So anyway
real engineers and researchers did get to look at the steel from the WTC and are doing real work improving things, it took months to remove debris and the steel was tracked and checked, it appears each piece was marked during construction and that helped understand the failure modes
So each piece was forensically examined to determine why the fireproofing was gone? How much of the central core was recovered? Where are the records of the examination results on this steel located?
But you will have to get with the program and pay up to view a lot of the work or at least visit a library where the real journals are kept.
I'm a big fan of libraries, but am not familiar with any journals relating to forensic analysis of the WTC steel.
I'll check the forums and see if somebody has posted that information.
Too bad all the Scholar for 9/11 truth are not useful enough to help improve buildings, but only see CT everywhere. At least only .00067 percent of the United States engineers have a problem researching and have suspended their rational side to join an ironically named truth movement!
Most of them seem rational, just a bit stressed and frustrated maybe.
I think you may be exaggerating your percentage figure. The 9/11 attacks showed civil engineers that they did not know how to protect buildings from fire damage. If the official explanation is true, virtually every steel-framed building is in danger of collapsing within a couple of hours from fire damage.
My take was that the central column design was flawed because it restricted escape routes to the center of the building. This is why so many people were trapped in the North Tower.
I have yet to see an explanation for the mechanism which caused all four walls to simultaneously fail on each building.
your time of collapse appears to be too short also, you could do a whole thesis on the real time of collapse, you could start with the slow movement at the very beginning, etc. ( a whole study in time, or you can stick with the looks like 10 second crowd of picking the quotes to suit the conclusion club)
Check out FEMA and the 9/11 Commission reports for fall times. If you have a problem with that value, take it up with them.
You could also measure the time by examining video of the collapse.
why do people not research what really happened to the steel and present the actual time it was whisked away to China?
The steel was shipped to holding yards until barges arrived at lower Manhattan.
My understanding is that virtually all of the steel was in Asia by May of 2002, despite only a small amount of it being examined.
Researching what really happened is only as easy as locating a truthful account of activities.
Nonetheless, there was not enough time to examine all pieces of evidence, as is typically done in air disasters.
The investigation was also limited to FEMA-approved scientists and engineers. If they have catalogued every piece of steel and performed a forensic analysis on each one, then I will apologize for my statement.
The 9/11 Commission was not even formed until November of 2002, and did not examine the issue of the towers' collapse personally.
why do people keep saying too short of times for the collapse, and pick the time that suits their conclusion (do I smell a concrete core coming, or is that the cordite, or just concrete being smashed at 500 mph?)?
Again, I am going with official times, although Ihave clocked the video from a couple of news sites. There is some footage taken from across the Hudson which gives a complete view of the collapse.
I'm not sure where you got the 500 mph figure. That was an estimated speed for each airliner. Each plane would have certainly encountered a large amount of conrete as it plowed into the building.
Are you saying that the building was moving at 500 mph when it started to collapse? The dust cloud was generated as soon as the upper section of each tower began to collapse.
Again, my point is that there is no conclusive evidence to explain what happened to bring the towers down, conspiracy theories aside.
The CT crowd appears to be locked in on the PNAC, and GWB admin gang.
For me, I see the need to examine and collect information. We haven't even gotten to the point where proof of anything is required.
That's one of the many problems I have with the Loose Change crowd. They have locked in on a number of unsupportable or fallacious possibilities, and then refuse to clearly examine them.
I realize that there are also a number of people who want to cling to the official explanation, despite the many inconsistencies because it allows them to hate an entire ethnicity.
I'm still waiting to see the proof that al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden were behind the attacks. So far all the feds have provided in that area are a couple of grainy videos, a pristene passport found at ground zero, a bandana (unsinged) at the flight 93 crash site, and a travel bag full of incriminating evidence sitting in an airport.
There just seems to be a little hypocrisy on the standard of proof required by both sides as compared to what each will accept to support their case.
