Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
An Open Question about Nanothermite
#16
Niels Harrit, the author of the paper you referred to stated in an email about 2 months ago that he estimated it would require 240 tons PER FLOOR for each of the towers. That is absurd and on the face of it undercuts his claim about the NT.

We don't know why those red gray chips were in the dust... and that requires more study. The presence of micro spheres in the dust can be possibly attributed to the enormous heat associated with the mechanical grinding of all the *concrete* and some of the metal. We saw how fine the dust particle size was and this could easily ignite and melt from the heat of friction. It's conceivable that fine iron oxide and ground up aluminum reacted in an exothermic reaction and this might be the explanation for the enormous heat which was found for months below all three towers. The thermitic reaction with iron oxide doesn't even require a fresh source of oxygen. The towers had abundant amounts of iron oxide and aluminum.

I don't rule out that the collapses were initiated with some engineering intervention. The event was obviously intended to be blamed on Islamic terrorists, but it was understood that the planes alone could not destroy the towers, but that would be the cover/cause and it would be blamed on the weakening of the steel from the fires they planes started. If additional heat devices were strategically placed (relatively few) they would not require det chord or wiring or timing and would ignite from the fires naturally caused as a result of the plane strikes.

In fact, there WAS certainly weakening of the steel from the heat from the fires. It appears that this was not sufficient and so additional devices were possibly or likely placed which would provide more intense heat to add to further weaken the structure. The combination of plane destroyed columns, weakened steel from fires and additional heat (or a few explosives) would push the structure at around the plane strike zone to below its reserve strength. And then the upper floors would come crashing down and the entire floors system would progressively collapse. This approach exploited the mass of the towers to destroy the floors... leaving the columns without bracing and they buckled or teetered over.

I know many in the truth movement want to believe that those towers were so strong that they could not collapse. This is not true. Excessive loading of a floor would destroy it (locally) and all below (locally). But of course the excessive load was not applied locally but over the entire floor area.

It needs to be noted that both twins came down from destruction at the plane strikes zones and so the planes' traumas DID contribute to their demise. Or was this an elaborate precision operation where the plane was direct to the precise area where all the devices were placed? I doubt that. More likely is that the anticipated fires would ignite the few placed devices AT the strike location and the fact would be sealed.

Further note the form of the beginning of the collapses of each tower. South tower rotated and dropped toward the plane strike damage at the SE corner of the core and the north tower's upper floors came almost straight down because the plane damage was in the center of the long side of the core... This seems to reinforce the fact that the plane damage WAS a factor... though not the sole cause.

Building 7 is a more complex mystery. Though it had no plane damage and the debris from tower 1 did not damage the core.. there was a massive Con Ed sub station serving all of lower Manhattan at the lowest floors and the tower was built over it. The structure of 7 required 4 massive transfer trusses to transfer the loads core columns to pass over / around the substation. There were also massive gen sets to power the NYC OEM center located within and lower down in the core.

Building 7's failure was also core led. It's possibly that there was extensive core damage from burning diesel...and or the explosions of the huge transformers in the sub station, but not enough for the core to collapse. The fires went unfought because the substation blew, electric service was lost and no pumps could move water up to the sprinkler system... not to mention that the water main apparently was also destroyed.

There are credible reports that the DOB and the FDNY had set up a transit and noted that building 7 began to slightly distort in the afternoon... indicating that the frame was redistributing loads as some columns were failing and unable to carry their design load. The redistribution caused some twisting and torquing of the structure. At that point it wouldn't take much more to collapse the entire core and the building would follow.

Careful observation shows the core was destroyed in advance of the downward motion of the curtain wall which had 2.25 second period of free fall decent. Just before the curtain wall comes down the East penthouse can be seen plunging right down through the entire building... a sign that all the columns which supported it had buckled. This might have been the last stage of the core destruction or the first one... but there is good reason to believe that there was no core remain when the curtain wall came down... the part we CAN see.

We can also see that the north side of the curtain wall entire upper floors (20 or more) bows inward as it comes down... an obvious indication that there was nothing behind it to hold it flat. It did not dip in the center as that would have shattered all the glass... so it *folded* inward at the window frame connections. We can surmise that the collapsed core pulled the floors inward along with the 58 columns located just inside the curtain wall and rotated the lower spandrels just enough to push the curtain wall out a few inches.... just enough so that there was nothing beneath it and so it fell at free fall.

If the DOB and the FDNY felt that the tower was going to come down... which they publicly stated they feared would happen, it is conceivable that they could have *helped it come to pass*... but this and pre placed explosives is still speculation.

It should also be noted that the Deutschbank did not collapse and was CLOSER to the South tower then Building 7 was to the north tower. It did not have the extensive fires. It did not have huge storage tanks of diesel fuel. It did not sit atop a huge ConEd sub station. It did not have exotic transfer trusses to offset the core column loads. It did not have a long span column free office space.

Building 7 was a very strong building but it also had aspects which mitigated that strength and assisted in its demise. The NIST explanation was hardly correct.

NIST provided the support for the hijacker story and took the heat off PANYNJ, the engineers and the DOB who *conspired* to allow such vulnerable and *radical* structural designs to be built. There are few to no similar structural frames being built today.. and only a few smaller ones of that design. The OCT is also a cover up of incompetence of PANYNJ, the engineers, DOB and contractors... their collective responsibility and negligence was passed right over.

Look boss, the plane... the plane!
Reply


Messages In This Thread
An Open Question about Nanothermite - by Jeffrey Orling - 20-09-2011, 12:01 PM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  WTC-7 & NanoThermite Evidence Admitted into Court - in Denmark, not USA - Naturally! Peter Lemkin 0 3,868 24-03-2015, 04:07 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  The New World Trade Center Building is open for business. Drew Phipps 1 2,963 03-11-2014, 02:20 PM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  The explosive nature of nanothermite Lauren Johnson 6 7,759 20-10-2012, 01:01 PM
Last Post: Jeffrey Orling
  An Open Letter to Anthony Lawson about "Absurdities" James H. Fetzer 18 13,629 08-08-2011, 02:18 AM
Last Post: Kyle Burnett
  "Has nanothermite been oversold to the 9/11 Truth community?" James H. Fetzer 7 9,332 04-05-2011, 08:55 AM
Last Post: Kyle Burnett
  Pentagon 'Aircraft's' Flight Deck Door NEVER OPEN!!! NEW & NEWS!!!! Peter Lemkin 2 5,141 20-08-2010, 08:48 AM
Last Post: Carsten Wiethoff
  Using the McChrystal Moment to Raise a Forbidden Question Ed Jewett 0 2,867 25-06-2010, 02:28 AM
Last Post: Ed Jewett
  Good 12 Part Video Lecture On 911 Nanothermite! Peter Lemkin 4 4,796 20-08-2009, 05:49 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Quick Question re Helms in Iran 73?-77 Nathaniel Heidenheimer 5 6,528 20-02-2009, 06:32 PM
Last Post: David Guyatt

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)