06-08-2013, 11:33 AM
I don't consider the forum the appropriate place to get into technical discussions. I presented many technical points in the Where did the Towers Go thread which was one of the longest threads on this site. Where was Tony back then?
Peter Lemkin simply posts or reposts articles he finds on the web.
It is my belief based on what I have studied and the work I have done, some of which Tony has seen that the designs themselves had Achilles' heels and that the forces released (gravity) by the plane strikes and the heat from fires was enough to tip the towers from stable and standing over the brink to rapid progrssive failure.
I linked to the reasons why Tony's paper was discredited and in error. The discussion is complex... very complex and perhaps very technical. Even Tony does not believe (I think) that post initiation...the main collapse included devices. It simply fell from gravitational forces... as most intended demoltions do.
Most people understandably look at the buildings coming down and see them through almost a child's conception of the world. In fact, many will say that even a child can see that the towers weree exploding. Maybe the children should conduct the techincal investigation explaining the mechanism of collapse.
Tony has now taken to characterize me or my interest in understanding and sharing my views about 9/11 as the work of a government agent. How dare I attend a public event and meet friends or discuss my ideas with people or listen to the presentation of the "researchers". When I was in Hartford I carefully listened to MacQueen's presentation about witnesses to explosions. But he didn't discuss what explosions sound like and what things do explode or might have expoded at the towers which would be mistaken for bombs. And there were several. I've noted that the WTC had hundreds and hundreds of step down power transformers which rather frequently explode. The bigger the transformer the bigger the bang when they do. I've had several explode in my neighborhood and witnessed my neighbors and running to the street asking where the bomb was that exploded. Another one exploded a few days ago! MacQueen doesn't even consider that many of the reports of explosions were not bombs.
All bombs produce explosions
Not all explosions are produced by bombs
An intellectually honest discussion about the explosive sounds at the WTC on 9/11 would include all possible causes of explosions.
And then consider that rather early on in the morning people beleived that there was a terrorist attack. And what do terrorist's use for their attacks? Bombs... all manner of bombs.. IEDs, bombs strapped to people worn as vests... now we here of pressure cooker bombs, or fertilizer bombs. Everyone knew that the WTC was a target of the 93 bombing. When people think terrorism attack... every loud sound with be heard as a bomb... every explosion as a bomb. Did a single witness comment that the explosions sounded like transformers exploding? How many people have heard them explode.. or seen them explode? Very few...and that includes first responders, office workers and even fireman or police.
So the MacQueen report.. like the Szomboti takes some cherry picked observations... and frames the conclusion as if there were hundreds of witnesses to bomb sounds. But where is the evidence of steel exploded by bombs? Where is a single steel column or beam which shows the tell tale sign that it's been ripped apart by a bomb? Or even possibly suggesting that? There's not one the bomb advocates can show. And when asked to explain that... the answer is the site was scrubbed of evidence. Think about the absurdity of that claim... all the thousands of clean up workers were trained to spot the bomb evidence and get it removed and disposed of before anyone could see it. And don't forget that the pile was perhaps a million or more tons or debris including hundreds of thousands to tons of steel... steel which required massive machinery to move. It tool almost a year to clean the site. So the conspiracy included training 1000's of volunteers working for a year to pick out the evidence of CD and keep it from the public. And not one took a picture of anything unusual?
Where are the pics of the flowing melted steel (in rivers)? Where are the pieces that hardened? Wouldn't they be massive and heavy and hard to lift and move and conceal? How could this be hidden from the public?
Building 7 in many ways is the key to understanding that 9/11 was not an inside job... although truthers keep say it was precisely the proof that it was. They begin with their weird statement that since it was not hit by planes as the towers were.. faling down HAD to be a CD. This almost is an admission that the planes DID or may have contributed to the twins' collapse.
But what hasn't been discussed by NIST nor the truthers is the bizarre structure features of 7 and where those features were located and why they were there. 7 was built over top one of the 23 massive power sub stations for the city of NY. Just the decision to build over the tower after purchase of air rights is something that was never even looked into... especially considering there was a vacant lot across West Street when it was built... which remained vacant on 9/11. Why would anyone by air rights and do an expensive and complicated structure building over a power station and not on a vacant lot?
That structure was essentially like erecting a skyscaper on a bridge span... The load transfer structure was massive. But it was field erected and with bolts and welded plates. The connections WERE the weak links not the massive sections used to construct the transfer trusses and cantilever girders. Like a chain... it completely fails when the weakest link goes... these trusses completely fail when a connection fails. And it takes a lot less to fail a connection than it does to fail or buckle a member. And of course all of this is SEEN in the debris... destroyed connections and intact members. Could those connections have been attacked by placed devices? Why not? But where's the evidence of this? They could have had robots inside with torches cutting them too. Where's the evidence of this?
NIST has effectively provided cover for the engineers, developers and designers or the WTC... and Con Ed... all of whom share responsibility for the designs which unzipped as they did. How many buildings in NYC have 30,000 gallons of flammable fuel stored in them and under them? Only one that I know of - Building 7.
So why would anyone want to destroy 7? Truthers will tell you because it contained all manner of things which had to be destroyed and this was the expedient way.... SEC records and of course the control center for the demo of the WTC. Wouldn't a fire at any old time have taken care of the SEC records? Did these insiders who clearly were in the cross hairs of the SEC need to blow up the entire building along with the WTC and kill thousands? Does that make sense?
Where is the study by ANYONE about the performance of steel connections exposed to heat? All we hear is the massive box columns of the tower cores.... but there were no box columns where the collapse began in either tower. And no box columns so any signs of being exploded. Sure steel was mangled from dropping 1300 feet to the ground and having as much as 400,000 tons of debris fall in it. What would you expect?
I don't know the motives of those in the truth community. I suspect the followers people are simply pissed of at the lies of the government, the MIC and the DOD/NSS for their militaristic and fascist polices. I am too. But I am also aware that there are terrorists who are pissed enough to do something about the abuse of their people, and their lands. There wouldn't be all the counter insurgency BS if there was insurgencies bubbling up where there is oppression and exploitation. You don't think the violence Palestine is all staged by the Israelis so they can then attack the poor innocent Palestinians in a series of hundreds of false flag operations?
Does intel stage terror attacks to leverage their franchise... sure they do. Police do drug buy and busts and stings all the time. The entire war on drugs seems to be more about breaking the black community apart and locking them up then it does about the problems of substance abuse.
The cover up here was not the bombs placed within massively strong structures... but the fact that the structures were flawed designs and were vulnerable to the ravages of unfought fires. Engineers know that steel MUST be protected from the heat of fire and it's why steel has applied fire protection... As hard it is to accept once a frame weakens enough it can't stand... and that the events of 9/11 show this can and will happen in steel frames.
I suggest Tony do a study of the performance of the connections of the WTC buildings under fire/heat stress. I think this study will reveal why the frames came undone. Imagining bombs on the 24 core columns is pure fantasy. And it doesn't even explain the observed building movements as has been pointed out by others.
The public has been victimized by those who were supposed to explain what happened including the truth movement which is letting the inherent weaknesses in the designs get a pass.
Peter Lemkin simply posts or reposts articles he finds on the web.
It is my belief based on what I have studied and the work I have done, some of which Tony has seen that the designs themselves had Achilles' heels and that the forces released (gravity) by the plane strikes and the heat from fires was enough to tip the towers from stable and standing over the brink to rapid progrssive failure.
I linked to the reasons why Tony's paper was discredited and in error. The discussion is complex... very complex and perhaps very technical. Even Tony does not believe (I think) that post initiation...the main collapse included devices. It simply fell from gravitational forces... as most intended demoltions do.
Most people understandably look at the buildings coming down and see them through almost a child's conception of the world. In fact, many will say that even a child can see that the towers weree exploding. Maybe the children should conduct the techincal investigation explaining the mechanism of collapse.
Tony has now taken to characterize me or my interest in understanding and sharing my views about 9/11 as the work of a government agent. How dare I attend a public event and meet friends or discuss my ideas with people or listen to the presentation of the "researchers". When I was in Hartford I carefully listened to MacQueen's presentation about witnesses to explosions. But he didn't discuss what explosions sound like and what things do explode or might have expoded at the towers which would be mistaken for bombs. And there were several. I've noted that the WTC had hundreds and hundreds of step down power transformers which rather frequently explode. The bigger the transformer the bigger the bang when they do. I've had several explode in my neighborhood and witnessed my neighbors and running to the street asking where the bomb was that exploded. Another one exploded a few days ago! MacQueen doesn't even consider that many of the reports of explosions were not bombs.
All bombs produce explosions
Not all explosions are produced by bombs
An intellectually honest discussion about the explosive sounds at the WTC on 9/11 would include all possible causes of explosions.
And then consider that rather early on in the morning people beleived that there was a terrorist attack. And what do terrorist's use for their attacks? Bombs... all manner of bombs.. IEDs, bombs strapped to people worn as vests... now we here of pressure cooker bombs, or fertilizer bombs. Everyone knew that the WTC was a target of the 93 bombing. When people think terrorism attack... every loud sound with be heard as a bomb... every explosion as a bomb. Did a single witness comment that the explosions sounded like transformers exploding? How many people have heard them explode.. or seen them explode? Very few...and that includes first responders, office workers and even fireman or police.
So the MacQueen report.. like the Szomboti takes some cherry picked observations... and frames the conclusion as if there were hundreds of witnesses to bomb sounds. But where is the evidence of steel exploded by bombs? Where is a single steel column or beam which shows the tell tale sign that it's been ripped apart by a bomb? Or even possibly suggesting that? There's not one the bomb advocates can show. And when asked to explain that... the answer is the site was scrubbed of evidence. Think about the absurdity of that claim... all the thousands of clean up workers were trained to spot the bomb evidence and get it removed and disposed of before anyone could see it. And don't forget that the pile was perhaps a million or more tons or debris including hundreds of thousands to tons of steel... steel which required massive machinery to move. It tool almost a year to clean the site. So the conspiracy included training 1000's of volunteers working for a year to pick out the evidence of CD and keep it from the public. And not one took a picture of anything unusual?
Where are the pics of the flowing melted steel (in rivers)? Where are the pieces that hardened? Wouldn't they be massive and heavy and hard to lift and move and conceal? How could this be hidden from the public?
Building 7 in many ways is the key to understanding that 9/11 was not an inside job... although truthers keep say it was precisely the proof that it was. They begin with their weird statement that since it was not hit by planes as the towers were.. faling down HAD to be a CD. This almost is an admission that the planes DID or may have contributed to the twins' collapse.
But what hasn't been discussed by NIST nor the truthers is the bizarre structure features of 7 and where those features were located and why they were there. 7 was built over top one of the 23 massive power sub stations for the city of NY. Just the decision to build over the tower after purchase of air rights is something that was never even looked into... especially considering there was a vacant lot across West Street when it was built... which remained vacant on 9/11. Why would anyone by air rights and do an expensive and complicated structure building over a power station and not on a vacant lot?
That structure was essentially like erecting a skyscaper on a bridge span... The load transfer structure was massive. But it was field erected and with bolts and welded plates. The connections WERE the weak links not the massive sections used to construct the transfer trusses and cantilever girders. Like a chain... it completely fails when the weakest link goes... these trusses completely fail when a connection fails. And it takes a lot less to fail a connection than it does to fail or buckle a member. And of course all of this is SEEN in the debris... destroyed connections and intact members. Could those connections have been attacked by placed devices? Why not? But where's the evidence of this? They could have had robots inside with torches cutting them too. Where's the evidence of this?
NIST has effectively provided cover for the engineers, developers and designers or the WTC... and Con Ed... all of whom share responsibility for the designs which unzipped as they did. How many buildings in NYC have 30,000 gallons of flammable fuel stored in them and under them? Only one that I know of - Building 7.
So why would anyone want to destroy 7? Truthers will tell you because it contained all manner of things which had to be destroyed and this was the expedient way.... SEC records and of course the control center for the demo of the WTC. Wouldn't a fire at any old time have taken care of the SEC records? Did these insiders who clearly were in the cross hairs of the SEC need to blow up the entire building along with the WTC and kill thousands? Does that make sense?
Where is the study by ANYONE about the performance of steel connections exposed to heat? All we hear is the massive box columns of the tower cores.... but there were no box columns where the collapse began in either tower. And no box columns so any signs of being exploded. Sure steel was mangled from dropping 1300 feet to the ground and having as much as 400,000 tons of debris fall in it. What would you expect?
I don't know the motives of those in the truth community. I suspect the followers people are simply pissed of at the lies of the government, the MIC and the DOD/NSS for their militaristic and fascist polices. I am too. But I am also aware that there are terrorists who are pissed enough to do something about the abuse of their people, and their lands. There wouldn't be all the counter insurgency BS if there was insurgencies bubbling up where there is oppression and exploitation. You don't think the violence Palestine is all staged by the Israelis so they can then attack the poor innocent Palestinians in a series of hundreds of false flag operations?
Does intel stage terror attacks to leverage their franchise... sure they do. Police do drug buy and busts and stings all the time. The entire war on drugs seems to be more about breaking the black community apart and locking them up then it does about the problems of substance abuse.
The cover up here was not the bombs placed within massively strong structures... but the fact that the structures were flawed designs and were vulnerable to the ravages of unfought fires. Engineers know that steel MUST be protected from the heat of fire and it's why steel has applied fire protection... As hard it is to accept once a frame weakens enough it can't stand... and that the events of 9/11 show this can and will happen in steel frames.
I suggest Tony do a study of the performance of the connections of the WTC buildings under fire/heat stress. I think this study will reveal why the frames came undone. Imagining bombs on the 24 core columns is pure fantasy. And it doesn't even explain the observed building movements as has been pointed out by others.
The public has been victimized by those who were supposed to explain what happened including the truth movement which is letting the inherent weaknesses in the designs get a pass.