001 -
Eyewitness Reports Persist of Bombs at WTC Collapse)
Finally, Hyman Brown, a WTC construction manager and civil engineering
professor at the University of Colorado, stated in the same article, “It
was over-designed to withstand almost anything, including hurricanes, high winds, bombings, and an airplane hitting it.”
Yet, planes carrying less than 10,000 gallons of jet fuel which burns at
only 1,400 degrees Fahrenheit brought both of these mighty towers to their knees … to little more than dust.
Incredible.
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Your claim of pools of molten steel are unsubstantiated. provide links to physical evidence of this. Furthermore you are implying that the USGS data
indicates these pools exist. This is not the case.
No I am not claiming the USGS data indicated pools of anything, they indicated thermal hot spots which persisted despite the rain and enormous amount
of water. Pools of molten aluminum, as per your suggestion, aren't going to have that kind of heat retention.The claim of pools of molten steel you
say are unsubstantiated, are hardly unsubstantiated, Evidence of molten steel was found at the very base of the WTC towers, and
is a matter of public record. Get over it, there was molten steel at the base of the towers, which blows a big hole in your arguement.
When the excavation of the rubble was completed, masses of
previously molten steel were found, according to Mark Loizeaux and
Steve Tully, presidents of two of the companies contracted to 'clean
up' Ground Zero.
Physical evidence? LOL yeah that would be nice wouldn't it, however observe the following articles, and you will see the impossibility of offering
any physical evidence.
WTC Steel Removal The Expeditious Destruction of the Evidence at Ground Zero Steel was the structural material of the buildings. As such it was
the most important evidence to preserve in order to puzzle out how
the structures held up to the impacts and fires, but then disintegrated into rubble. Since no steel frame buildings had ever collapsed due to
fires, the steel should have been subjected to detailed analysis. So what did the authorities do with this key evidence of the vast crime and
unprecedented engineering failure?
They recycled it! Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from Ground Zero. Most of the steel has been recycled as per
the city's decision to swiftly send the wreckage to salvage yards in New Jersey. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who
believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last
month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the
authority to preserve the wreckage. Mayor Bloomberg, a former engineering major, was not concerned about the destruction of the
evidence: If you want to take a look at the construction methods and the
design, that's in this day and age what computers do. Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything.
During the official investigation controlled by FEMA, One hundred fifty pieces of steel were saved for future study. One hundred fifty pieces out of
hundreds of thousands of pieces! Moreover it is not clear who made the decision to save these particular pieces. It is clear that the volunteer
investigators were doing their work at the Fishkills dump, not at Ground Zero, so whatever steel they had access to was first picked over by the
people running the cleanup operation. Highly Sensitive Garbage Given that the people in charge considered the steel garbage, useless to any
investigation in this age of computer simulations, they certainly took pains to make sure it didn't end up anywhere other than a smelting furnace.
They installed GPS locater devices on each of the trucks that was carrying loads away from Ground Zero, at a cost of $1000 each. The
securitysolutions.com website has an article on the tracking system with this passage. Ninety-nine percent of the drivers were extremely driven to do
their jobs. But there were big concerns, because the loads
consisted of highly sensitive material. One driver, for example, took an extended lunch break of an hour and a half. There was nothing criminal about
that, but he was dismissed. Shielding Investigators From the Evidence According to FEMA, more than 350,000 tons of steel were extracted from Ground
Zero and barged or trucked to salvage yards where it was cut up for recycling. Four salvage yards were contracted to process
the steel.
Hugo Nue Schnitzer
at Fresh Kills (FK) Landfill, Staten Island, NJ
Hugo Nue Schnitzer's Claremont (CM) Terminal in Jersey City, NJ
Metal Management in Newark
(NW), NJ
Blanford and Co. in Keasbey (KB), NJ
FEMA's BPAT, who wrote the WTC Building Performance Study, were not
given access to Ground Zero. Apparently, they were not even allowed to collect steel samples from the salvage yards. According to Appendix D of the
Study, "Collection and storage of steel members from the WTC site was not part of the BPS Team efforts sponsored by FEMA and the American Society of
Civil Engineers (ASCE)."
References
1,N.Y. Daily News,4/16/02
2Baosteel Will Recycle World Trade Center
Debris,china.
org.cn,1/24/02
3GPS ON THE JOB IN MASSIVE WORLD TRADE CENTER
CLEAN-UP,securitysolutions.com,
A growing number of fire protection engineers have theorized that "the
structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet
fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers," the
editorial stated. A FEMA spokesman, John Czwartacki, said agency
officials had not yet seen the editorial and declined to comment. Norida Torriente, a spokeswoman for the American Society of Civil Engineers,
described her group's study as a "beginning" and "not a definitive work."
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has joined a group of relatives of
firefighters who died in the attack in calling for a blue-ribbon panel
to study the collapse. "We have to learn from incidents through investigation to determine what types of codes should be in place and what are the
best practices for high-rise construction," Manning told the Daily News. "The World Trade Center is not the only lightweight, core
construction high-rise in the U.S. It's a typical method of construction."
NY TIMES
December 25, 2001 THE TOWERS
Experts Urging Broader Inquiry in Towers' Fall
...In calling for a new investigation, some structural engineers have
said that one serious mistake has already been made in the chaotic
aftermath of the collapses: the decision to rapidly recycle the steel columns, beams and trusses that held up the buildings. That may have
cost investigators some of their most direct physical evidence with
which to try to piece together an answer. Officials in the mayor's office declined to reply to written and oral requests for comment over a three-day
period about who decided to recycle the steel and
the concern that the decision might be handicapping the investigation...
Interviews with a handful of members of the team, which includes some
of the nation's most respected engineers, also uncovered complaints
that they had at various times been shackled with bureaucratic
restrictions that prevented them from interviewing witnesses,
examining the disaster site and requesting crucial information like
recorded distress calls to the police and fire departments...
"This is almost the dream team of engineers in the country working
on this, and our hands are tied," said one team member who asked not to
be identified. Members have been threatened with dismissal for
speaking to the press. "FEMA is controlling everything," the team
member said...
Dr. Frederick W. Mowrer, an associate professor in the fire protection
engineering department at the University of Maryland, said he believed
the decision could ultimately compromise any investigation of the
collapses. "I find the speed with which potentially important evidence
has been removed and recycled to be appalling," Dr. Mowrer said.
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Furthermore you are implying that the USGS data indicates these pools exist. This is not the case.
Uh no, I am implying that the USGS data showed persistant hotspots.
In perfect conditions the maximum temperature that can be reached by hydrocarbons like jet-fuel, burning in air is 1520° F (825° C).
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Not true. You are confusing heat and temperature. The amount of heat energy released in a given chemical reaction like the combustion of toluene, for
example, is a fixed value based on the amount of materials involved. Since temperature is an average of the kinetic energy the maximum temperature
is a totally different thing.
Sorry, this just don't cut the mustard. It doesn't cut steel support columns either. Again i reiterate, NO STEEL STRUCTURED HIGH RISE HAS EVER
COLLAPSED DUE TO FIRE, on 9-11, it happened twice in one day, arguably three times when the order came to "pull' WTC 6. Yes, I said "pull" it, a
term used in demolition for 'bring it down'. Consider the following...
Eduardo Kausel proposed an alternative failure explanation that he
acknowledged was independently developed by Zdenek Bazant, a professor at Northwestern University. "I believe that the intense heat softened or
melted the structural elements—floor trusses and columns—
so that they became like chewing gum, and that was enough to trigger the collapse," he said.
To turn the columns into the consistency of chewing gum would have
required heating them to at least 1200ş C, well above what can be achieved with jet fuel, even with a directed flame and pressurized oxygen. "The
floor trusses are likely to have been the first to sag and
fail. As soon as the upper floors became unsupported, debris from the failed floor systems rained down onto the floors below, which eventually gave
way, starting an unstoppable sequence. The dynamic forces are so large that the downward motion becomes unstoppable." Via two simple models, Kausel
was able to determine that the fall of the upper building portion down onto a single floor must have caused dynamic
forces exceeding the buildings’ design loads by at least an order of
magnitude. He also performed some computer simulations that
indicate the building material fell almost unrestricted at nearly the speed of
free-falling objects. "The towers' resistive systems played no role.
Otherwise the elapsed time of the fall would have been extended," he
noted. As it was, the debris took about nine seconds to reach the ground
from the top. Did you catch that? the towers' resistive systems played no
role. The at least 85,000 tons of intact steel structure below the impact
zone provided no resistance. It all magically got out of the way.
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Hmm, what happened to all of the office furniture, paper, computer cases, carpeting, wood doors, paneling, etc. that were in the building before it
collapsed? these were there as well as the remaining jet fuel.
Have you ever heard of underground coal fires?
LOL, jesus man, let me try to explain this to you, once again by repeating myself...
Conventional fires burning under tons of rubble would be oxygen starved, therefore the smoke produced would be black, not white. Also, a lot of
soot would have been produced in five days, therefore the temperatures of the oxygen starved fires should have been significantly lower. The fires in
the WTC wreckage were not conventional fires.
Originally posted by HowardRoarkHmm, what happened to all of the office furniture, paper, computer cases, carpeting, wood doors,
paneling, etc. that were in the building before it collapsed? these were there as well as the remaining jet fuel. Have you ever heard of underground
coal fires?
Have you ever heard of controlled demolition? Thermite? Terminal Velocity? Partially evaporated steel members were found in the debris, or are you
going to say that is unsubstantiated too? ... More to the point...
...the one unexplained WTC issue is the continuing fire from below the collapsed debris. That was NOT jet fuel, just by virtue of the smoke color. Any
residual liquid fuel would have been burned or dispersed - essentially evaporated, on the way down. Refer to FEMA's statement above - if jet fuel
couldn't have induced the collapse, there could not have been enough remaining liquid fuel to account for the subterranean temperatures;
jet fuel doesn’t “leak-down-and-smolder.”
By all evidence, and pragmatic thinking, the smoke was smoldering debris and escaping residual heat. BUT the post-collapse temperatures (gathered by
satellite heat imagery) were radically too high to be just smoldering “building debris;” even with any remaining jet fuel being factored. Buried
debris will not burn at a temperature hotter than its open-air temperature. Remember the millions of gallons of water which were constantly being
sprayed on the 'pile.'
That takes us to the last reasonable question, "Then, what WAS fueling that kind of temperature?"About all that can be said is "Damned good
question!"...
THE SMOKING GUNS
One of the most curious statements of the 9-11 history is the “slip” of Tom
Kenney, the infamous FEMA Urban Search & Rescue worker. According to his statement to Dan Rather, the FEMA team arrived the night before 9-11...
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Twitchy, Let’s get back to this point that you made.
Originally posted by twitchy
In perfect conditions the maximum temperature that can be reached by hydrocarbons like jet-fuel, burning in air is 1520° F (825° C).
I am going to go over this again because it indicates a root failure to understand simple chemistry and physics.
To begin with, some very important words have been left out of that quote above. It should read ”In perfect, and standardized, equilibrium,
conditions the maximum temperature that can be reached by hydrocarbons like jet-fuel, burning in air is 1520° F (825° C).”
That statement assumes that the combustion is under standard equilibrium conditions. Engineers and scientists that use this kind of data make that
assumption because when they are designing a boiler system, for instance, they can be safe in assuming that the initial temperature of the air and the
fuel are a constant. The rate at which the heat of the
reaction is drawn off is also a constant. This is called an equilibrium system
Unfortunately, under the conditions we are talking about, a structure fire, these things are anything but constant. This is called a non-equilibrium
system. Let me ask you this. Let us say that your fuel and air are both at 20° C initially, and after the combustion, you’ve produced combustion
gasses that are 800° C. What would happen if both your fuel and air are 400° C initially? What would the temperature of the exhaust gasses be then?
How about if they were both 800 °C? What if they were both 1000° C? Would the temperature of the exhaust gasses go down to 825° C? Further on in
you post, you wrote
That is some hot office furniture man.
"The heat output from these fires will later be estimated to have been comparable to that produced by a large nuclear generating station. [Civil
Engineering Magazine]"
Really hot Office furniture!
Uh, yes in fact it is. You must have missed this
link from an earlier post.
From that link:
This test, conducted by National Institute of Standards and Technology last month, showed the fuel from the plane that crashed into the tower burned
out quickly - but the fire it created grew in intensity by up to another 300 degrees as it consumed office products and structures. The computers,
cubicle walls, furniture, files and paper - recreated on detailed
information supplied by the insurance company on the exact materials used in their offices –blazed at temperatures that reached 1,200 degrees,
the NIST test found. The test fire burned for 33 minutes before the 386 pounds of material were consumed and reduced mostly to ash and gases.
And that is just one cubicle, imagine how much heat an entire floor will give off, now imagine four or five floors burning away at the same time.
Let’s go back a bit.
Originally posted by twitchy
"The heat output from these fires will later be estimated to have been comparable to that produced by a large nuclear generating station. [Civil
Engineering Magazine]"
Just how exactly do you think that the heat output from the fires was estimated? They didn’t measure them, they estimated them. How do you think
that the engineers and scientists were able to do that? Simple, they totaled up the amount of fuel (mainly jet fuel) present, made some assumptions
on how fast it burned off, and computed the amount of energy released over the period between the impact and the collapse. (energy over time equals
watts) Why don’t you include the entire paragraph from which you took that quote?
Civil Engineering article
The fires spread, and there are significant temperature variations throughout those areas where the fires are located, depending on the type and
arrangement of combustible material being consumed and the availability of air supporting combustion. The advancing fires elevate the temperature
within the tower. Future estimates will place it between 1,700ş and 2,000şF—further stressing the structure. At the 80th floor of WTC 2—in the
northeast corner, where office furnishings had been deposited by the rapid path of the plane—the fire burns at such a high temperature that a stream
of molten metal begins to pour over the side
of the tower. The heat output from these fires will later be estimated to have been comparable to that produced by a large nuclear generating station.
Over a period of many minutes, this heat induces additional stresses on the damaged structural frames while simultaneously softening and weakening
these frames.
Actually, the author of that article copied that almost word for word from the FEMA executive
summary with one interesting exception. He changed the wording from “a large commercial generating station”
in the FEMA report to “a large nuclear generating station.” (
not only was the reported lazy, but given to a bit of hyperbole.)
In any case, if the fire was hot enough to melt aluminum, it was hot enough to soften the steel.
Here is a good summary of your steel melting infernos...
How Serious Were the Twin Towers' Fires?
The plane crashes resulted in significant fires in
both towers, at least for the first few minutes after the crashes. The fires in the North Tower were considerably more extensive than than those in
the South Tower. As time progressed the fires in both towers appeared to
diminish greatly in severity. This was probably due to most of the
jet fuel being exahausted within a few minutes of the impacts.
Since kerosene (jet fuel) has a low boiling point and a low flash point,
most of it would have evaporated and caught fire quickly.
The Fires at Their Most Severe How severe were the fires at their greatest extents? Fires in the North Tower covered extensive regions, at
least near the perimeter walls, of about three floors. Fires in the South
Tower also extended over about three floors, but were more
localized to one side of the building. The fires were not hot enough to produce significant window breakage in either tower. Widow breakage is a
common occurrence in large office fires, particularly when temperatures exceed 600ş C. The flames mostly remained within the buildings. Significant
emergence of flames from the buildings, another common feature of large office fires, was only observed in a limited region of the North Tower.
The fires did not spread significantly beyond the impact region. With the exception of a region of fire about 10 floors above the crash zone in the
North Tower, the fires remained around the impact zones. The fires did not cause parts of the building to glow. At temperatures above 700ş C, steel
glows red hot, a feature that is visible in daylight. The Fires' Progression Over Time Given that the vast majority of the volatile jet fuel was
consumed inside five minutes of each crash, the fires subsequently
dwindled, limited to the fuels of conventional office fires. The fires in both
towers diminished steadily until the South Tower's collapse. Seconds
before, the remaining pockets of fire were visible only to the firefighters and victims in the crash zone. A thin veil of black smoke enveloped the
tower's top. In the wake of the South Tower's fall new areas of fire appeared in the North Tower. This summary is supported by simple observations
of the extent and brightness of the flames and the color and quantity of smoke, using the available photographic and video evidence.
Visible flames dimished greatly over time. Significant emergence
of flames from the building is only seen in a region of the North Tower 10 stories above the impact zone. South Tower: Virtually no flames were
visible at the time of its collapse. North Tower: Flames were visible in several areas at the time of its collapse. A region of flames on the 105th
floor is seen after the South Tower collapse. The smoke darkened over time. While the fires in both towers emitted light gray smoke during the first
few minutes following the impacts, the color of the smoke became darker. South Tower: Smoke from the fires was black by the time it
collapsed. At that time it was only a small fraction of the volume of the smoke from the North Tower. North Tower: Smoke from the fires had
become much darker by the time the South Tower was struck, 17 minutes after the fires were ignited. The smoke was nearly black when the South Tower
collapsed. Thereafter the smoke appears to have lightened and
emerged from the building at an accelerated rate. Dark smoke implies the presence of soot, which is composed of uncombusted hydrocarbons. Soot is
produced when a fire is oxygen starved, or has just been extinguished. Soot also has a high thermal capacity and may act to rob a fire of heat by
carrying it away. There appears to be no evidence of fires within the buildings' cores. It can be assumed that most of the fires were near the
perimeters of the towers where broken windows around the crash zone
allowed them a supply of air. The cores were an average distance of
about 70 feet from the nearest walls, and had much less flammible
material than the surrounding offices. The impact gash in the North
Tower provided a line of sight to the core. Available photographs
and videos show the gash as consistently dark, showing no signs of
fire in the building's core. Eyewitness ReportsDozens of people were observed to jump from floors of the North Tower above the impact zone. They may
have jumped to escape painful deaths from inhalation of toxic smoke, or to escape unbearable heat.
Note, however, that temperatures unbearable to a human, such
as 100 C, are insignificant to the survivability of structural materials.
At least 18 survivors evacuated from above the crash zone of the
South Tower through a stairwell that passed through the crash zone,
and many more would have were it not for confusion in the evacuation
process. None of the survivors reported great heat around the crash
zone. An audiotape of firefighter communications revealed that
firefighers had reached the 78th floor sky lobby of the South Tower
and were enacting a plan to evacuate people and put out the " two
pockets of fire" they found, just before the tower was destroyed.
The fire was hot enough enough to melt aluminum, LOL. Yes, a camp fire will melt aluminum. A building fire does not melt structural steel, and an
oxygen poor fire certainly doesn't. Now, interestingly enough, it was hot enough to not only weaken the steel, but to melt it.
You throw alot of numbers around trying to demonstrate my ignorance, then make a mockery out of the estimates of the WTC fires. Now one fact, one
simple statement shows what an incredible waste of time all that typing was, and again I repeat myself, Fire does not cause the collapse of steel
framed high rises. Period. It never has, and it never will regardless
of the differences between kinetic energy and temperature you claim I fail to understand (a slight I will respond to below), regardless of the amount
of fuel consumed or the gasses created. Can you name a single steel structure that has collapsed due to fire? Can you point out a single instance
where a normal fire has melted steel support sturcture? Also, you
totally ignore the fact that according to the fire fighters, and by accounts of witnesses, there was no incinerating inferno, there were fires, not
steel melting catastrophic oxygen rich blazes. There were victims clearly visible looking out of the building where the fires were supposed to be the
most intense. there was black smoke indicating oxygen starved smoldering type fires. Firefighters had reported the flmaes were abating, fightable. You
also completely ignore the NUMEROUS reports of explosions, you say the very visible squibs going off in the lower floors as the building collapses are
digital flukes (yet they were recorded and quite visible from multiple sources). Yes, there were pools of molten steel, sorry dude. As to my lack of
understanding of thermodynamics, you don't have a clue as to my
credentials or knowlege, so lay off that arguement before I suprise you. You can jump up and down and shout "that's not true" till the cows come
meandering home, but that isn't goign to answer a single question, or explain a single anamoly. How can I debate with someone that
has not only demonstrated that he doesn't address all the issues presented, misquotes the opposition, but ignores data and denies public information?
Now if you want to explain how cheese got on the moon, I'm interested, otherwise, you are wasting my (our) time.
WTC was demolished. That is why they withstood the initial impact of the planes, and that is why they fell straight down perfectly into their
foundations at nearly terminal velocity. That is why there were explosions, and that is why security at WTC got rid of the bomb sniffing dogs and
powered down the weekend before 9-11. Fires have never destroyed steel buildings. The collapses were not investigated. The physical evidence was
destroyed. The official explanations are ludicrous. The evidence indicates demolition. Demolition is provable.
Here is some more for you to chew on...
Daddy Bush and Cheney were in the SITUATION ROOM at the WHITE HOUSE during the terror attacks (during the 34 minutes between the second WTC hit and
the PENTAGON hit while a stand down order was issued to the AIR FORCE to supersede established intercept
procedures for planes that stray off course).
Junior Bush was reading stories to grade school children during the
attacks. He knew one plane had crashed into the WTC when the
reading started. When his top aid Andrew Card whispered in his ear
about the second plane hitting the WTC this was caught on videotape
and is widely available on the internet. Junior Bush only looks up
and nods and then goes back to reading stories to the kids for 25
more minutes!! It clearly looks more like Card is informing Bush of
an expected event. There was for example no time for Card to add
AND THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER HIJACKED PLANES IN THE AIR.
The Director of the WHITE HOUSE SITUATION ROOM where all military
crises are managed is with Junior Bush at the grade school. At the
end of the 25 minutes of reading Bush goes immediately to the library of the school where a press conference was set. He says there I CALLED MY VICE
PRESIDENT AND MY FBI DIRECTOR AND THE
GOVERNOR OF NEW YORK. This was a lie!! There was not enough
time for that. It takes $5 million to make the minimum investment in CARLYLE GROUP, the defense contractor investment group whose stock has gone up
37% since 911. The friends of Bush and Cheney are
the other investors in CARLYLE GROUP along with the bin Ladens and John Major. CARLYLE GROUP was having their international investors conference in
Washington D.C. at the RITZ CARLETON at the exact time of the
911 attacks. CARLYLE GROUP had a big interest in BIOPORT a company
that was the sole source of ANTHRAX VACCINE for the PENTAGON.
BIOPORT gave Admiral Crowe, the former Chairman of the JOINT CHIEFS
OF STAFF a 27% interest in the company for his pull
with the PENTAGON. Do I have to connect all the dots regarding the
ANTHRAX ATTACK that was traced to US military sources?
It was widely reported by THE NEW YORK TIMES Feb. 17, 2002, MSNBC
Oct. 7, 2001 and others that Pakistani ISI Chief, General Mahmud,
wire transferred $100,000 to alleged lead terror pilot Mohammed Atta
the week before the terror attacks. At the exact moment of the
terror attacks Mahmud was having breakfast with the chairmen of the
HOUSE (Rep. Porter Goss, R-Fla) and SENATE (Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla)
INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEES along with my senator Jon Kyl. I
will have words with Kyl at the next opportunity. The $100,000 was
sufficient to remove Mahmud from office but not enough for the light
to go on in the brains of our top US intelligence officials!!
Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, and others were
told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October. In an exercise, called
Operation "Swift Sword" planned for four years, 23,000 British troops were on their way to Oman the day before the attacks. These troops were the
ones used to assist the Americans in the Afghan invasion. At the same time two U.S. carrier battle groups arrived on station in the Gulf of Arabia
just off the Pakistani coast. Also at the same time, some 17,000 U.S. troops join more than 23,000 NATO troops in Egypt for Operation "Bright Star."
All of these forces were in place before the first plane hit the WTC! Dan Hopsicker found plenty of CIA connections to the flight school in Venice
Florida where Atta and others trained and much more of this nature www.madcowprod.com...
As far as security at WTC...
Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been LiftedThe World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the
landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been
working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly
removed. Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-DownOn the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This
power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security
cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower."WTC Security Courtesy of Marvin Bush
It's enough that none of the buildings should have collapsed, let alone all three - identically; in record time.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being
attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.” — Herman Goering
Nazi Air Force (Luftwaffe) commander
at the Nuremberg War-Crimes Trials, 1946