Thanks to cb_brooklyn for posting this over at http://www.mypetgoat.tv/forums/

-Paper for Peer Review:

“Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse? “
By Steven E. Jones
Department of Physics and Astronomy
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84604
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html


Professor Steven E. Jones provided an invited seminar open to the public at Utah Valley State College in Orem, Utah, on February 1, 2006: "9/11 Revisited: Scientific and Ethical Questions”

An MP3 of the Two Hour Seminar (61MB): http://tinyurl.com/974zy
PowerPoint Slideshow JPEGS (4.6MB ZIP file): http://tinyurl.com/95bht

Review of Seminar:
“Prof. Jones' Utah 9/11 Seminar - Feb.1, 2006”
http://www.gnn.tv/blogs/12675/Prof_Jones_U...inar_Feb_1_2006

Daily Herald - Central Utah's Newspaper:
“Questions remain from 9/11 report, professor says”
http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/163875/3/



-KUTV (Salt Lake City CBS affiliate) - Thursday, November 10, 2005
“Collapse or Implosion: BYU Professor Has Theory About 9/11 Attacks”
Video: http://kutv.com/topstories/local_story_314234334.html

-Deseret Morning News - Thursday, November 10, 2005
“Y. professor thinks bombs, not planes, toppled WTC”, by Elaine Jarvik
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635160132,00.html

-MSNBC's 'The Situation' - Tuesday, November 15, 2005
“Professor believes planes didn't cause all the damage around the WTC”
Video: http://www.911blogger.com/2005/11/byu-prof...n-jones-on.html

-TRIBUNE-REVIEW - Sunday, November 20, 2005
“Jonesing on conspiracy theories”, by Bill Steigerwald
http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review...d/s_395972.html



OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT REPORTS AND CRITIQUES


-Official NIST Report: http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1CollapseofTowers.pdf
-NIST Report Critique: http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/index.html
-Official FEMA Report: http://www.fema.gov/library/wtcstudy.shtm
-FEMA Report Critique: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/official/fema.html
-Official 9/11 Commission Report: http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
-9/11 Commission Report Critique: http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/commission/report.html



INFORMATION ABOUT WTC BUILDING 7


-Official NIST Report for WTC 7 - pg 6 – “Working Collapse Hypothesis”
“An initial local failure at the lower floors (below Floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event), which supported a large span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 ft2”
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%20Part%20IIC%...pse%20Final.pdf

-Official FEMA Report on WTC 7 – Chapter 5, pg 31
“Loss of structural integrity was likely a result of weakening caused by fires on the 5th to 7th floors. The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue.” http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf

-Building 7, the Untold Story: http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/index.html


-WTC lease holder, Larry Silverstein, commenting on the collapse of Building 7 in the PBS documentary "America Rebuilds", which aired in September of 2002:

“I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.”
Video: http://www.911blogger.com/files/video/wtc7_pbs.WMV


-In the same documentary, America Rebuilds, a clean up worker at ground zero uses the term "pull" when preparing for the controlled demolition of Building 6: (Use of the word “pull” as slang for “demolish”)

Unidentified Construction Worker: "Hello? Oh, we're getting ready to pull building six."

Luis Mendes, NYC Dept of Design and Construction: "We had to be very careful how we demolished building six. We were worried about the building six coming down and then damaging the slurry walls, so we wanted that particular building to fall within a certain area.” Video: http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/video/wtc7/pull_wtc6.wmv


-Silverstein Answers WTC Building 7 Charges: Says "pull it" meant to evacuate firefighters, but there were no firefighters in the building. http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/si...tc7_charges.htm


-Reporter who witnessed the collapse of Building 7: "People started to run away from the scene [WTC7] and I turned in time to see what looked like a skyscraper implosion - looked like it had been done by a demolition crew - the whole thing just collapsing down on itself and another big huge plume of gray and white smoke shooting up into the air and then more of the smoke billowing up the street here... so that’s number one, number two, and now number seven that have come down from this explosion. "

Live report by 1010 WINS NYC News Radio on 9-11-01. This report can be heard in the documentary 911 Eyewitness (the film can be downloaded for free at this link: http://question911.com/links.php )


-Emergency worker who witnessed the collapse of Building 7: "We were watching the building [WTC7] actually ‘cuz it was on fire… the bottom floors of the building were on fire and… we heard this sound that sounded like a clap of thunder… turned around - we were shocked to see that the building was ah well it looked like there was a shockwave ripping through the building and the windows all busted out… it was horrifying… about a second later the bottom floor caved out and the building followed after that… we saw the building crash down all the way to the ground… we were in shock. "

Live report by 1010 WINS NYC News Radio on 9-11-01. This report can be heard in the documentary 911 Eyewitness (the film can be downloaded for free at this link: http://question911.com/links.php )


-Guns & Butter Radio interview - April 27th 2005:
Hosted by Bonnie Falkner
Guest: Indira Singh (Ground Zero Emergency Worker)

Bonnie: How long did you work as an emergency medical technician and exactly what is it that you were doing (at ground zero)?

Indira: ...when I got there we were setting up triage sites (at ground zero), close, very close to the area. The triage site that I was setting up was behind, well, to the east of Building 7 where Building 7 came down...
...we were setting up triages as close to the pile as possible… so what we were doing was setting up different kinds of stations… IV stations, cardiac stations, wound stations, burn stations ...just trying to have an organized space. What happened with that particular triage site is that pretty soon afternoon, after mid-day on 9/11 we had to evacuate that because they told us Building 7 was coming down... I do believe that they brought Building 7 down... By noon or one o'clock they told us we had to move from that triage site up to Pace University a little further away because Building 7 was going to come down or being brought down.

Bonnie: Did they actually use the word "brought" down and who was it that was telling you this?

Indira: The fire department... the fire department and they did use the word "we're going to have to bring it down."

The entire interview can be listened to at this link. The excerpts from above can be found approximately 10 minutes into the interview. http://tinyurl.com/7dww8


-Columbia Journalism Review – May/June 2003, by Thomas Franklin

Excerpt from an article written by award winning photographer, Thomas Franklin, who snapped the world famous photo of firemen raising the American flag at ground zero. In the article Franklin explains that all of ground zero was evacuated less than an hour before WTC 7 was demolished at approximately 5:20 pm on 9/11:

"Much of what happened to me on September 11 is a blur, but this moment I clearly remember: It was 4:45 p.m., and all the firemen and rescue workers were evacuating Ground Zero after word came that a third building -- WTC 7 -- was ready to fall. I had only a few frames left, and an entire day's worth of pictures to develop, so I prepared to head back to New Jersey." Link to entire article: http://archives.cjr.org/year/02/2/franklin.asp




A MIXTURE OF NEWS/FILM FOOTAGE AND NEW YORK TIMES QUOTES WHERE SPECIFIC REFERENCES TO BOMBS, EXPLOSIONS, AND CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS ARE MADE

The video clips are of FDNY personnel, emergency workers, reporters, and witnesses.

The quotes are from the Official ‘Oral Histories’ Transcripts of FDNY personnel and emergency workers as conducted a few months after 9/11 by the WTC Task Force Interviewers and published in the New York Times:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/html...es_full_01.html



- CBS News Anchor, Dan Rather, comments on the collapse of WTC Building 7: “Amazing, incredible pick your word. For the third time today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down.”
Video: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/w..._demolition.mpg



-NEW YORK TIMES ‘ORAL HISTORIES’ - WTC TASK FORCE INTERVIEWS
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STEPHEN GREGORY Interview Date: October 3, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110008.PDF

pgs 14-16: I know I was with an officer from Ladder 146, a Lieutenant Evangelista, who ultimately called me up a couple of days later just to find out how I was. We both for whatever reason -- again, I don't know how valid this is with everything that was going on at that particular point in time, but for some reason I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. In my conversation with Lieutenant Evangelista, never mentioning this to him, he questioned me and asked me if I saw low-level flashes in front of the building, and I agreed with him because I thought -- at that time I didn't know what it was. I mean, it could have been as a result of the building collapsing, things exploding, but I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down.

Q. Was that on the lower level of the building or up where the fire was?

A. No, the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw. And I didn't broach the topic to him, but he asked me. He said I don't know if I'm crazy, but I just wanted to ask you because you were standing right next to me. He said did you see anything by the building? And I said what do you mean by see anything? He said did you see any flashes? I said, yes, well, I thought it was just me. He said no, I saw them, too.
I don't know if that means anything. I mean, I equate it to the building coming down and pushing things down, it could have been electrical explosions, it could have been whatever. But it's just strange that two people sort of say the same thing and neither one of us talked to each other about it. …

Q. On the television pictures it appeared as well, before the first collapse, that there was an explosion up on the upper floors.

A. I know about the explosion on the upper floors. This was like eye level. I didn't have to go like this. Because I was looking this way. I'm not going to say it was on the first floor or the second floor, but somewhere in that area I saw to me what appeared to be flashes. I don't know how far down this was already. I mean, we had heard the noise but, you know, I don't know.


-CAPTAIN KARIN DESHORE Interview Date: November 7, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110192.PDF

pg 10: I had no clue what was going on. Never turned around because a sound came from somewhere that I never heard before. Some people compared it with an airplane. It was the worst sound of a rolling sound, not a thunder. I can’t explain it, what it was. All I know is -- and a force started to come hit me in my back. I can’t explain it. You had to be there. All I know is I had to run because I thought there was an explosion.

pg 11: Whatever this explosion was simply sucked all the oxygen out of the air.

pg 15: Somewhere around the middle of the world trade center, there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. The popping sound, and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building. I went inside and I told everybody that the other building or there was an explosion occurring up there and I said I think we have another major explosion…

pg 16: So here these explosions are getting bigger and louder and bigger and louder…

pgs 17-18: Again, I didn’t see what was happening behind me, but knowing of all the explosions I thought here was another explosion coming and this sound again and this wave of this force again. I just jumped on the boat, closed the door with my left hand and just sank down to my knees. Here whatever it was just came right at us again.


-DEPUTY COMMISSIONER THOMAS FlTZPATRlCK Interview Date: October 1, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110001.PDF

pgs 13-14: We looked up at the building straight up, we were that close. All we saw was a puff of smoke coming from about 2 thirds of the way up. Some people thought it was an explosion. I don't think I remember that. I remember seeing, it looked like sparkling around one specific layer of the building. I assume now that that was either windows starting to collapse like tinsel or something. Then the building started to come down. My initial reaction was that this was exactly the way it looks when they show you those implosions on TV.



-FDNY recall "detonations" in South Tower:

fireman2: We made it outside, we made it about a block.
fireman1: We made it at least 2 blocks.
fireman2: 2 blocks.
fireman1: and we started runnin'
fireman2: poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch
fireman1: Floor by floor it started poppin' out ..
fireman2: It was as if as if they had detonated, det..
fireman1: yea detonated yea
fireman2: as if they had planned to take down a building,
boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom ...
fireman1: All the way down, I was watchin it, and runnin'
Video: http://www.prisonplanet.tv/discussion_in_firehouse.mpg


-WTC Worker: “…we started walking down the stairs and made it to the eighth floor.Big Explosion. Blew us back into the eighth floor...” Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.....explosion..wmv



-NEW YORK TIMES ‘ORAL HISTORIES’ - WTC TASK FORCE INTERVIEWS
FIREFIGHTER EDWARD CACHIA Interview Date: December 6, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110251.PDF

pg 5: As my officer and I were looking at the south tower, it just gave. It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit, because we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.


-PARAMEDIC DANIEL RIVERA Interview Date: OCTOBER 10 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110035.PDF

pg 9: It was a frigging noise. At first I thought it was -- do you ever see professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear “pop, pop, pop, pop, pop”? That’s exactly what -- because I thought it was that. When I heard that frigging noise, that’s when I saw the building coming down.


-FIREFIGHTER KENNETH ROGERS Interview Date: December 10, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110290.PDF

pgs 3-4: … then there was an explosion in the south tower, which according to this map, this exposure just blew out in flames. A lot of guys left at that point. I kept watching. Floor after floor after floor. One floor under another after another and when it hit about the fifth floor, I figured it was a bomb, because it looked like a synchronized deliberate kind of thing. I was there in '93.


-LIEUTENANT GEORGE J. DeSIMONE Interview Date: October 22, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110129.PDF

pg 6: The next thing I know, we heard a little bit of a rumbling, and then white powder came from the first collapsed building. I thought it was an explosion initially.

pgs 7-8: After that, I still thought it was an explosion. I thought it was some kind of thermal explosion where I'm either going to get burnt -- and I had kind of ideas that it was going to be something like Hiroshima where all this heat was coming at me and we were going to get burnt -- or if the heat didn't burn me, I thought that all the parts coming out of this building, the windows, metal, all the things like that, that I might be severed in half.

pg 10: I don't think we understood the magnitude of what was going on. I was fearful that there were bombs in the building. That was my first thought, being the military kind of guy that I am.


-FATHER JOHN DELENDICK Interview Date: December 6, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110230.PDF

pgs 5-6: I remember asking Ray Downey was it the jet fuel that blew up. He said at that point he thought there were bombs up there because it was too even. As we've since learned, it was the jet fuel that was dropping down that caused all this. But he said it was too even.

Q. Symmetrical?
A. So his original thought was that he thought it was a bomb up there as well.



-NBC Reporter, Pat Dawson: “[Albert Turi] the Chief of Safety of the Fire Department of New York City told me he received word of the possibility of a secondary device, that is another bomb going off. He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could, but he said there was another explosion which took place. …That his theory he thinks that there were actually devices that were planted in the building.” Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.1.wmv


-MSNBC Reporter, Ann Thompson: “... Cars on fire… cars just turned by the force of the explosions…”
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc....ompson.cars.wmv



-NEW YORK TIMES ‘ORAL HISTORIES’ - WTC TASK FORCE INTERVIEWS
FIREFIGHTER TIMOTHY JULIAN Interview Date: December 26, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110386.PDF

pg 10: … right when we got to the corner of Washington and Albany, that’s when I heard the building collapse. First I thought it was an explosion. I thought maybe there was a bomb on the plane, but delayed type of thing, you know, secondary device. I was convinced for a week it was secondary devices. … You know, and I just heard like an explosion and a then a cracking type of noise, and then it sounded like a freight train, rumbling and picking up speed, and I remember I looked up, and I saw it coming down…


-LIEUTENANT ROBERT DORRITIE Interview Date: December 11, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110299.PDF

pg 4: … we were deciding which way to go into the south tower. That's when I looked up, and the tower started coming down, which at the time I said I thought it was a secondary device. I had warned the guys about secondary devices on the way down and to be careful of that.


-FIREFIGHTER TIMOTHY BURKE Interview Date: January 22, 2002
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110488.PDF

pg 8: Then the building popped, lower than the fire, which learned was I guess, the aviation fuel fell into the pit, and whatever floor it fell on heated up really bad and that’s why it popped at that floor. That’s the rumor I heard. But it seemed like I was going oh, my god, there is a secondary device because the way the building popped thought it was an explosion.


-FIRE MARSHAL JOHN COYLE Interview Date: December 28, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110406.PDF

pg 8: The tower was -- it looked to me – I thought it was exploding, actually. That’s what I thought for hours afterwards, that it had exploded or the plane or there had been some device on the plane that had exploded, because the debris from the tower had shot out far over our heads. It was raining down.

pgs 15-16: While I was down at Battery Park, I finally got through on my phone to my father and said, “I’m alive. I just wanted to tell you, go to church, I’m alive. I just so narrowly escaped this thing.” He said, “where were you? You were there?” I said, “yeah, I was right there when it blew up.” He said, “you were there when the planes hit?” I said, “no, I was there when it exploded, the building exploded.” He said, “you mean, when it fell down?” I said, “no, when it exploded.” I still didn’t realized what had happened. I totally thought it had been blown up. That’s just the perspective of looking up at it, it seemed to have exploded out. But that I guess was the force of the upper stories collapsing down.


-FIREFIGHTER ANGEL RIVERA Interview Date: January 22, 2002
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110489.PDF

pgs 4-5: We were there about ten minutes before the chief told us go to the Marriott Hotel, go from the 14th floor up, search and evacuate all the floors. So we walk all the way up, no problem. Then we hear the explosion and debris falling. We were looking out of the windows and see body parts all over the place. It was scary. It was very sad. We searched 14, 15, went in one lobby, we came out the other way, we went in one stairway, came up -- when we hit the 19th floor, something horrendous happened. It was like a bomb went off. We thought we were dead. The whole building shook. The brick coming out of -- the door to the hallway into the hotel blew off like somebody had thrown it all over the place. It shook all over the place. We were thrown on the floor. We looked inside the lobby after everything calmed down, and everything was collapsed. The building was still shaking and we're still hearing explosions going on everywhere, so we decided let's get out of here. After we decided to get out of there, we dropped everything. We had a roof rope; we dropped it. We didn't think about retaining our tools. We just wanted to get out of there. We ran all the way down to the fourth floor where we ran out of stairs. There were no more stairs.

pg 7: Mike Mullan walked one flight up, and then the most horrendous thing happened. That's when hell came down. It was like a huge, enormous explosion. I still can hear it. Everything shook. Everything went black. The wind rushed, very slowly [sound], all the dust, all the -- and everything went dark.

pg 9: When the second tower came down, we had no idea what was going on. We thought another plane, another bomb, another as a second device. We thought, this is it, we are dead.



-MSNBC Reporter, Rick Sanchez: "… Police have found what they describe as a suspicious device, and they fear that it might be something that could lead to another explosion...I spoke with some police officials moments ago, Chris, and they told me that they have reason to believe that one of the explosions at the WTC aside from the ones that may have been caused by the impact of the plane with the building, may have been caused by a van that was parked in the building that may have had some type of explosive device in it. So, their fear here is that there may have been explosive devices planted either in the building or in the adjacent area ..."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.w....explosives.wmv


-WTC Worker: “…we stuck on the stairs for a while, we finally got down to the lobby. Then we get to the lobby, there’s this big explosion.” Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc....g.explosion.wmv



-NEW YORK TIMES ‘ORAL HISTORIES’ - WTC TASK FORCE INTERVIEWS
BATTALION CHIEF DOMINICK DeRUBBIO Interview Date: October 12, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110064.PDF

pg 5: It was weird how it started to come down. It looked like it was a timed explosion, but I guess it was just the floors starting to pancake one on top of the other.


-ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER JAMES DRURY Interview Date: October 16, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110098.PDF

pg 6: We were in the process of getting some rigs moved when I turned, as I heard a tremendous roar, explosion, and saw that the first of the two towers was starting to come down.

pg 7: That was the north tower now coming down. I should say that people in the street and myself included thought that the roar was so loud that the explosive - bombs were going off inside the building. Obviously we were later proved wrong.

pg 12: As I said I thought the terrorists planted explosives somewhere in the building. That's how loud it was, crackling explosive, a wall.


-FIREFIGHTER JOHN MALLEY Interview Date: December 12, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110319.PDF

pg 5: I felt the rumbling, and then I felt the force coming at me. I was like, what the hell is that? In my mind it was a bomb going off. The pressure got so great, I stepped back behind the columns separating the revolving doors. Then the force just blew past me. It blew past me it seemed for a long time. In my mind I was saying what the hell is this and when is it going to stop? Then it finally stopped, that pressure which I thought was a concussion of an explosion. It turns out it was the down pressure wind of the floors collapsing on top of each other.

pg 6: There were secondary explosions, I don't know, aerosol cans or whatever. But we're in the darkness. We see basically the glow of a flashlight and still things coming down. The noise, the explosions, whatever it was.


-CAPTAIN JAY SWITHERS Interview Date: October 30, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110172.PDF

pg 5: I took a quick glance at the building and while I didn't see it falling, I saw a large section of it blasting out, which led me to believe it was just an explosion. I thought it was a secondary device, but I knew that we had to go.



-MSNBC Reporter, Ann Thompson: "At 10:30 I tried to leave the building, but as soon as I got outside I heard a second explosion and another rumble and more smoke and more dust. I ran inside the building and the chandelier shook and again black smoke filled the air. Within another five minutes we were covered again with more soot and more dust. And then a fire marshal came in and said we had to leave, because if there was a third explosion this building might not last."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.....explosions.wmv


-Reporter: “… there was an explosion. It was way up where the fire was.. and the whole building, at that point, bellied out in flames…”Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.2.wmv



-NEW YORK TIMES ‘ORAL HISTORIES’ - WTC TASK FORCE INTERVIEWS
LIEUTENANT GREGG HANSSON Interview Date: October 9, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110017.PDF

pg 15: Then a large explosion took place. In my estimation that was the tower coming down, but at that time I did not know what that was. I thought some type of bomb had gone off.


-FIREFIGHTER WILLIAM REYNOLDS Interview Date: December 11, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110288.PDF

pgs 3-4: After a while, and I don't know how long it was, I was distracted by a large explosion from the south tower and it seemed like fire was shooting out a couple of hundred feet in each direction, then all of a sudden the top of the tower started coming down in a pancake. …

Q. … where was the fire? Like up at the upper levels where it started collapsing?
A. It appeared somewhere below that. Maybe twenty floors below the impact area of the plane. I saw it as fire and when I looked at it on television afterwards, it doesn't appear to show the fire. It shows a rush of smoke coming out below the area of the plane impact. The reason why I think the cameras didn't get that image is because they were a far distance away and maybe I saw the bottom side where the plane was and the smoke was up above it.

pg 8: So we kind of just all were walking around dazed and I ran into a Battalion Chief. I don't know who he was. I said to him, I said, "Chief, they're evacuating the other building; right?" … Before the north tower fell. He said, "No." I said, "Why not? They blew up the other one." I thought they blew it up with a bomb. I said, "If they blew up the one, you know they're gonna blow up the other one." He said, "No, they're not." I said, "Well, you gotta tell them to evacuate it, because it's gonna fall down and you gotta get the guys out."


-FIREFIGHTER THOMAS TURILLI Interview Date: January 17, 2002
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110501.PDF

pgs 4-5: … sounded like bombs going off, like boom, boom, boom, like seven or eight, and then just a huge wind gust just came.


-FIREFIGHTER KEITH MURPHY Interview Date: December 5, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110238.PDF

pgs 19-20: I had heard right before the lights went out, I had heard distant boom boom boom, sounded like three explosions. I don’t know what it was. At the time, I would have said they sounded like bombs, but it was boom boom boom and then the lights all go out. I hear someone say oh, shit, that was just for the lights out. I would say about 3, 4 seconds, all of sudden this tremendous roar. It sounded like being in tunnel with the train coming at you. It sounded like nothing I had ever heard in my life, but it didn’t sound good. All of a sudden I could feel the floor started to shake and sway. We were being thrown like literally off our feet, side to side, getting banged around and then a tremendous a wind started to happen. It probably lasted maybe 15 seconds, 10 to 15 seconds. It seemed like hurricane force wind. It would blow you off your feet and smoke and debris and more things started falling.


-EMT MICHAEL OBER Interview Date: October 16, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110093.PDF

pgs 4-5: Then we heard a rumble, some twisting metal, we looked up in the air, and to be totally honest, at first, I don’t know exactly…but it looked to me just like an explosion. It didn’t look like the building was coming down, it looked like just one floor had blown completely outside of it. I was sitting there looking at it. I just never thought they would ever come down, so I didn’t think they were coming down.



-War Corespondent, Jack Kelley: "…Apparently what appears to happen was that at the same time two planes hit the building that there... that the FBI most likely thinks that there was a car or truck packed with explosives underneath the buildings which also exploded at the same time, and brought both of them down..."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.w....jack.kelley.rm


-Terrorism Security Expert (used by many news organizations): “We’ve heard reports of secondary explosions after the aircraft impacted, whether in fact there wasn't something else at the base of the towers that in fact were the coup de grace to bring them to the ground.”
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.wtc.s...frey.beatty.wmv



-NEW YORK TIMES ‘ORAL HISTORIES’ - WTC TASK FORCE INTERVIEWS
LIEUTENANT NEIL BROSNAN Interview Date: December 12, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110328.PDF

pgs 8-9: Actually the explosion came in through those doors and came up behind the way I had come in. And I realized that, that the explosion came from the way had just left.

pg 20: They observed the explosion and the hallway disappeared. They thought the hallway blew up where I had come from.


-FIREFIGHTER RICHARD BANACISKI Interview Date: December 6, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110253.PDF

pgs 3-4: We were there I don't know, maybe 10, 15 minutes and then I just remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions. Everybody just said run and we all turned around and we ran into the parking garage because that's basically where we were. Running forward would be running towards it. Not thinking that this building is coming down. We just thought there was going to be a big explosion, stuff was going to come down.


-EMT JULIO MARRERO Interview Date: October 25, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110162.PDF

pg 4: … I heard a loud bang. We looked up, and we just saw the building starting to collapse.

pg 5: I was screaming from the top of my lungs, and I must have been about ten feet away from her and she couldn't even hear me, because the building was so loud, the explosion, that she couldn't even hear me.


-FIREFIGHTER CRAIG CARLSEN Interview Date: January 25, 2002
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110505.PDF

pg 6: I guess about three minutes later you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions. At the time I didn't realize what it was. We realized later after talking and finding out that it was the floors collapsing to where the plane had hit.


-FIREFIGHTER KEVIN DUGGAN Interview Date: December 14, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110345.PDF

pg 7: … looked like the middle of [the south tower] was just exploding out…



-ABC Reporter: “…the entire building has just collapsed as if a demolition team set off....”
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.abc.demolition.team.wmv


-Witness: "I was about five blocks away when I heard explosions... three thuds and turned around to see the building that we just got out of... tip over and fall in on itself." Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.1.wmv


-Witness: "...and then all of a sudden it started like... it sounded like gunfire... you know, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang and then all of a sudden three big explosions. "
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.2.wmv



-NEW YORK TIMES ‘ORAL HISTORIES’ - WTC TASK FORCE INTERVIEWS
SUPERVISING FIRE MARSHAL JOHN D. LYNN Interview Date: December 27, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110389.PDF

pg 3: It's hard to deal with the time frame, but it seems as if suddenly there was a -- our attention was drawn to the south tower. There was some kind of explosion, you might say, up in the area where the fire was. Actually, in hindsight, that was the start of the collapse. Now, we were very close at that time.


-BATTALION CHIEF JOHN SUDNIK Interview Date: November 7, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110198.PDF

pg 4: Then we heard a loud explosion or what sounded like a loud explosion and looked up and I saw tower two start coming down.


-PARAMEDIC KEVIN DARNOWSKI Interview Date: November 9, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110202.PDF

pg 8: At that time I started walking back up towards Vesey Street. I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and tower two started to come down.


-CHIEF STEVE GRABHER Interview Date: December 6, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110241.PDF

pgs 10-11: Just as I go out of the building, one of my guys says hey Captain, the building is coming down. I looked over my shoulder and you could see the whole top of the south tower leaning towards us. It looked like it was coming over. You could see the windows pop out just like in the picture, looked like a movie. I saw one floor of windows pop out, like poof, poof. I saw one and a half floors pop out. It looked almost like an explosion. The whole top was teetering, and I really thought just the top of the building was falling off.



-FDNY: "As we were getting our gear on and making our way to the stairway, there was a heavy duty explosion."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/heavy.duty.explosion.wmv


-Street Reporter: "45 minutes into the taping that we were doing, there was… an explosion. It was way up where the fire was, and the whole building… at that point… bellied out… in flames… and everybody ran."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.2.wmv


-9/11 Hero William Rodriguez: says explosions before airplanes hit: (INN World Report - 15 Minute Interview)
Video: http://www.911proof.com/resources/innrodri...nsept05snow.wmv



-NEW YORK TIMES ‘ORAL HISTORIES’ - WTC TASK FORCE INTERVIEWS
LIEUTENANT PATRICK SCARINGELLO Interview Date: October 10, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110030.PDF

pg 4: … I heard the explosion from up above. I looked up, I saw smoke and flame and then I saw the top tower tilt, start to twist and lean.


-FIREFIGHTER CHRISTOPHER FENYO Interview Date: December 11, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110295.PDF

pg 3: There was an explosion at the top of the Trade Center and a piece of Trade Center flew across the West Side Highway and hit the Financial Center.

pg 5: About a couple minutes after George came back to me is when the south tower from our perspective exploded from about midway up the building.

pgs 6-7: At that point a debate began to rage because the perception was that the building looked like it had been taken out with charges. We had really no concept of the damage on the east side of 2 World Trade Center at that point, and at that point many people had felt that possibly explosives had taken out 2 World Trade…


-LIEUTENANT GARY GATES Interview Date: October 12, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110065.PDF

pgs 6-7: I looked up, and the building exploded, the building that we were very close to, which was one tower. The whole top came off like a volcano.

Q. What was that, was that the second plane hitting?

A. … I realized in talking with people over a period of two weeks, that had to be the collapse, because since that was the north tower which was hit by a plane first, the other tower was hit by a plane just before we got there. So now both towers have been hit by a plane. The north tower was burning. So the explosion, what I realized later, had to be the start of the collapse. It was the way the building appeared to blowout from both sides. I'm looking at the face of it, and all we see is the two sides of the building just blowing out and coming apart like this, as I said, like the top of a volcano.


-FIREFIGHTER KEVIN MURRAY: Interview Date: October 9, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110020.PDF

pg 7: We helped a lady out of there and we started walking up to the third floor. That third floor was clear. There was no damage, nothing. We got up to the fifth floor and there was severe damage. The ceilings had come down, the some walls had caved in. … Then we went to the sixth floor and did the same thing. Same sort of damage up there.

pg 15: When the tower started -- there was a big explosion that I heard and someone screamed that it was coming down and I looked away and I saw all the windows domino -- you know, dominoeing up and then come down.



-FDNY: "We were trying to get some of the people out, but then there was secondary explosions and then subsequent collapses..." Video: http://www.911blimp.net/videos/FDNY-explosions.mov


-Construction Worker:

“I go downstairs… the foreman tells me to go to remove the containers… as I’m walking by the main freight car of the building in the corridor… that’s… that’s when I got blown. I mean... the impact of the explosion... of whatever happened it threw me to the floor… and that’s when everything started happening. It knocked me right to the floor...”
“…As we were running up the ramps [to 2 WTC]… and then all of a sudden in happened all over again. Building 2 got hit. And… I don’t know that… I just know something else… hit us to the floor. Right in the basement you felt it… walls were caving in…”
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc....ent.morelli.wmv
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc....ent.morelli.wmv



-NEW YORK TIMES ‘ORAL HISTORIES’ - WTC TASK FORCE INTERVIEWS
FIREFIGHTER RICHARD BOERI Interview Date: December 10, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110302.PDF

pg 4: We had our backs to the tower and under that pedestrian bridge walking south, myself, Eddie Kennedy and the officer, when you heard the crackling. You looked up and you saw the one floor explode on itself and the top start to slide.


-LT. THOMAS PIAMBINO Interview Date: January 24, 2002
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110493.PDF

pg 5: The south tower had fallen, but at that time I didn't know what it was. All I heard was a tremendous explosion. The tower I was in shook really bad. It really shook bad, and my opinion, I thought it was another aircraft that hit the building.

pgs 9-10: We started to go north on West Street as fast as we could. We weren't running, but we were moving, walking pretty fast, and then the north tower started to fall, and my perception was that when I looked back at the tower as it was starting to come down -- I was booking -- was that there was -- I thought it exploded, and I didn't realize it had collapsed. It looked to me like an explosion, and you could feel the -- you could feel it coming, and they were still running away from it. I mean, you weren't going to out run it. At that point, we all split up. I mean, it was like run, and each one of us took refuge behind something, and I wound up taking refuge behind an ESU truck, I believe it was, a Police Department ESU truck, I think, and I just rode it out until first there was the explosion or the concussion, and then there was very, very strong wind, and then there was the black -- black -- dirt black cloud, and you couldn't see nothing, and it became very, very quiet…


-FIREFIGHTER FRANK SWEENEY Interview Date: October 18, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110113.PDF


pg 9: I hear what sounded like firecrackers and a low rumble. I look up, and the south tower – I could see the top part of the siding overlapping the bottom side of the siding..



-CNN Producer:

“...Every few minutes you'll hear like a small sort of a rumbling sound, almost like an explosion sound and another chunk of it will come flying down into the street...”
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc....nsound.part.wmv

“…There was just a huge ... [explosion? Word apparently muted on original CNN video] and enormous pieces of debris just falling one right after the other…” Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc....nsored.part.wmv



-NEW YORK TIMES ‘ORAL HISTORIES’ - WTC TASK FORCE INTERVIEWS
CAPTAIN WILLIAM MCLAUGHLIN Interview Date: December 17, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110361.PDF

pg 5: I looked up and I could see the top of the north tower mushroom out in a cloud of dust and smoke and you could see the tip of the antenna sort of wobble.


-FIREFIGHTER KEVIN GORMAN Interview Date: January 9, 2002
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110434.PDF

pg 6: … I heard the explosion, looked up, and saw like three floors explode, saw the antenna coming down, and turned around and ran north.


-FIREFIGHTER JOHN PICARELLO Interview Date: December 6, 2001
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...HIC/9110240.PDF

pgs 14-15: … started to hear that rumbling sound again. I looked up, and the first thing I saw was the aerial on the top of the tower just rocking one way and rocking the other way, and all of a sudden there it goes.


-News Footage with Battalion Chief Joseph Pfeiffer:

Narrator: Pfeiffer was the first chief into the building. Right away, a guy from the Port Authority told him ‘the damage was somewhere above the 78th floor’. But all you had to do what look around. It was obvious, something had happened right there, in the lobby.

Pfeiffer: “You just… you just saw that, all the windows were blown out. The lobby… looked like the plane hit the lobby.”
Video: http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/underground/lobby.mpg




OTHER EXPERT OPINIONS


-Matthys Levy, Structural Engineer and Co Author of “Why Buildings Fall Down”

Levy has stated in the past that fire brought down the WTC buildings on 9/11. But it is interesting that he also made a public statement saying the WTC collapses resembled controlled demolition. (Matthys Levy was/is a representative for Weidlinger Associates; a company hired by WTC leaseholder Larry Silverstein to help prove to his insurers that the failures of the Towers were the result of two separate terrorist attacks, and therefore allow Silverstein to double his insurance payout.)

“It was the fire ... causing the failure of the steel columns and that caused the collapse”
http://wcbs880.com/topstories/topstoriesny..._113150328.html

"If you've seen many of the managed demolitions where they implode a building and they cause it to essentially to fall vertically because they cause all of the vertical columns to fail simultaneously, that's exactly what it looked like and that's what happened." Video: http://www.freepressinternational.com/discovery.html



-Professor Shi Yongjiu, Director of Civil Engineering Department, Qinghua University

Yongjui is an expert on steel structure. He guesses that the lower part of the WTC twin towers may got seriously damaged.

Why WTC Steel Towers Collapsed at One Blow September 20, 2001

“According to steel structure's mechanical nature, the towers shouldn't collapse as late as an hour later after the planes slammed into. What's more, it should be in a way to topple over gradually instead of crashing down as seen in videotapes. It looks more like a directional blast in doing the job of destruction, so he feels that huge damages must have been done at the lower part of the towers.“ http://english.people.com.cn/english/20010...0920_80655.html



-Van Romero, Vice President for Research and Economic Development
New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology

Romero is a major authority on the effects of explosions on buildings.

Just days after 9/11, this explosives expert stated that he could tell the WTC was professional demolished by watching the videotapes. A few days later Romero recanted, and then received a promotion.

Explosives Planted in Towers, New Mexico Tech Expert Says Albuquerque Journal, September 14, 2001

"My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse”

"It would be difficult for something from the plane to trigger an event like that”

"It could have been a relatively small amount of explosives placed in strategic points.”

Original Link of quote: http://www.abqjournal.com/aqvan09-11-01.htm
Archived link of Romero's quote: http://www.world-action.co.uk/explosives.html


New Mexico Tech Explosives Expert 'Flip-Flops' On WTC Controlled Demo Theory; Refuses To Explain Why:
“Certainly the fire is what caused the building to fail.” http://news.baou.com/main.php?action=recent&rid=20284

Romero receives promotion - January 11, 2002: http://infohost.nmt.edu/mainpg/news/2002/11jan05.html

Romero appointed to the Presidential Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans: http://www.yic.gov/paceea/adcom/bios.html



- Jerry Russell, Ph.D. (MS in Engineering) - “Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC”
http://www.attackonamerica.net/proofofcont...litionatwtc.htm


-David Ray Griffin - “The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True”
http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html




CONTINUED.....

VIDEOS ON WTC CONSTRUCTION:
-Frank Demartini, Manager, WTC Construction And Project Management - January 25, 2001: "The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jet airliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door,... this intense grid,... and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting." Video: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/novem...ignedtotake.htm


-PBS Film "The Center of the World" - 18-minute film made in 1983 of the construction of the Twin Towers:
Video: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/newyork/sfeat...pop_01_qry.html


VIDEOS OF THE WTC ATTACKS AND COLLAPSES:


Videos of the Airplane Strikes:

WTC Twin Tower One (North Tower) Airplane Strike:
Naudet Brothers Video Original: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04/wtc1-strike.avi
(backup for above) http://thunderbay.indymedia.org/uploads/no...ower-strike.avi
Naudet Brothers Video Original (Shorter Edit): http://tinyurl.com/cr8fd
Naudet Brothers Video From TV News: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/wtc1hit1/911.w...audet.hit.2.wmv
Naudet Brothers Video Slow Motion: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/wtc1hit1/911.w....3.enl.slow.avi
Naudet Brothers Video Slow Motion, Another: http://thewebfairy.com/911/video/firsthit....ft.friendly.avi


WTC Twin Tower Two (South Tower) Airplane Strike:
The Second Plane Hitting The South Tower: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04/wtc2-strike-0.avi
View from north: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04/wtc2-strike-2.avi
Close view from east: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04/wtc2-strike-4.avi
Another view from north: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04/wtc2-strike-5.avi
Longer view from north-east: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04/wtc2-strike-7.avi


Videos of the WTC Collapses:

WTC Twin Tower One (North Tower) Collapse:
One: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/03...emolition-4.avi
(backup for above) http://thunderbay.indymedia.org/uploads/no...tower-shake.avi
Two: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04...emolition-1.avi
(backup for above) http://thunderbay.indymedia.org/uploads/no...-demolition.avi
Three (Premature Detonations): http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04...tonations-1.avi
Four (More Premature Detonations): http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04...tonations-2.avi
Five (Squibs Marked): http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04...ts-1-marked.avi
(backup for above) http://thunderbay.indymedia.org/uploads/no...lition-pops.avi
Six (Another view - Pre-detonations): http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04/wtc1_jets.mpeg


WTC Twin Tower Two (South Tower) Collapse:
One: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/03...emolition-2.avi
Two: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/03...emolition-3.avi
Three: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/03...emolition-4.avi
Four: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/03...emolition-5.avi
Five (Squibs Marked): http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04...ts-1-marked.avi


WTC Building Seven Collapse:
One : http://terrorize.dk/911/wtc7dem2/911.wtc.7...tion.naudet.wmv
Two: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04...emolition-2.avi
Three: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04...emolition-3.avi
Four: http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04...emolition-4.avi
Five: http://terrorize.dk/911/wtc7dem2/911.wtc.7...t.penthouse.wmv

Wow! Good stuff. That's VERY thorough.

Here's something I contributed to another thread. Though I'd plug it in here also for review.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...st=0#entry98803

Roxdog WOW


Let get a cup of coffee and go through these one at a time.... great post loaded full of facts....

Excellent work Roxdog.

I have pinned this topic.

Any objections to my "cleaning up" this topic when more links are posted for the benefit of newbies ? ( OCMARK, HH )

JFK

Hey... I heard That!! HH

Feel free to edit this out or move it if this doesn't belong here JFK :)

I just ran into this, it is the first I have heard of this theory..

Writings of a Finnish Military Expert on 9/11


He suggests that small hydrogen bombs were also used..

I found this interesting.. This is an interview, oral history, done by NYFD..


See page 12.. (pdf)

Mathew Long --- See page 12 :o

How did they "know" 7 would come down "immediately" ??? They evacuate the area.. leaving a trapped chief?!?... and 18 minutes later it came down??

interesting.... So many hours later, yet to call it within half an hour?? To even expect it to fall from just fire surprises me.... These are fiefighters, who have fought how many steel structure fires? What "told" them it might come down immediately?? Something the building was doing?? cracking, shifting, groaning, what??


or .. something/someone else??

source: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/html...es_full_01.html


*again feel free to move or edit this as needed if in wrong area* :)

Bumping this for you Rox.

Ok, am I the only one who sees the flashes going off in this video? I've presented this video to a number of people and everyone says they dont see them? Are they just too slow to see them or am I just insane?
*VIDEO*

FUF,
YOu are the man. I've never seen this video before and it is quote obvious something is going on. Im gonna download this and go over it carefully. CHEERS!!!

take a look at this

See the flash of what seems to be fire and the smoke coming out like as an explosion somewhat 8 floors under the carnage? the best shot of demolition proof I have seen!

I wanted to add to this forum about what I wrote in regards to the physics behind the collapse. It took me quite some time to write and I felt this was the perfect place to share it. I did very little copying and pasting. Most of this I wrote completely on my own assembled with the information we all learned. I spent alot of time researching and studying this specific event. I am hoping the guys making the movie version of loose change would include some of this material in it. I wrote in a form so it can be included in any presentation to educate people. Feel free to use any of it.

There has been a tremendous debate over the conspiracy with sept 11. The arguments go back and forth between conspiracy and the official story. Lets just for a moment put aside all the conspiracy and whether it was Osama or not or whether it was a missile at the pentagon or what was attached to the planes at the WTC etc.... I agree that this can become difficult to convice some people and complex to prove definitively. I want to talk about something much more concrete that doesn't involve speculation. I want to talk about the collapses of the WTC complex. I want to talk about the laws of physics involved with this. Please consider what I am about to present.

The official story explained the following: The jet fuel of the planes hitting the WTC set fire to the building and with the combination of jet fuel and office contents generated enough heat (2000 F) in about an hour to soften/melt the steel trusses and core columns to cause them to buckle and fail and resulting in the towers collapsing.

Ok, on the surface it seems plausible however ponder on this. Jet fuel or as my brother who is a port authority officer calls it, "Jet A" (http://www.csgnetwork.com/jetfuel.html) is a kerosene based fuel that "flash burns" meaning that once it ignites it converts into a gas and burns off very quickly. It does not continuously burn like solid materials burn since the liquid depletes a source very quickly unlike solids. This is why the fire balls that exploded when the planes impacted only lasted a few seconds. The only way this fuel continues to burn with flame is when it is continually and proportionally fed with a fuel source and along with that there must be a balanced ratio of oxygen feed to keep it burning efficiently. This is what is required (by specs) for this fuel to burn at the rated +/-1800 F heat and the byproduct should produce little to no visual smoke (much like gas grills and gas stoves do). Even if there was enough fuel in the building to burn, I want someone to explain how this hydrocarbon based fuel was able to produce enough sustained heat to penetrate through and cause 47 vertical rectangular columns of steel that is nearly 3-4 inches thick in density (core columns) to loose its load strength and fail in less than an hour? How is this able to do this and not dissipate heat energy away from the heated area like a heatsink to the connecting members? Especially when realistically this fuel would be depleted within an hour and along with that would not have been fed the correct fuel to oxygen ratio to burn efficiently to create temperatures to melt steel. The black smoke was NOT from the jet fuel burn. People really don't know what kind of heat energy is required to make steel weaken or melt, You need heat sources equivalent to a blast furnace (blast = forced oxygen fed)

Secondly..The collapse itself. Lets take the north tower for example. How it is possible for all the core columns (47 or so, give or take if some were damaged) were able to all fail simultaneously to cause the tower to fall vertically and symmetrically. This is an amazing event to have the heat energy all around the interior to be sustained and heat precise enough to cause the steel members to fail in the exact time whether it be trusses or columns. Not even positioned large blow torches can create this event. Heat distribution would be different for each column due to the density of the materials and what is in contact with it. This is not even accounting for the variations of fire burning in an area. Realistically I am sure all the core columns and trusses were not exposed like a skeleton. There had to be intact areas of drywall and other structure as well as debris build up in others. The floors could not have possible fallen like a pancake. In reality only sections would buckle and give way but would likely fall sideways while other areas would stay intact. Photographs do not show evenly distributed fires all around the tower so this helps illustrate my point here. The official collapse theory with fire is not very plausible in this event.


Thirdly. The collapse and progression. How is it possible that the Potential energy of the 18 floors of structure above the collapse point when it became kinetic energy was able to destroy 92 or so stories of building in less than 12 seconds? If the 18 stories of building was crashing into the floors below and was able to convert it's kinetic energy into the energy to destroy all the joints of the core columns and pulverize the concrete into fine dust and eject it out in all directions hundreds of feet away from the footprint area of the building. How is it possible that the collapse was able to continue once it depleted itself of mass? Why did it at least not slow down as the mass amounts lessened (besides the resistance factor)? Consider these facts:

All the concrete was pulverized into dust. The largest pieces of concrete found were about the size of a baseball. The rest coated the streets around the city like volcanic ash.

The materials being pulverized inside the building were being ejected out of the building footprint area in some cases horizontally and as far as +/-150 feet out all around the structure.

All the core columns and most of the perimeter walls were shattered at their joints.

All the congregated steel floor sheets along with the trusses and office contents was pulverized on every floor.

All the windows were shattered into fine particles almost to the point of silica

All this occurred at the rate of +/-10 floors a second. It would take roughly 6 tenths of a second for a floor to be pulverized.

The entire building was destroyed at this level in 10-12 seconds.

Physics challenge: Calculate the energy levels necessary to do the described above and whether or not the kind of mass structure provided (potential energy) would be able to do this and be able to overcome the dissipative forces (resistance) of the mass below without the use of any other catalyst?

How is it possible for these 18 floors to destroy 92 floors without the 18 floors depleting themselves of material? How was the mass able to overcome resistance so methodically? If the floors were being destroyed at a rate of 10 floors a second the area mass of falling building would have depleted itself of mass in less than 2 seconds. Since they are of the same composition they must have the same ability to loose their integrity equally. Since the majority of mass was being ejected out (this started as soon as it made contact with eachother) what was left to cause the collapse to continue? The mass could not have collected on top of each floor in large amounts since this would have resulted in a large centralized debris pile in the footprint area. This did not occur. The photos show it was spread out everywhere. The debris pile in the footprint areas was about 60 feet high or so.

Size of this mass is irrelevant in this equation because they are equal when making contact. I do want to note however that the core columns density became thicker as they went down the tower. It was designed this way because of the load bearing requirements. This should have played into the collapse equation.

In physics energy can only be transferred when a change occurs. In this case, If potential energy is converted into Kinetic energy but then converted again into the energy to pulverize the concrete and eject it out, how is the mass able to maintain it's kinetic energy? This goes against the laws of physics. Kinetic energy is slowed down by dissipative forces and that is exactly what should have taken place. The 18 floors should have depleted and the collapse should have halted. This is pure physics. This has nothing to do with conspiracy.

Perpetual motion cannot be applied here because with perpetual motion, no energy is wasted. With the WTC all of the energy was wasted because the concrete was pulverized and energy was wasted ejecting it out. Energy was also wasted shattering the joints of the huge steel core column members and energy was wasted in the basement levels where pools of molten steel were found (meaning that kinetic energy would have had to be converted into heat energy) In reality however due to dissipative forces the kinetic energy would have depleted far sooner before it got this far down. This is just to illustrate that perpetual motion is not applicable.

We have determined that the buildings collapse progression was at free fall speeds. This calculation determines how long it would take for an object to fall if you were to drop it off the roof of the tower and let it fall to the ground without touching anything on the way down.

Distance = 1/2 x Gravity x Time(squared)

or

Time(squared) = (2 x Distance) / Gravity


Time(squared) = 2710 / 32 = 84.7


Time = 9.2 seconds

(I must note that this calculation is based on falling objects in a perfect vacuum, it does not account for air resistance which greatly slows down an objects fall)

Since the building fell in 10-12 seconds, this would imply that the collapse proceeded at free fall speeds. This is impossible.

The same dynamics applies to the WTC 2 and the WTC 7 that collapsed that day as well.


Could there have possibly been another catalyst involved that was not revealed?


Absolutely.


Similar topics are available here: http://www.attackonamerica.net/proofofcont...litionatwtc.htm

http://911blimp.net/prf_FreeFallPhysics.shtml

This video further explains these dynamics and also shows video to the claims above.

http://www.911revisited.com/video.html

I want you to ponder on just this if anything.. not whether it was a missile or government. The laws of physics is not conspiracy. If it was we would still be living like the time of Columbus and we all would think the world was flat. Ponder on these hard core facts of physics and take it from there.



Thanks for your time


Frank Scarano From Pottstown PA

maybe just a coincidence and/or not relevant at all, but both the time from the first plane crash to the first collapse = 1 hour 10 minutes; time from WTC7 to be reported on fire to its collapse = 1 hour 10 minutes..........

question....was there a fire suppression system [fire sprinklers] installed in WTC7 or the WTC complex for that matter?

Another Wtc Proof
of Controlled Demolition
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...?showtopic=3160

A bunch of reports by people who heard whjat they thought were bombs, but no real description of bombs and no outward sign of bombs. And then there is that reference back to the pseudo-expert Jones. That twit is no scientist. He's a charlatan. He belongs to the Discovery Foundation, forcrying out loud. NOT to be trusted with scientific fact. If anything, I would suspect that he is a neoclown mole trying to get us chasing our tails while Bushcrimes Inc hides their dirty clothes.

"Bushclown." Can anyone doubt his credentials as a liberal?

So, so obvious.

Just had to post so I don't see this idiot's name as the last post on the thread.

Hey Rox,

"MIT Engineer Breaks Down WTC Controlled Demolition"... Add this to the body of research conducted... Jeff King, MIT Engineer & Research Scientist, goes into detail why the WTC Towers and WTC 7 were brought down by explosives.

See video of presentation at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1822764959599063248

Best,
Tom

P.S. Hey man - he mentions Jim Hoffman (you know WTC7.NET, gunsandbutter, Berkley etc..) - you believe that? Pretty cool!

Excellent!

THIS is the video I am going to send to all of my structural engineering friends...

Short and sweet.

[cheers]

Thanks Angus - I tried to keep it simple and to the point, so I couldn't discuss some of the basic concepts as much as I would have liked, but that also forced it to be more organized and concise.

If you send anyone my talk, send them this link too:

NYC talk and annotations

It goes into a lot of the more interesting background material that I didn't have time to discuss, and expands on some of the points in the talk.

Best wishes,

Jeff

I wish that I would have write that! This is very clear.

This is simply impossible!

Yes, fstek brings out a major contradiction in the progressive collapse models that deserves close attention.

We cannot have the top section acting as a giant hammer to crush the building below if it is no longer a rigid object. What happens to the tops of both towers goes way beyond just losing rigidity - exploding would be a more accurate description, at least for the North Tower. And a quick look at the video shows that the top of the South Tower underwent a lot of internal disintegration early in the collapse, losing much of its height before it drops out of the frame.



You can't use the same gravitational energy twice: either it goes into accelerating everything downward or some of it gets extracted to crush, pulverize and eject stuff, in which case the collapse has to slow down. It goes without saying that there was a lot of this crushing and pulverizing going on, so the collapse should have gone very slowly, if at all.

And if you can show, as I think Jim Hoffman has, that more than the total gravitational energy was required to do the pulverizing and expansion of the dust cloud, I guess you would have to believe that the collapses ran backwards.

I have done some thinking of myself (yeah, really ;) ).

It's the following numbers that keep me busy.

free fall

The following formulas were used to produce the numbers. a= 9.81 m/s (gravitation speed) x=(1/2*a)*t2 (distance fallen) x=v*t (distance with constant speed)

The towers were roughly 417 meters high. Disregarding air resistance, it would take an object 9.22 seconds to fall from the top of the tower to the ground. The following formula is used.

x=(1/2*a)*t2 417=(1/2*9.81=4.905)*(t2) t2=85.01 t=9.22 seconds.

The end speed would be 325 km/u (9.22 seconds of acceleration with 9.81 m/s2 is 90,45 m/s -> *3.6= 325 km/u)

However, if one looks at the various video’s of the collapses, it is clear that a 9.22 seconds collapse is a bit optimistic. Due to the debris it is hard to see what the exact period of time of a collapse was, but I settle for 15 seconds (see this video, the offical report states 10 seconds for one of the towers). I assume that everyone interested in this topic can live with a 15 seconds collapse thesis as shown in that video.

Using the same formulas as shown above, the numbers for a free fall for longer periods of collapse are shown below. 11 seconds, 593 meter, 388 km/u 13 seconds, 829 meter, 459 km/u 15 seconds, 1104 meter, 530 km/u

It is quite clear to everyone that the distance of falling and the end speeds mentioned above do not align with the facts as presented. The end speeds are rather ridiculous and the distance traveled is much higher that the actual height of a tower.

We have a 417 meter fall distance and (for the thesis) a collapse time of 15 seconds. Therefore, I will implement a theory to make the 417 meter distance work with the 15 seconds collapse.

free fall reasoning enhanced

We know that certain facts were the facts on 911. The gravitational force was 9.81 m/s2, the towers were 417 meters high, and our fact of the assumed collapse time of 15 seconds. I use a theory to make these numbers fit.

I modify the collapse model of free fall speed with an assumed resistance. The structure would give resistance upon a collapse starting at the top. Therefore, the assumption is made that the collapse starts with the normal gravitational force but when the collapse progresses, a resistance force builds up that partially compensates the gravitational force. The collapse will accelerate with the normal gravitational force until it finds a balance between the gravitational force down and the resistance force up as provided for by the structure.

The model used is simple. I assume acceleration takes place with the gravitational force until a certain end speed is reached and from thereon the further collapse goes on with said end speed. One could think of a more elaborate model using a more elegant reaching of the end speed instead of a sudden stop of acceleration. I have not done so to keep it simple.

The model with an end speed of 10 m/s (36 km/u) is calculated as follows:

first, we must reach the end speed by accelerating with the gravitational force. 10/9.81=1.019 seconds
in 1.019 seconds we have traveled 5.093 meter (x=(0.5*9.81)*1.019(2)).
remaining are 417m-5.093m=411.907 meter
time required for remaining distance with 10m/s ->411.907/10=41.1907 seconds.
total collapse time=1.019+41.1907=42.21 seconds

This is a bit slower than our thesis of 15 seconds, so I calculated a set of other end speeds under this theory.

20m/s, 72 km/u end speed, 21,87 seconds collapse time.
30m/s, 108 km/u end speed, 15,43 seconds collapse time.
40m/s, 144 km/u end speed, 12,47 seconds collapse time.
50m/s, 180 km/u end speed, 10,8 seconds collapse time.
60m/s, 216 km/u end speed, 10,01 seconds collapse time.
70m/s, 252 km/u end speed, 9,52 seconds collapse time.

Based on this approach, we can conclude that the collapse’s end speed would have been roughly 30m/s (108 km/u) or a bit faster to have a 15 seconds collapse. As from 50m/s, the collapse time comes really close to 9.22 seconds, and the end speeds come closer and closer to the free fall end speed (disregarding air resistance) of 325 km/u.

An other approach could be a progressive speed of collapse with a constant acceleration. The numbers would be as follows:

x=0.5a*t2
417=0.5a*225
a=3.706 m/s
end speed 55,59m/s (15 seconds*3.706 m/s), 200 km/u.

So, 108 km/u or 200 km/u, depending on which thesis you use.

Hmm, 108 km/u would be the speed a cat would fall: through free air

200 km/u would be the speed a human being would fall: through free air

Notice this beatifull picture:

Notice the core. Notice the rest of the tower, it's almost 95% air.

I can understand a piece of the tower falling down. What I cannot understand is the sheer absence of any noticeable resistance during the collapse.

Between 108 and 200 km/u is awfully fast (using a moderate 15 seconds for the fall, the official report states 10 seconds for one of the towers. Actually, it is the only official report that says anything about the time required for the towers to collapse. None to be found in the FEMA and NIST report, but still these reports are widely used as respectable investigations [flex] [doh] ).

My head is a mess, I can't make this collapse work with the official story :(

I've recently seen a few videos claiming to prove there were explosions during the collapse, in floors near to the initial floor of collapse explosions of fire can be seen but if you squash any structure containg air and fire it's going to make it's way out somehow, demolition explosives do not produce large fiery explosions. Further down during the collapse holes appear and material is ejected horizontally, here is a video of a concrete compression test which shows that under compression concrete does more than just break into a few lumps as well as appear to explode outwards.

http://www1.shimadzu.com/products/test/hsvc/movie/03.mpg

Thinking about that some more, if that's the case then it shows that while the floor collapsing at the time takes the brunt of the force from the falling structure/material from above, some shock or compression wave travels downwards doing significant damage to the floors below which are then already in a state of collapse before they're reached which could explain the almost freefall collapse.

I've also read here some questions that as the concrete is pulverised then why does the collapse contine right to the bottom, I would think that not all the concrete would be pulverised instantly and also there's the amount of steel falling which would accumulate with the collapse of each floor.

As for the molten steel found afterwards, I have a thought on that (it is only a thought). From experience I know that steel hand chisels can heat up and become warm to touch with impact from only a plastic mallet, with handheld air hammers chisels can become too hot to hold and can burn skin or melt plastic gloves. With handheld breakers or hammer drills the steel tips can become hot enough to glow red and sometimes deform but the forces invloved in these things is virtually nothing compared to the forces that must have been experienced by the steelwork in the towers during the collapse so could it be possible that it was the shock or pressure waves traveling down the building that caused enough heat to build up to melt steel?

Did you know that the top of the south tower fell over?

top of the north one also.

I've spent a great deal of time analyzing that picture of the towers at sunrise. Having seen a documentary in 1990 about the construction of WTC 1, I know about the concrete core and its doorways.

Here is what I've written about the core explosions which are captured my photos,

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11corexplosions.html

The below is copied from that page regarding the photo you've posted.


WTC 1 at sunrise. The direction is not looking down the hallways, we look nearly along the long axis . The vertical line of light in the lower segment is created by sunlight reflecting off the inner core walls then shining out the core hallway.

The North Tower had a core oriented east and west in cardinal directions. The camera perspective is not aligned with the hallway as can be seen by the orientation of the south towers roof indicating an oblique view, The light coming through is not direct. It is reflected off the inner south shear wall at a hallway level where there is no doorway interrupting. We see no light on the left side because the doorways on the north face do not align with the doors on the east. Above that the top floors had a different scheme with some halls on one floor crossing both directions.

I would note additionally that the concrete core had a breakdown steel form to create the inner surfaces. Concrete can become quite reflective, shiny, when smooth steel is used to form it.

You are quite right. It is impossible to set explosives in a steel core columned building and get tht effect/image.

I've added a red line to show you a vertical valley created between two perpindicuarly adjacent explosions. The explosions are precision and are going outward from the vertical exploding planes of the concrete core walls. Because they are precision built, with explosisve optimally located at the center of the cast concrete, and optimally distributed over the planes, the breakage of the concrete is uniform and the resulting expansion is as well. The yellow line shows how the outer edge of the expanding debris cloud forms a cloud with a squarish quality relating to the corner of the tower or more correctly the core corner and the plane of the core wall.



So it is possibe, but only within a very narrow set of circumstances. You will notice that most images of the towers exploding have that vertical valley between the exploding faces of the towers.

BTW. With multiple steel core columns as FEMA describes, APROX. 1400 cutting charges must be set to cut 47 tempered steel box columns into 40 foot long pieces, most inside the core where no containment would be possible. Without containment very heavy loading of explosives would be needed and access to place linear shape charges was not fully possible.
When the 1400, heavy loads, uncontained are detonated, even in a delayed series, a massive horizontally oriented group of explosions ensue which throw larger shrapnel of tempered steel up to 1,000 feet distant in all diirections. Creating a completely different visual event, let alone the sound diffrence. Not to mention there would be far less concrete particulate involved. When uncontained high density explosive charges are detonated, very sharp loud crack/bang noises are created, not the rumbling, booming sounds heard. Those are from well contained explosions.

This message had been circulating on a 9-11 list.

The site about the demo built in 2003 has mention of the missile silo construction w/rebar coated with C4. I read it in a Mens magazine around 1975 and it was an entire self destruct technology that was invented by Navy seals to make openings in submarine bases. The DOD took the idea and applied it widely.




Hello Judson and Jim!

I am a retired Mechanical Engineer (BME U of MN 1961) who practiced as a
Professional Engineer in Minnesota for 27 years.

I have witnessed the implosion of two high rise concrete-steel buildings in
person. My first thought when I saw the first WTC tower collapse was,
"That is a controlled demolition". I had second thoughts when I realized
how much smoke and dust had been created. The demolitions I witnessed did
not have all that smoke and dust.

I have since learned that the original steel and rebar in those building
was coated with special type of corrosion inhibitor that required special
contractors and high security during the coating. It turns out that
coating was the plastic explosive C4 that the Navy Seals use to blow up
underwater steel and concrete barriers. It turns them to powder and naked
steel just like the 3 WTC buildings.

I heard that submarine pens and missile silos used this construction in
case an enemy had captured one of these facilities. They could be
destroyed with one coded phone call.

I called a fraternity brother, Theta Tau - the largest engineering
fraternity in the USA, who had done work on the missiles silos in N. and S.
Dakota during the 1960's. He affirmed that such construction was used in
building those missile silos so that they could be "pulled" with a coded
phone call.

Was there any mention of the use of C4 on the steel in any of the videos on
9-11?

Phile Ratte

In 2003 I built a web site using what I remembered from a 2 hour video about the construction of WTC 1 in 1990 and the message from the engineer above shows that he recognized the amounts of superfine dust as being too much for even an ordinary controlled demo.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html#anchor1152901

I have never seen a "controlled demolition" begin from the top of a building. All the other controlled demolitions I have seen in the past the explosions come from the bottom and then most of the way up the top.


Why would you want to start demolishing a building from the top?

Why would the demolition explosions start coincidently from the place the plane hit ?

dont you think it would be rather risky to start a demolition from the top ?

why do people say it "fell on its footprint" when you can see high res satelittle images of the carnage?

Why do people maintain that pancaking is the only feature of the collapse and not account for the massive "rubble overflow" ?

Why do people say "no building has ever collapsed by fire in history" and totally dismiss the notion of a MASSIVE jetliner smashing into it an hour beforehand ??

why cover up the fact that fires burned under the wtc rubble for a hundred days and concentrate on "weak fires" as the main feature of the incident?



Simple logic will tell you.. a plane hit the buildings (dont start with wt7 as evidence just yet!). The supports and the fire were intense enough to bring down the building.



Dont you think that the following article i have posted is more logical, intelligent explanation than suggesting something totally over the top as wired demolitions, bluescreens, pods and everything except what you saw on tv ?








Tim Wilkinson, Lecturer in Civil Engineering

(This is an initial suggestion, originally written on Sept 11 2001 (with some minor subsequent changes) on one possible reason for failure, and should not be regarded as official advice.)
World Trade Center collapse

The structural integrity of the World Trade Center depends on the closely spaced columns around the perimeter. Lightweight steel trusses span between the central elevator core and the perimeter columns on each floor. These trusses support the concrete slab of each floor and tie the perimeter columns to the core, preventing the columns from buckling outwards.

After the initial plane impacts, it appeared to most observers that the structures had been severely damaged, but not necessarily fatally.

It appears likely that the impact of the plane crash destroyed a significant number of perimeter columns on several floors of the building, severely weakening the entire system. Initially this was not enough to cause collapse.

However, as fire raged in the upper floors, the heat would have been gradually affecting the behaviour of the remaining material. As the planes had only recently taken off, the fire would have been initially fuelled by large volumes of jet fuel, which then ignited any combustible material in the building. While the fire would not have been hot enough to melt any of the steel, the strength of the steel drops markedly with prolonged exposure to fire, while the elastic modulus of the steel reduces (stiffness drops), increasing deflections.
World Trade Center collapse

Modern structures are designed to resist fire for a specific length of time. Safety features such as fire retarding materials and sprinkler systems help to contain fires, help extinguish flames, or prevent steel from being exposed to excessively high temperatures. This gives occupants time to escape and allow fire fighters to extinguish blazes, before the building is catastrophically damaged.

It is possible that the blaze, started by jet fuel and then engulfing the contents of the offices, in a highly confined area, generated fire conditions significantly more severe than those anticipated in a typical office fire. These conditions may have overcome the building's fire defences considerably faster than expected. It is likely that the water pipes that supplied the fire sprinklers were severed by the plane impact, and much of the fire protective material, designed to stop the steel from being heated and losing strength, was blown off by the blast at impact.

Eventually, the loss of strength and stiffness of the materials resulting from the fire, combined with the initial impact damage, would have caused a failure of the truss system supporting a floor, or the remaining perimeter columns, or even the internal core, or some combination. Failure of the flooring system would have subsequently allowed the perimeter columns to buckle outwards. Regardless of which of these possibilities actually occurred, it would have resulted in the complete collapse of at least one complete storey at the level of impact.

Once one storey collapsed all floors above would have begun to fall. The huge mass of falling structure would gain momentum, crushing the structurally intact floors below, resulting in catastrophic failure of the entire structure. While the columns at say level 50 were designed to carry the static load of 50 floors above, once one floor collapsed and the floors above started to fall, the dynamic load of 50 storeys above is very much greater, and the columns were almost instantly destroyed as each floor progressively "pancaked" to the ground.



Image: a woman stands amongst massive structural damage.. steel damage that never seems to make the alternative news

i'd say it's a height to width ratio thing and the danger of having the structure start to tip over like a tree. smokestacks are usually dropped like a tree but if they have to come straight down you'd need a different technique:

the buildings were lattices of interconnections and redundancies. if the core were to fail, the outside columns would actually hold the building up initially, but would of course fail at the first weak point, ie, the airliner impact damage.

yes!

that's generally attributed to wtc-7, and explosive demolitions which do the same thing. the twin towers, from the crash zone down fell within a fairly tight symmetrical radius of their own foot prints and the tops of each tower fell over.

i don't know. there are many mysteries to pancake-tuesday. perhaps it's a religious belief thing.

i think that the quote says "steel-framed sky-scraper" instead of "building" and then goes on to point out that steel-framed sky-scrapers have been in use for over a hundred years.

i don't think that the notion of a jet-liner is dismissed, it's generally assumed that the buildings could survive the impact, damage, and fire. you can check this by the response of emergency workers. then something happened which most people wouldn't expect... a total collapse, the most obvious cause would be what's known as "secondary devices" in the building.

i don't know. i think that shifting into damage control mode is second nature to authorities and they act automatically to protect their own.
federal contingency plans (which originated as 1960's cold-war scenarios, ergo "groundzero") called for tightly controlled "one voice" media production on site in order to control media response. the central story which was actually decided upon was the "hero-firefighter" story and this story was continually spoon fed to the media making it pretty much the only thing they could report, if they wanted any pictures, etc.

probably makes more sense than pods and bluescreens yeah.
but it does rely on a number of key assumptions, namely that once 1,2 or 3 floors collapse, global collapse is inevitably and assured to occur in the manner observed.
it avoids the actual collapses themselves and how the buildings can be seen to mushroom into vast clouds of dust whilst huge chunks of steel are pitched up and over as if they are fired from a cannon.

Dont you think that the following article i have posted is more logical, intelligent explanation than suggesting something totally over the top as wired demolitions, bluescreens, pods and everything except what you saw on tv ?

No I do not. The reason for that position is that the article posted, nor the official story, do not explain, or even approach explaining, what is seen in this image.



There is absolutely no way that can be termed a collapse.

BTW, medium addresses your post well, point by point, but since the information you present does not explain the over all event, i can't justify addressing details that just do not have relevancy to the final effect seen.

if the building had of fallen sideways it still would have been called a demolition by the people that are dedicated to making people think it was a demolition.

I get the feeling that with all these theories that the goal is not the truth, its about getting the bushadministration in trouble.

its also like these theorist's are trying to "catch the conspiracy" or see how much history they can re-write. Its like the new era thinking "we were too slow for JFK, too slow for the moon landing hoax, weren't born for the holohoax, so lets make sure we grab this event with gusto and possibly change history".

do remember that the demolition theory is a part of every single event in post 9/11 - from 9/11 to london, spain, mumbia, bali to nick berg in which if america has become a victim its automatically "fake" and if america has pride in somthing [moon landing] these people will try their hardest to snuff out the pride.

that's not the point. people say all kinds of things all the time. the reason a lot of people are saying this at the moment is because there is a substantial amount of truth to the claims. time and again, people who are bothering to take a closer look at the facts are realizing that there is definitely something fishy with what the media told them.

they already are in trouble. they need to be prosecuted for war crimes. they've already invaded two nations, killed tens of thousands of people, mostly civilians, with no end in sight.
since americans only seem to care about themselves, many would argue that they need to be aware that the bushadmin's actions are placing them in far more danger and obliterating their freedoms

as far as truth goes. different people have different agendas. interestingly enough a political movement has formed around a common platform: the wtc attacks were not investigated properly and the administration are seemingly protecting the guilty. the attacks were used as a pretext for 2 illegal unprovoked wars.

i don't necessarily agree with trying to use 9/11 as reverse propaganda but it was so violent and so close to home that it has seemingly become the source of disillusionment for many.

there's some good books which cover a wide cross-section of conspiracy theories. seems americans are second only to italians in conspiracy theorizing, perhaps because italy's just had way more time for actual conspiracies.
of course there's lots of batshit theories always floating around, but fact is, a lot of so called "conspiracy theories", if you really look into it, happen to be true.

the berg case is maybe not the best example, his father blames the bush admin for his son's death. the whole thing looked like a cheap hacked together last minute crappy piece of propaganda to distract from the prisoner abuse scandal. and even if it wasn't, it's pretty tough to say that "america" was somehow the victim there. still hardly a mention in the news of the thousands of american kids coming home in bodybags. who's the victim there?

your moon landing...? look. americans come off as being the most insecure people on the planet. it's embarrassing at times. you even question someone's faith, someone's indoctrinated faith, you get tantrums. raving tantrums, anger, betrayal, even hatred.
so, yeah, the americans went to the moon. they went to impress the russians (among some other reasons). it worked, the ruskies were impressed.
if you feel national pride for the moon landings then great. would be nice if there were similar projects instead of imperial aggression. if someone tries to dress you down because they happen to think the landings were faked?.. maybe you just need to be a bit more self-assured friend.

yeah, the moon landings were real... but it's pretty certain that some staged footage was produced, perhaps as a backup... it's also pretty clear that footage was shot and shown out of sequence over the course of individual apolo missions, but that's a pretty normal documentation practice.

Had it did that it would have resembled a collapse making it hard to argue as a demolition

You are providing a cogntiive distortion by over generalizing "all of these theories".

What you suggest, if it were true, would still be better and make more sense than the FEMA supplied WTC report trying to change the structure of the buildings THEN the NIST report trying to change physics.

We snuff false pride with pride. Liberty and justice for all by using TRUTH.

That was a good attempt for so early after the event, but given the vast amount of evidence subsequently uncovered, it does tend to lack considerable detail. A bit like Dr. Bazant's in that regard.
How have you altered your thinking on the collapse initiation and progression when the following points were considered?
+ Early failure of the core structure
+ Survival of the lower core structure until an advanced stage of the collapse.
+ Survival of the corners of the perimeter structure after the collapse front has passed.
+ Inward bowing of the perimeter walls.
+ Sagging of floors perpendicular to the direction required to cause bowing
+ Tilting movement of the upper section.
+ Bending of upper section
+ Early disintegration of upper section
+ Early downward movement of the antennae.
+ Ejections of dust & debris simultaneously across whole floors, but not every floor.
+ Behaviour of the "spire"
+ Flashes of light before and during collapse in a recognisable and relevant pattern
+ Colour and character changes of smoke emisions at seats of failure.
+ Molten metal ejections
+ Failure of core structure horizontal bracing and failure of core columns horizontally at several levels


Gordon Ross

Hi guys,

Just to let u know, there is a programme on BBC1, in the U.K this evening.

Apparently its been put together via witness statements from people who were in the towers at the time,and firefighters at the scene.

Should be interesting to see if any `secondary explosions` occuring in the towers are mentioned.....they`ve gotta talk about them...

Not sure if u can get BBC in the states, would of thought u could....

Great post Gordon,

Good points on the impossibility of collapse.

I remember you from the physorg.com board, and that you provided some quality analysis with an open mind.

I understand the social pressures that create a trend to adhere to what is accepted even though it may not be something that can be reasonably supported to a degree that justifies unquestioned use. of course I refer to the "core issue". Concrete tube or multiple steel core columns?

Accordingly I extend an invitation to you to support the multiple steel core columns in debate to the evidence and assertion of the concrete core found here. Seeing as those trying to reasonably support the steel core columns there are failing, again, always, to show with evidence and comon sense that the multiple steel columns FEMA said existed actually did.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...opic=11658&st=0

These points of your list are pertinant to the "core issue".

+ Early failure of the core structure

Good point and within demolition, how are steel columns of the mass alleged cut with high explosives to achieve the;

+ Tilting movement of the upper section.

And how does that effect the visual/auditory event? How does damage on one side cause a fall in the other direction.

Below the failure of bracing is questioned. I wonder if there is an documentation of that bracing or if any of it can be seen in the demoliton images.

+ Failure of core structure horizontal bracing and failure of core columns horizontally at several levels.


I hope you are up to this because your accountabily to reason rates very high in my book, so an interesting exchange might develop.

Chris

Sometimes you even get banned from the forum.