Loose Change - Part III

[WildCat]

I don't believe that is it.
The final won't be out until Dec.
I believe that's from Apr 5 2005
The HTML cache
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:Z6PqgHiSJQAJ:wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%2520Part%2520IIC%2520-%2520WTC%25207%2520Collapse%2520Final.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

Damn, that sucks. Had my hopes up.

 

[gumboot]

"Not to mention the enormous pools of molten metal that were found at the subbasement level three, four, and five weeks later. For more, consult Steve."

I like this. I like how one piece of footage of clean-up crews lifting up salmon-hot (not molten) steel beams suddenly becomes "enormous pools of molten metal".

-Andrew

EDT. Typo

 

[Belz...]

If anyone still doubts the self importance factor of the CT'er's check the thread here;


http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8135

Definitely the issue of the day.

(pssst - Editing is not censorship!)

She doesn't know what free speech is, does she ?

 

[Kent1]

A CTer reading this would only see the following:

I can show you a great example of this with Steven Jones
See if you can spot how he re-wrote it.

First the original from FEMA

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.

Now the Jones version:
(MISSING FIRST LINE) The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse [“official theory”] remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis [fire/debris-damage-caused collapse] has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue. (FEMA, 2002, chapter 5; emphasis added.)

 

[Belz...]

Someone here went through the calculations of how much energy is available from just the falling mass of the building, versus that from explosives, and you'd have to have some godawful amount of explosives to match the gravitational energy from the building. So if the energy from the buildng's fall wasn't enough to cause all that dust, what did?

I'd like to see those calculations again; it would be nice thing to have handy to embarass CTs with.

These guys place too much weight on Hollywood movies. I might be wrong, but I think the collapse of a building is far more energetic than any explosive used to demolish it. They seem to think that a few kilos of C4 can anihilate an entire city block.

 

[Belz...]

Thought you all might enjoy the latest thread, or at least the one I found most amusing. Wonder where DJ has gotten to with his debunking of Gravy?

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8161

Dammit. That Chucksheen just keeps laying those golden eggs, doesn't he? :

There are personal attacks and it doesn't denounce the more important coincidences, red flags, smoking guns, cover ups, Bush-Cheney testified out of oath in private, holes, evidence, clues, reputation, etc.

Yeah. Those damn coincidences and red flags and smoking guns and cover ups prove... er... pretty much nothin'.

 

[JamesB]

I like this. I like how one piece of footage of clean-up crews lifting up salmon-hot (not molten) steel beams suddenly becomes "enormous pools of molten metal".

-Andrew

EDT. Typo

The same way that electrical repairs in part of one tower suddenly becomes "all of the world trade center was evacuated and the security was shut down".

 

[Kent1]

I like this. I like how one piece of footage of clean-up crews lifting up salmon-hot (not molten) steel beams suddenly becomes "enormous pools of molten metal".

-Andrew

EDT. Typo

While a lot of the article is pandering to the CT'ers I like this part

Trained in nuclear and atomic physics at the University of California, Los Angeles, Cahill now specializes in the transport of aerosols and their radiative effects in the atmosphere. He has performed the most definitive studies to date on the pollutants that smoldered up out of Ground Zero’s rubble piles and into the lungs of cleanup workers.

Cahill arrived at Ground Zero weeks after the reports of molten metal at the scene, but his extensive research on why the rubble piles smoldered so long was of interest to controlled-demolition theorists, who believed molten steel in the bottom of the piles provided the heat source. Such was not the case, Cahill said. Instead, fuel oil from the WTC’s generators seeped into the ground, ignited and slowly consumed the debris stacked on top of it. As the piles were peeled open, oxygen stoked the underground fire, which burned for weeks.

http://209.63.142.214/issues/sacto/2006-06-22/cover.asp

 

[WildCat]

I like this. I like how one piece of footage of clean-up crews lifting up salmon-hot (not molten) steel beams suddenly becomes "enormous pools of molten metal".

-Andrew

EDT. Typo

There were actually reports of molten metal (not steel) by credible witnesses, such as Richard Garlock (IIRC he is a structural engineer):

The debris past the columns was red-hot, molten, running.

http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/engineering/engineering_debris_06.html

 

[gumboot]

There were actually reports of molten metal (not steel) by credible witnesses, such as Richard Garlock (IIRC he is a structural engineer):

http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/engineering/engineering_debris_06.html

If it was red hot and molten as per the description, it isn't steel. Aluminium happens to melt at "cherry red" temperatures. Coincidence? I think not.

-Andrew

 

[Kent1]

If it was red hot and molten as per the description, it isn't steel. Aluminium happens to melt at "cherry red" temperatures. Coincidence? I think not.

-Andrew

Likey it was a hodge podge of different garbage with the aluminum raising the blackbody. What Jones doesn't seem to understand is that the aluminum doesn't have to be pure.

Its one of his many bad assumptions.
Like thinking that the fire can't get to 1000C or higher.

 

[SRW]

letter to the editor

Time for Sept. 11 probe

Letters to the editor

Your June 26 editorial, "A memorial befitting 9/11," highlighted our nation's need for closure on Sept. 11. Recently an FBI spokesman, Rex Tomb, stated that "the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to 9/11."
What, you ask. Didn't he admit it on videotape? Didn't we start two wars based on that evidence?
Some physicists and Massachusetts Institute of Technology engineers claim that the airliners' impact and the exploding fuel alone could not have caused the near free-fall collapse of the Twin Towers. The Internet is abuzz with alternative versions and conspiracy theories. Surveys by Pew and Zogby found that more than half of the people in the Arab countries and large segments of the population elsewhere, including New York, have not accepted the official version of the events. Many questions from victim family members remained unanswered by the official Sept. 11 commission.
Almost five years have passed. For the sake of closure, to honor the memory of the victims, and to put divisive conspiracy theories to rest, we need to have a new, complete and fully independent investigation


This was in my local paper this morning, I am putting together a reply any glaring mistakes I can point out other than the free fall bs?

TIA Steve

 

[dubfan]

Time for Sept. 11 probe

Letters to the editor


Some physicists and Massachusetts Institute of Technology engineers claim

The "MIT Engineer" (note singular -- NOT plural) who supports the CT, is probably Jeff "jumping carpeted floors" King. He is not an "MIT Engineer". He received his undergrad degree in electrical engineering (IIRC) from MIT in the mid-70s.

He's been a practicing physician for the last 25 years. He has no current affiliation with MIT *at all*.

PlaguePuppy is the nom-de-net of Jeffrey King, a 50-something former engineer (MIT class of '74, about 10 years in electronics and electro-mechanical engineering), gainfully employed as a family physician for the past 25 years. See here for more details: http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/Confronting the Evidence/index.htm#Pupp

http://home.comcast.net/~jeffrey.king2/wsb/html/view.cgi-about.html-.html

 

[realitybites]

MIT huh? I didn't go to school in the 70s, so maybe some of the more seasoned vets here can answer this question for me.

Back then, did they teach the concept of the sun rising in the east and setting in the west? Or did that theory come along later under the Reagan administration?

Reason I ask is because PlaguePuppy seems to think this photo of the collapse of the north tower has a "bright glow" about it.

Now I didn't go to MIT, but being that the photographer is looking south, and the "glow" appears to be only on the eastern side, would it be reasonable to assume that it's just the morning sun reflecting off the dust cloud and debris?

 

[SRW]

MIT huh? I didn't go to school in the 70s, so maybe some of the more seasoned vets here can answer this question for me.

Back then, did they teach the concept of the sun rising in the east and setting in the west? Or did that theory come along later under the Reagan administration?

Reason I ask is because PlaguePuppy seems to think this photo of the collapse of the north tower has a "bright glow" about it.

Now I didn't go to MIT, but being that the photographer is looking south, and the "glow" appears to be only on the eastern side, would it be reasonable to assume that it's just the morning sun reflecting off the dust cloud and debris?

As I recall from being in college in the 70's...wow, I don't recall all that much about it. I do distinctly recall getting into an argument with some one who used to get high and watch the sun rise over the beach in California. Well it was not MIT but UCONN is not all that bad.

 

[realitybites]

Totally pointless, but in the search for my new avatar (inspired by the fine folks over at SLC), I came across this pic. Just kinda struck me funny.

 

[gumboot]

Some physicists and Massachusetts Institute of Technology engineers claim that the airliners' impact and the exploding fuel alone could not have caused the near free-fall collapse of the Twin Towers.

You have already pulled up the "Free-fall" BS, but it is also worth noting that the official NIST report also claims the aircraft impact and exploding fuel alone cound not hace caused the collapse of the Twin Towers.

They maintain it was a combination of the following:
1) Impact force damaging the structure of the building
2) Impact force dislodging significant amounts of fire-proofing
3) Jet fuel causing extensive fires across entire expanses of multiple floors simultaneously
4) Temperatures from these extensive fires further weakened structural integrity of building

2 and 3 are very important, and 3 especially is often overlooked. Normally fire in a building starts in a small location and spreads slowly. Consider the 1 acre area of each floor of the WTC. Consider how long an open fire in a field takes to spread from a single spot to cover an acre.

What this means is normally, even in a severe fire that spreads across multiple floors, only a very small area is at maximum temperate at any given time. So only a small part of the structure is exposed to potentially steel-weakening temperatures at a given moment. As the "hot spot" moves on the steel hardens again and takes the weight off the bit that is now exposed to the fire.

But at the WTC the fuel spread across great swathes of multiple floors and started equal intensity fires there ALL AT THE SAME TIME. This meant in any given moment a significant percentage of the load-bearing structure was exposed to potentially steel-weakening temperatures within the fire zone.

Surveys by Pew and Zogby found that more than half of the people in the Arab countries ... have not accepted the official version of the events.

Well gee.... isn't that a surprise? I think we should also let the Arab world choose the USA's next president...

-Andrew

 

[MikeW]

There were actually reports of molten metal (not steel) by credible witnesses, such as Richard Garlock (IIRC he is a structural engineer):

http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/engineering/engineering_debris_06.html

And of course the problem with that quote is it's talking about "molten metal" below WTC6. 6? Does that mean they put thermite/thermate in there, too? Or could it be that just regular fires were hot enough to produce these reports, after all?

 

[Brainster]

Time for Sept. 11 probe

Letters to the editor

Your June 26 editorial, "A memorial befitting 9/11," highlighted our nation's need for closure on Sept. 11. Recently an FBI spokesman, Rex Tomb, stated that "the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to 9/11."
What, you ask. Didn't he admit it on videotape? Didn't we start two wars based on that evidence?
Some physicists and Massachusetts Institute of Technology engineers claim that the airliners' impact and the exploding fuel alone could not have caused the near free-fall collapse of the Twin Towers. The Internet is abuzz with alternative versions and conspiracy theories. Surveys by Pew and Zogby found that more than half of the people in the Arab countries and large segments of the population elsewhere, including New York, have not accepted the official version of the events. Many questions from victim family members remained unanswered by the official Sept. 11 commission.
Almost five years have passed. For the sake of closure, to honor the memory of the victims, and to put divisive conspiracy theories to rest, we need to have a new, complete and fully independent investigation


This was in my local paper this morning, I am putting together a reply any glaring mistakes I can point out other than the free fall bs?

TIA Steve

I'd point out that Zacharias Moussaoui recently became the first person convicted of complicity in the attacks, that Osama has confessed to his involvement on several occasions so far, most recently in the last month, and that the polls cited also indicate that among those most likely to agree with the request for another investigation are high school dropouts, while those least likely were college graduates, and that another investigation will not satisfy the kooks as it will come to the same conclusions as the last investigation.

 

[60hzxtl]

I'd point out that Zacharias Moussaoui recently became the first person convicted of complicity in the attacks, that Osama has confessed to his involvement on several occasions so far, most recently in the last month, and that the polls cited also indicate that among those most likely to agree with the request for another investigation are high school dropouts, while those least likely were college graduates, and that another investigation will not satisfy the kooks as it will come to the same conclusions as the last investigation.

You left out perpetual students looking to live off a government grant to "study" this situation forever, and Ivory Tower academics looking to become "experts" in the field and assured a job for life.

And as far as "diverse conspiracy theories" being put to rest? As fast as you answer them, they cook up another. (see first paragraph).