Merged Fireballs and Backdraft in WTC1 Basement and Lobby

[TexasJack]

Since when is Ralph Nader a truther? Oh, and Ron Paul said he doesn't believe in 9-11 conspiracy theories.

He listed Ralph Nadar, not Ralph Nader, but I don't think any are full blown truthers other than the former pro-wrestler, but some want an independent investigation.

 

[thewholesoul]

Hellbound,

First I want to say that I appreciate your criticism. Its is hard to find people you still wish to address my argument head on.

My argument:

(1) [Upon impact] Elevator cables are severed + jet fuel droplets and/or jet fuel fireball descend shaft
(2) Car 50 falls approx. 17 floors taking no more than 5s to reach B1
(3) Jet fuel droplets and/or jet fuel fireball descend 95 floors taking approx. 30s and 15s respectively
(4) The first basement explosion occured below car 50 and before it reached B1

Conclusion: whatever exploded below car 50 and before it reached B1 could not POSSIBLY have been caused by fuel droplets and/or jet fuel fireball.

If I understand your argument correctly you are saying that the freight elevator car took longer than 5 seconds to reach B1, that the emergency brakes would have slowed her descent. This is a logical counter argument, if you cant speed up the descent of fuel droplets (9m/s) or the jet fuel fireball (27m/s) then maybe we can slow down the descent of the elevator.

You write:

The elevator car should have had emergency brakes. Can't speak to that, but do you have details of the type of car used, and the safety measures included?

Freight elevator cars in the world trade center were gearless traction machines with a max speed of roughly 10m/s [1].
There is only two reasons that the emergency braking system will be activated mechanically, the first is if there is no electricity. But we know that the elevators in world trade center still had electricity [2] the second reason is if the elevator is over the speed limit. The governor is a mechanical speed control mechanism. It is a wire rope driven centrifugal device used to stop and hold the movement of the driving rope. This intiates the activation of the car safety device. It opens a switch [overspeed governor switch], which cuts off power to the drive motor and brake if the car travels at a preset overspeed (freefall or 20% over its rated nameplate speed) in the down direction [3]. The reason, in my opinion, why the emergency brakes worked for the freight elevator car and not for others is because the plane impact may not have managed to sever the all important governor cable which as explained above activates the emergency brake jaws which grip the guide rails and slow the car to a stop [4].

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator
2. http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002-09-04-elevator-usat_x.htm
3. http://www.hkaconsulting.com/Pages/Glossary.html
4. http://www.answers.com/topic/elevator

The car would likely have emergency brakes. So the car velocity would be less than that of the fuel.

Wrong. Fuel droplets have an approximate terminal velocity of 10m/s. A freight elevator descending normally would also have a speed of 10m/s. So even if the elevator cables had not have been cut, fuel droplets could not have caught up and passed the freight elevator. But we know that the cables were cut, this is why the freight elevator was heard “falling” by Phillip Morelli, and why the operator of the freight elevator Arturo Griffith was saying to himself “Oh, God, Oh, God, I’m going to die”. the fact that the emergency brakes kicked in further confirms that overspeed was reached.

So how long was car 50 falling?

From Griffiths testimony we learn that their elevator ascended for 5-7 seconds [5]. But let us use the most generous estimation, that being 7 seconds. A freight elevator ascending 10m/s for 7s will reach 70m. Each floor is 3.8m so it is fair to say that the freight elevator reached about the 18th floor when the plane impacted the building. From Griffith’s testimony we also learn that the elevator fell at least 15-16 floors before the emergency brakes caught. That fits in nicely with the above estimation of 18 floors. It is difficult to say however exactly how long it took car 50 to fall 18 floors but given that a freight elevator would descend 18 floors in roughly 7 seconds it is safe to say that a freight elevator, with cables cut, would take no longer than 5 seconds.

5. http://911stories.googlepages.com/insidethenorthtower:witnessaccounts,floo2

The question then is how could fuel droplets and/or jet fuel fireball descending 95 floors pass this elevator?

Answer: it couldnt.

Implication: fuel droplets and/or jet fuel fireball was not responsible for the devastation in the basement

Question: then what was?

And I'd say you need to research something besides testimony. Testimony is well and good, but your failing seems to be in the physical realm.

I dont need testimony to know that when the plane crashed into the building that cables were cut, fuel fell down the shafts and elevators fell. Thats just common sense.

If the basement explosion occured after car 50 reached B1 dont you think they would notice the intoxicating fumes as they passed over the car? A human can detect kerosene as little as 1ppm but you dont think they would be overcome by 7000ppm to 50000ppm?

Dont you think they would have noticed a massive jet fuel deflagration just below their car? You do know that shaft 50, 6 + 7 were the ONLY route the fuel could have travelled down to reach the basement from the impact zone? Again to establish the fact that the basement explosion occured before car 50 reached B1 simply requires the application of some common sense.

To establish the fact the something-actually-did-explode in the basement are you really willing to discard 20 or so witnesses? So you see my firend my argument does not rest so much on testimony but more on the physical realm than you give it credit for. And when the physical realm and testimony corroborate one another your argument should be taken seriously and not simply ignored.

You are not familiar with the characteristics of explosives, you seem to be at a loss on the construction of elevators, and frankly, you've got no physical evidence at all for your viewpoint.

True i am not familiar with explosives and if you are apparently more familar with the construction of elevators then dont you find it odd that you were asking me for information concerning the emergency brake system? As for the physical evidence, given that jet fuel cannot POSSIBLY explain the damage that did occur in the basement what else do you propose can possibly explain it?

So go learn a bit of science, instead of making unsupported claims that are counter-indicated by your own "evidence". Anyone can do that.

Why dont you go learn some common sense. But heres a prediction, eventhough you will be unable to refute my argument with any intelligent or logical counter you will still hold onto your DEBUNKED belief and join the growing list of jrefers including Mackey, Norseman, Gumboot, Dave Rogers, Funk de Fino etc

peace

 

[thewholesoul]

As a miltiary member trained in the use of explosives, and having experienced explosives of varying sizes, up to and including multi-ton HE blasts,

Unnecessary information

there is nothing in an explosion that any person I've come in contact with would describe as "wind".

Well you have not come across Salvatore Gimabanco because he describes the blast wave as an incredible force of wind? When i look at the following link I think that the blast wave from this explosive detonation could be described as an incredible force of wind. Heres someone elses testimony:

There is a blast wave, but it is quick and sudden. Explosions in real life aren't like in the movies; you don't have 3 seconds to run as the fireball expands; the explosion doesn't happen slow enough for you to really see the expanding fireball.

How come when i see this explosive detonation http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=_Arqevz05Eo i can see the expanding fireball. and how come when i got to this link http://pdm.medicine.wisc.edu/18-3pdfs/220Arnold.pdf
i can read all the states of burn victims from terrorist bombs since

In fac,t those movies exploaisons are exactly the type of thing being surmised here...they use gasoline and other fuels for the slowe,r modre visible, flashier effects. Real explosives produce very little flame (in fact, explosives are used in firefighting) and are over in an instant.

You were not in the basement that day so you dont know what the explosive looked like. In relation to the first basement explosion there is no report of a fireball – maybe you should become more familiar with the testimony? And because you did not plant the explosives that did detonate in the basement you have no idea what kind of explosives were used and can only specualte.

Also, another point. The definition of an explosive, as opposed to fuel or gasoline, is that the blast wave travels at the speed of sound (a lower expansion rate is not an explosion). This means that the blast wave and the sound would hit at the same time. The description given has the sound arriving a considerable time before the "wind", again supporting the idea of a fuel conflagration rather than an explosive.

I dont know how you can infer “considerable time” between the sound of the explosion and the incredible winds from the testimony of Salvatore Giambanco?

"We heard the explosion and the smoke all of a sudden came from all over. There was an incredible force of wind that also swept everything away. I remember hearing a scream of a woman, but I couldn't see her

Just because there was a full stop does not = “considerable time” delay. In my opinion if there was a “considerable time” delay he would have said so himself.

But you do make a valid point i.e. time delay between sound and blast wave = deflagration. But you will need to establish that to a much greater extent.

Finally, I saw 5psi mentioned. That's actually a very high pressure rate, especially over a second or so. An explosive produces a very high pressur,e but for a very, very brief time. A fuel explosion procuces lower pressures over a longer time. In any case, 5 psi is enough to collapse non-reinforced walls. Think about if for a moment. An elavator door is, perhaps, 5 feet by 8 feet. That 60 inches by 96 inches, or 5,760 square inches. At 5 psi, that's the equivalent of the door holding up 28,800 pounds, or almost 14 and a half tons. That's more than the weight of the U.S. Army's M113 Armored personnel carrier (See Wiki).

So are you suggesting that an explosive cannot collapse non reinforced walls and elevator doors?

So far, nothing in the account rules out a fuel conflagration, and I see a lot of indicators to rule out explosives.

Sound of explosion, smoke, walls cracking, building shaking, incredible force of wind (blast wave), people running and screaming, people blown to the floor, people burnt, people maimed, people killed – please name just one of these afformentioned effects that ALL occured in the basement that COULD NOT POSSIBLY be explained by the detonation of an explosive device.

And one final thing, if your saying that the explosion in the basement was caused by the deflagration of jet fuel, then how come nobody on B1, B2, B4 reported smelling any? Would that not count as something that ruled out a fuel deflagration?

peace

 

[thewholesoul]

If you had any reading comprehension skills at all TWS, you would understand Mackey has you on ignore, and for good reasons.

you think i haven't noticed?

he is an intellectual coward and his "droplet" hypothesis was DEBUNKED. he knows that but rather than doing the rational thing and changing his belief he chooses to bury his head further into sand. its called cognitive dissonance.

but it doesnt bother me much, people coming to this thread will also notice how he ran. they will notice how nobody can refute my argument. they will notice how i am the only one still seeking a rational dialogue and actually encourge intelligent criticism of my argument. maybe you can give it a shot next eh? but your not are you.... lol

peace

just like NIST Mackey runs for the hills when his hypothesis is challenged.

 

[TexasJack]

you think i haven't noticed?

he is an intellectual coward and his "droplet" hypothesis was DEBUNKED. he knows that but rather than doing the rational thing and changing his belief he chooses to bury his head further into sand. its called cognitive dissonance.

but it doesnt bother me much, people coming to this thread will also notice how he ran. they will notice how nobody can refute my argument. they will notice how i am the only one still seeking a rational dialogue and actually encourge intelligent criticism of my argument. maybe you can give it a shot next eh? but your not are you.... lol

peace

just like NIST Mackey runs for the hills when his hypothesis is challenged.

LOL, he works for NASA, and you do what again? The only thing people have have noticed is that you're a T-Ball player who thinks he's better than A-Rod, and A-Rod has simply chosen to quit beating up on you.


Answer me this, what exactly is your background that you can so arrogantly proclaim victory in your fantasy conjectures? Maybe you'll answer that adequately, but you are not, are you?

 

[Norseman]

And one final thing, if your saying that the explosion in the basement was caused by the deflagration of jet fuel, then how come nobody on B1, B2, B4 reported smelling any? Would that not count as something that ruled out a fuel deflagration?

For some strange reason Mike Pecoraro smelled jet fuel (kerosene) down on B6:

By this time, however, the room they were working in began to fill with a white smoke. "We smelled kerosene," Mike recalled, "I was thinking maybe a car fire was upstairs", referring to the parking garage located below grade in the tower but above the deep space where they were working.

Source: http://www.chiefengineer.org/article.cfm?seqnum1=1029

 

[thewholesoul]

LOL, he works for NASA,

plea to authority

and you do what again?

i work for MYOB, you?

The only thing people have have noticed is that you're a T-Ball player who thinks he's better than A-Rod, and A-Rod has simply chosen to quit beating up on you.

but A-rod couldn't refute a 4 line argument, either can you B-ball lol

Answer me this, what exactly is your background that you can so arrogantly proclaim victory in your fantasy conjectures?

right now my background consists of a wall with a window with a view, whats your yours?

Mackey is the arrogant one, i am still here ready for debate. he is not. he cannot refute a 4 line argument. but you want to know why he doesnt even try? because the smarter you are the dumber you look when your wrong.

Maybe you'll answer that adequately, but you are not, are you?

look tex, i posted a 4 line argument, i asked if you wanted to take a shot at refuting it. you declined as predicted. i have answered your question above, whether it was adequate or not is something you can debate to yourself.

peace

 

[Norseman]

So are you suggesting that an explosive cannot collapse non reinforced walls and elevator doors?

He just attempted to show you that a pressure increase of a few PSI form a jet fuel deflagration would be more than enough to fail the door. But this is something that you do not want understand of course, true to form.

By the way this was an exercise I asked you to do for yourself back in post #504.

 

[thewholesoul]

For some strange reason Mike Pecoraro smelled jet fuel (kerosene) down on B6:

Source: http://www.chiefengineer.org/article.cfm?seqnum1=1029

so you do not dispute that no-one on B1, 2 or 4 reported smelling kerosene. good.

now what Mike Pecoraro thought is that "I was thinking maybe a car fire was upstairs". when he later went to the car park it was turned into rubble. maybe he was right.

but since your the one claimng that what he smelt was indeed kerosene from the impact zone perhaps you can explain to me why kerosene wasnt smelt on B1, 2 and 4 but was smelt on B6. perhaps you can outline Mikes location in relation to the elevator shafts and explain why Arturo Griffith and Marlene Cruz inside the elevator shaft also saw some smoke but didnt smell kerosene? perhaps you can tell me why nobody in B1, 2 and 4 reported seeing a slow expanding fireball indiciative of a fuel deflagration. but maybe you could tell me how fuel droplets falling 95 floors can pass an elevator falling 18 floors in order to explode in the basement levels.

as for your unofficial shockwave hypothesis post 674 poses two questions that you may be interested in answering.

but its good to have you back Norseman, there dropping like flies around here.

peace

 

[TexasJack]

Instead of just answering that I'm fully unqualified to refute any of Mackey's arguments, you spout off like a drunken politician.

Since you're not qualified, who in the scientific world has grabbed on to your bizarre and idiotic theory? I look forward to concise answer this time.

BTW it's appeal to authority, not plea, and it doesn't apply if he has destroyed your "arguments" and decided that's it's useless to try to explain things to someone who obvisiously doesn't have the background to understand his refutations. Heck, you can't even comprehend a simple analogy.

 

[Norseman]

Sound of explosion, smoke, walls cracking, building shaking, incredible force of wind (blast wave), people running and screaming, people blown to the floor, people burnt, people maimed, people killed – please name just one of these afformentioned effects that ALL occured in the basement that COULD NOT POSSIBLY be explained by the detonation of an explosive device.

All of it fully consistent with the consequences of aircraft impact and jet fuel deflagration. Something you have been shown time and time again in this thread. There is no need for any bombs to explain what happened in the basement of WTC 1.

 

[thewholesoul]

He just attempted to show you that a pressure increase of a few PSI form a jet fuel deflagration would be more than enough to fail the door. But this is something that you do not want understand of course, true to form.

i know and i AGREE that a jet fuel deflagration could fail a door. but an explosive can also fail a door. and given that jet fuel cannot POSSIBLY explain the basement explosion that was responsible for failing doors etc that means that it was caused by an explosive.

are you prepared to take on my 4 line argument? because that is what should lead any rational person to the same conclusion. you know its true, that is why you changed your explanation for the first basement explosion to a shockwave. this means you are intellectually honest unlike Mackey who thinks that by ignoring someone that somehow makes him the winner? he is such an intellectual coward it makes me laugh
peace

 

[thewholesoul]

All of it fully consistent with the consequences of aircraft impact and jet fuel deflagration. Something you have been shown time and time again in this thread. There is no need for any bombs to explain what happened in the basement of WTC 1.

please Norseman are you really just going to repeat the same old mantra. i have countered every explanation you and everyone else has thrown down that elevator shaft in relation to the causes behind the basement explosion. i even numbered them 1-4; theres the official fireball hypothesis, the unofficial fuel droplets, the falling debris, and the shockwave.

below is explains in black and white WHY the official hypothesis is impossible. if you disagree pick a number and shoot it down. please because i welcome criticism. if my argument is false you can surely pick off one of them??? but if you cannot demonstrate one to be false then why dont you accept it to be true? you know that is considered irrational where i come from.

My argument:

(1) [Upon impact] Elevator cables are severed + jet fuel droplets and/or jet fuel fireball descend shaft
(2) Car 50 falls approx. 17 floors taking no more than 5s to reach B1
(3) Jet fuel droplets and/or jet fuel fireball descend 95 floors taking approx. 30s and 15s respectively
(4) The first basement explosion occured below car 50 and before it reached B1

Conclusion: whatever exploded below car 50 and before it reached B1 could not POSSIBLY have been caused by fuel droplets and/or jet fuel fireball.

peace

 

[thewholesoul]

Instead of just answering that I'm fully unqualified to refute any of Mackey's arguments,

ok then, i am fully qualified to refute some but not all of Mackey's arguments.

i would think that given Mackey has such a big brain, and given that he works for NASA that he would be qualified enough to take on a 4 line argument. wouldnt you argree Tex. but where has your hero gone Tex??

Since you're not qualified,

hang on there Tex i never told you my qualifications so dont you think your jumping to conclusions

who in the scientific world has grabbed on to your bizarre and idiotic theory? I look forward to concise answer this time.

i will post my common sense argument - that you are unable to refute - in a blog so hopefully i can wake up more individuals in respect to the official lie maybe that will include some scientists, who knows.

but you should listen to yourself, you call the 4 line argument bizarre and idiotic yet you cannot refute it yourself? do you not realize how bizarre and idiotic that is? i'm guessing not

he has destroyed your "arguments"

please quote which line of the 4 line argument your hero has refuted, if you cant do that please stop talking rubbish man havent you noticed your hero has ran to the hills.

and decided that's it's useless to try to explain things to someone who obvisiously doesn't have the background to understand his refutations. Heck, you can't even comprehend a simple analogy.

but you can understand his calculations Tex? lol

listen i dont need to understand his calculations because my argumemt proves that the basement explosion could not possibly have been caused by a fuel deflagration.

peace

 

[TexasJack]

I don't have heroes, but I, unlike you, listen to experts. Tell me TWS, if you have problems with your heart, do you consult an accountant?
TWS, quit beating around the bush; please list your qualifications and show your calculations to support them, otherwise you're a joke.

 

[Norseman]

perhaps you can tell me why nobody in B1, 2 and 4 reported seeing a slow expanding fireball indiciative of a fuel deflagration.

From the site of Mark Roberts that you should familiar with since it is your main source of dishonest quote mining.

B4 level
In the 2002 taped statement, (Jose) Sanchez recalls, at the same time Rodriguez and the others heard the explosion, being in a small sub-level 4 workshop with another man who he only knew by the name of Chino when, out of nowhere, the blast sounded as the two men were cutting a piece of metal.

“It sounded like a bomb and the lights went on and off,” said Sanchez in the tape recording. “We started to walk to the exit and a huge ball of fire went through the freight elevator. The hot air from the ball of fire dropped Chino to the floor and my hair got burned,” said Sanchez in the tape recording. “The room then got full of smoke and I remember saying out loud ‘I believe it was a bomb that blew up inside the building.’

Source: http://911stories.googlepages.com/insidethenorthtower:witnessaccounts,lobb

My emphasis above.

As I have explained earlier in this thread in connection with Felipe David, the first thing they heard must have been the impact of Flight 11, the light flickering would be due to short circuits and shaking of transformers also caused by the impact. Then as they started to walk out the jet fuel fireball arrived from the impact zone.
Is this really so difficult to comprehend thewholesoul?

 

[Kent1]

so you do not dispute that no-one on B1, 2 or 4 reported smelling kerosene. good.

now what Mike Pecoraro thought is that "I was thinking maybe a car fire was upstairs". when he later went to the car park it was turned into rubble. maybe he was right.

but since your the one claimng that what he smelt was indeed kerosene from the impact zone perhaps you can explain to me why kerosene wasnt smelt on B1, 2 and 4 but was smelt on B6. perhaps you can outline Mikes location in relation to the elevator shafts and explain why Arturo Griffith and Marlene Cruz inside the elevator shaft also saw some smoke but didnt smell kerosene? perhaps you can tell me why nobody in B1, 2 and 4 reported seeing a slow expanding fireball indiciative of a fuel deflagration. but maybe you could tell me how fuel droplets falling 95 floors can pass an elevator falling 18 floors in order to explode in the basement levels.

as for your unofficial shockwave hypothesis post 674 poses two questions that you may be interested in answering.

but its good to have you back Norseman, there dropping like flies around here.

peace

But didn't Rodriguez smell kerosene on B1?
"When I asked him about the reports of people smelling kerosene (Jet-A fuel is basically kerosene) in the basement levels just after the fireball erupted there, he said he also smelled the kerosene."

http://911stories.googlepages.com/rodriguezvs.everyone
If I'm not mistaken he was on B1
He also said" "And at that terrible day when I took people out of the office, one of them totally burned because he was standing in front of the freight elevator and the ball of fire came down the duct of the elevator itself, I put him on the ambulance."
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0209/11/se.48.html

 

[Norseman]

please Norseman are you really just going to repeat the same old mantra. i have countered every explanation you and everyone else has thrown down that elevator shaft in relation to the causes behind the basement explosion. i even numbered them 1-4; theres the official fireball hypothesis, the unofficial fuel droplets, the falling debris, and the shockwave.

below is explains in black and white WHY the official hypothesis is impossible. if you disagree pick a number and shoot it down. please because i welcome criticism. if my argument is false you can surely pick off one of them??? but if you cannot demonstrate one to be false then why dont you accept it to be true? you know that is considered irrational where i come from.

My argument:

(1) [Upon impact] Elevator cables are severed + jet fuel droplets and/or jet fuel fireball descend shaft
(2) Car 50 falls approx. 17 floors taking no more than 5s to reach B1
(3) Jet fuel droplets and/or jet fuel fireball descend 95 floors taking approx. 30s and 15s respectively
(4) The first basement explosion occured below car 50 and before it reached B1

Conclusion: whatever exploded below car 50 and before it reached B1 could not POSSIBLY have been caused by fuel droplets and/or jet fuel fireball.

Why would I have to shot down 1 to 3?. Number 1 to 3 are matters of fact, but the exact times etc are unknown and open to some speculation.

Number 4 I have debunked in post number 561, number 585 and number 586.

Here is yet another example, that I found by coincidence, of someone unable to locate the correct source of the noise inside a building, just like David Felipe. This account from the Marriott Hotel next to WTC 1 and WTC 2:

We walked up and saw other companies searching the lower floors. We made it up to 14 and took a breather. They were showing the probie how to force a door. I looked out a window and could see people on the rooftops of surrounding buildings that had jumped. We walked all the way to the north end and up to 17 or 18. The company was divided into two teams and we met at the south end landing outside the stairway. There was a rumbling and the building started to shake. The door blew open and blew the guys back. We crawled into a corner. The lights went out and the dust came in. I thought it might have been a bomb in the basement.

Source: http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/kothe.html

Yes he thought it was a bomb in the basement, but it was WTC 2 collapsing on top of the building he was inside.

Building parts hitting Marriott:
http://flickr.com/photos/19385954@N00/469530102/

This is what Marriott looked like after the collapse of WTC 2:
http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0111/biggart21.htm

 

[jhunter1163]

TWS, if there were bombs in the basement, why did the buildings collapse from the impact zones?

 

[Jonnyclueless]

#3 wqs debunked a while ago too.