14-08-2013, 10:44 PM
Phil Dragoo Wrote:We were presented with an emotional psychological operation on September 11, 2001, a contrived "tragedy" arising from an act of "terrorism" in order to mobilize us for two wars, where "us" is the American body politic.
....
NIST's Hypothesis of Total Collapse:
Three essential elements of NIST's hypothesis of total collapse are made explicit in the Final Report and the companion volumes of the study:
1. Because of damage to stories 93 to 98, and especially because of column buckling due to fire, the top 12 stories of the North Tower (99-110) plus the roof were, in effect, separated from the rest of the Tower and began to behave as a unit. [2]
2. This "rigid block" of 12 stories plus the roof began to move. First it tilted, and then it abruptly
fell onto the stories beneath it. [3]
3. The fall of the rigid block caused such damage to the lower structure that "global collapse began."[4]
NIST explanation is wrong. Does not make it a CD. Other explanations have been advanced which match the obsevations including witness testimony.
There follows a meticulous study of the fall of the floors leading to
Conclusions
We have tracked the fall of the roof of the North Tower through 114.4 feet, (approximately 9 stories) and we have found that it did not suffer severe and sudden impact or abrupt deceleration. There was no jolt. Thus there could not have been any amplified load. In the absence of an amplified load there is no mechanism to explain the collapse of the lower portion of the building, which was undamaged by fire. The collapse hypothesis of Bazant and the authors of the NIST report has not withstood scrutiny.
The motion did not show smooth accerlation. Tony's data is not the best. What you see in any case is the facade and you have no way of knowing it was a BLOCK. But there are ways to know that it wasn't because of pre release movements no limited to to drop of the antenna before "release"
~~~
I thank Tony Szamboli for correcting my conflation of terms in his 347--in fact, I intended to write floor truss, not hat truss--as the model presented in the official animation showed floor trusses weakened by heat and sagging an exaggerated amount pulling in facades and causing irreversible collapse.
The weakening by fire has not been proved but is essential to the official model--it is central to Jeffrey's scenario at 351 of a core collapse due to physical damage and temperature weakening which left twelve stories of load depending in tension from the hat truss which imploded and pulled in the facade.
Tony disagrees, stating the hat truss a-frames were not adequate for the forces implied.
The actual temps is indeterminate. There were no thermo couples and no one can dispute that heat DOES reduce the strength of steel If the core DID collapse as movements at parts of the facade suggest it means that the core was gone and the floors were no longer supported... integrity gone.
The conclusions I posted at 345 of David Chandler, Graeme MacQueen and Tony Samboli indicate heat weakening did not reduce the core strength, but that sequential charges may well have done.
Pure speculation without a shred of evidence.
The Bazant falling block or pile driver is not shown, no more so than the heat weakening or the plane damage.
Not quite... there was no block drop and Bazant was simply a theoretical limiting case.
The official explanation for the North Tower collapse is defended even as it is unsupported, much as the single-bullet or Magic Bullet contrivance arising out of the ambitious and unscrupulous Arlen Specter faced with the inconvenient wound to James Tague's cheek.
Comparison is not a factual basis for a conclusion.
By what alchemy was the extreme temperature necessary to weaken steel produced by the burning jet fuel which was gone in ten minutes--
The fires burned continuously... look at the video. There were other things burning as well... carpet, plastics and furnute. The fire was continuous up until collapse.
--or by the office furniture which, although toxic and dramatic, cannot "melt" steel?
No steel was melted... doesn't have to reach melting point to lose enough strength to fail
The dropping antenna indicates core column failure, but the official explanation fails to explain.
Official explanation is wrong. Unofficial explanation have accounted for antenna drop.
Any more than separation of domestic and foreign intelligence explains the disbanding of Able Danger as it identifed a 9/11 cell in CONUS a year before the event.
Or the sabotage and sidelining of John O'Neill when the FBI counterterrorism chief warned of such an attack
or Special Agent Colleen Rowley whose warnings of Middle Eastern men taking flying lessons sans takeoff and landing were ignored by her FBI supervisors
Not related to the technical issues
Ace Elevator had access--
Supposedly they were doing an elevator upgrade.
(is that a typo. . .shouldn't it be Wiley Coyote's Acme Elevator)
No one heard explosions--someone still makes that claim
When a fireman describes boom boom boom
Massive sections of dropping floors would make a sound described as boom boom boom. If you think another word is more appropriate... please let on.
comments in red