Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis
Tony Szamboti Wrote:Albert, if you believe that 911 was perpetrated by insiders and there was a lot more to it than 19 hijackers and four airplanes I owe you an apology.



I don't believe it - I know it. However I think the apology should be made for not answering how no firefighters in the stairwell reported thermite fires around them just before the tower fell. I remain agnostic on the controlled demolition. Certainly there's enough premeditation to make placed charges very possible. I just don't think they were necessarily the cause of the collapses.


The South Tower could have come down first because there was more weight above the damage area. Your controlled demolition claim has trouble there because that is a basic indicator of weakness/stress-based initiation of the collapse.
Quote:Your controlled demolition claim has trouble there because that is a basic indicator of weakness/stress-based initiation of the collapse.

Are you an engineer or did you get this from somewhere reputable? Or did you just make something up just now?
"We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I

"We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl
Tony, your observation of anomalies in the elevator renovation and the construction of the emergency center in 7 parallel the motorcade route, the ownership of the Depository, the witnesses citing evidence of men moving into position:

The charges were most likely set in WTC 7 when Rudy Giuliani's OEM bunker on the 23rd floor was built as the AMEC company had access to the entire building for ventilation and back-up power. This is why Rudy insisted on putting his bunker there.

The charges in the towers would have been placed during the elevator renovation project occurring for eight months prior to Sept. 11, 2001. ACE Elevator was a front company with the towers being 90% of their business. It is hard to understand how they could ever beat out Otis Elevator for the maintenance contract and be considered competent enough to do the elevator renovation project. In 2011 the Empire State Building let a contract to Otis to do its elevator renovation on its 67 elevator system and they only considered three companies competent enough to bid on it (Otis, Schindler, and Thyssen-Krupp). The Twin Towers had 99 elevators each.


Regarding 7, this article has several items of interest:

[URL="http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_07.htm"]http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_07.htm

[/URL]
At 5:20 p.m., the massive 47-story steel frame Building 7, untouched by the hijacked airplanes, imploded in the exact manner of a professionally engineered demolition - at near free-fall speed, straight down, and with scientific precision into a compact pile of rubble, barely damaging any of the surrounding buildings. Watch Video

The official explanation for the collapse is fire - as in fire weakened the building's structural support steel to the point where it could no longer hold its own weight upright. The magazine Popular Mechanics has tried to posit the theory of lethal structural damage caused by the falling debris of the North Tower as reason for Building 7's collapse. But no existing public photographs, nor videos, show anything near their claim that 1/3 of Building 7's façade was gouged out. Furthermore, even if structural damage was significant, this would not account for Building 7's eventual symmetrical, box-like collapse, where all four corners, and all four facades of the building fell simultaneously straight to the ground. And most significantly, the official government explanation is still fire. So this essay will stay with fire as the stated cause.
Flames were visible on 3-4 floors of the building, having been apparently ignited by falling debris and ruptured diesel tanks at the base of the structure. And while relatively minor in severity, these fires were apparently responsible for the building's demise. But fire as the cause for collapse poses a number of significant problems - problems that break fundamental laws of nature. Firstly, fire from diesel fuel and building debris does not remotely approach the necessary temperature required to weaken and melt steel. Steel is melted and forged in sophisticated blast furnaces at incredibly high temperatures. Secondly, even if fire did cause the necessary weakening of the buildings steel support beams, each of those more than 50 beams would have had to weaken and fail at the exact same time to account for the symmetrical downward trajectory of the collapse. A wildly contentious scenario.
~~~

Another, and perhaps stronger, piece of evidence for controlled demolition of Building 7 is the speed at which the structure fell. It was a 576-foot tall building, and a conservative estimate of available video evidence shows that it fell in 6.5 seconds. A marble, with nothing but wind resistance in its path, would fall to the ground from the same height in roughly 6 seconds. Somehow, the top of this building fell to the ground in a perfectly symmetrical downward trajectory, with 47 floors of steel, concrete, and thousands of tons of upright standing debris in its path providing huge amounts of vertical resistance, at virtually free-fall speed. Allegedly because of random fires on a few floors. This is a physical and mathematical impossibility, violating laws in the conservation of momentum covered at length in this paper by Dr. Kenneth Kuttler here. Or go to the June 2006, Volume 1 edition of this online journal here.
~~~

Because all available evidence points to this controlled demolition as the most logical reason for Building 7's particular collapse pattern, serious questions now need answering. To wire a building of that size for implosion requires weeks of careful study and planning. Which means whoever wired the explosives knew far in advance of the September 11 plot. So who? And why? Perhaps Larry Silverstein has an answer. In July of 2001, 2 months before the attack, the new leaseholder of the Twin Towers and Building 7 took out a huge insurance policy on his buildings. In it, there was a special clause 'in case of terrorist attack'. As a result of the collapse of Building 7, Larry Silverstein pocketed almost $1 Billion, $500 million of it in profits. For the collapse of the Twin Towers, which he also owned, Silverstein argued in court that he should be compensated twice because two separate airplanes flew into his two separate buildings. And this, according to his argument, constituted two terrorist attacks. He won this argument, and was awarded $7 Billion for the Towers' collapse, quite a return for his initial investment.
~~~

Perhaps a government official from the CIA, Department of Defense, the IRS, the SEC branch investigating the infamous Wall Street corporate fraud cases, the Secret Service, or New York City's Office of Emergency Management (OEM) knows something about Building 7's odd collapse. All of those agencies strangely had offices in Building 7. The presence of OEM is particularly disturbing. They occupied a recently reinforced bunker-like space on the 23rd floor. Equipped with bulletproof windows, bomb-proof walls, and hurricane resistant windows, the office housed a sophisticated command center with top of the line military communication and logistical equipment. Perhaps Building 7 was a command center of a different kind, used as the true Ground Zero for the operation carried out on 9/11. A command center that became a crime scene after 8:46 a.m. that morning. A command center that needed to be destroyed.
Perhaps this OEM department could also explain the miraculously coincidental fact that on September 10, FEMA officials, in conjunction with NYC authorities, had arrived in the city and set up a command post near the World Trade Center for an extensive simulated terrorist attack operation to be carried out on September 12. Perhaps Mayor Rudolph Giuliani could shed some light on this subject. He confirmed this miraculous coincidence in his own testimony to the 9/11 Commission, all of which, unsurprisingly, never made it into their 'official' Report. "... the reason Pier 92 was selected as a command center was because on the next day, on September 12, Pier 92 was going to have a drill, it had hundreds of people here, from FEMA, from the Federal Government, from the State, from the State Emergency Management Office, and they were getting ready for a drill for biochemical attack. So that was gonna be the place they were going to have the drill. The equipment was already there, so we were able to establish a command center there, within three days, that was two and a half to three times bigger than the command center that we had lost at 7 World Trade Center. And it was from there that the rest of the search and rescue effort was completed."
~~~

Phil's note: We see a "drill" conducted at the scene of a covert operation, as per that said to be in progress in Dealey, at Murrah where ATF heros broke open elevator doors--oh, that's right, they lied.

Speaking of elevators:

An introductory query is made here:


Ace Elevator had basically 1 customer, the WTC.
How could it get the most lucrative contract in elevator history
without a track record of many customers?

Why did Ace Elevator workers disappear on 9/11?
Why were they never questioned or mentioned by the 9/11 Commission?

[URL="http://aneta.org/911experiments_com/AceElevator/"]http://aneta.org/911experiments_com/AceElevator/


[/URL]
To which I will add Peter's fascinating mystery, the elevator renovation massive in scope until the very day of collapse for which no record can be found:

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...tion-work!

And an insight regarding Ace access to core columns:

The architectural drawings of the WTC North Tower have been leaked from an individual associated with the Silverstein-Weidlinger Report. They reveal that the large box columns of the core maintain their 30"x16" and 52"x22" dimensions at least up through the 66th floor. They also indicate that most of the core columns would be easily accessed from the elevator shafts in order to plant explosives. We know that the elevators were being modernized by Ace Elevator during the 9 months prior to 9/11.

Available with more at: http://www2.ae911truth.org/twintowers.php including the video described here:


[URL="http://www.ae911truth.net/videos/gallery/MoltenMetalFlowsatGrPFC.wmv"]
[/URL] In addition to the FDNY witnessing the molten metal, Leslie Robertson, the structural engineer of the WTC noted: "As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running," at the National Conference of Structural Engineers on October 5, 2001.


Of course what does he know; what does he think he is, the structural engineer for the towers? Oh, wait a minute. . . .

Means, motive, opportunity. And no discernible scruples. War and its profits. America, Hell yeah.

Now do tell us a fairy tale that there be no dragons. . . .
Albert Doyle Wrote:
Tony Szamboti Wrote:Albert, if you believe that 911 was perpetrated by insiders and there was a lot more to it than 19 hijackers and four airplanes I owe you an apology.



I don't believe it - I know it. However I think the apology should be made for not answering how no firefighters in the stairwell reported thermite fires around them just before the tower fell.

I don't think I saw your observation that no firefighters reported thermite in the stairwells.

There was only one radio transmission from firefighters who were near fires, and that from the South Tower three minutes before it fell, when chief Orio Palmer said they had reached the fire on the 78th floor and said they could knock it down with two lines. Thermite very likely would have been used on critical joints and wouldn't have been anywhere near the stairwells.

Quote:I remain agnostic on the controlled demolition. Certainly there's enough premeditation to make placed charges very possible. I just don't think they were necessarily the cause of the collapses.

The columns were certainly not involved in the collapses and the only plausible explanation I can think of is controlled demolition with devices eliminating their ability to provide structural resistance. In addition to the lack of column involvement and no deceleration problems for a natural collapse in the North Tower there is also video evidence of focused and concentrated blowouts which can only be from squibs. See this short video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8

Quote:The South Tower could have come down first because there was more weight above the damage area. Your controlled demolition claim has trouble there because that is a basic indicator of weakness/stress-based initiation of the collapse.

Don't you understand that the building got stronger as you moved down the tower? It was a virtual pyramid strength wise. The columns under the 28 story load on the South Tower were built to withstand an average of four times the load above them, just like the columns under the 12 story load on the North Tower were built to withstand an average of four times the load above them. The further down you went the bigger the columns got to handle the bigger load above them.
Phil Dragoo Wrote:[URL="http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_07.htm"]

[/URL]
...

Phil's note: We see a "drill" conducted at the scene of a covert operation, as per that said to be in progress in Dealey, at Murrah where ATF heros broke open elevator doors--oh, that's right, they lied.

...
[URL="http://www.ae911truth.net/videos/gallery/MoltenMetalFlowsatGrPFC.wmv"]
[/URL]In addition to the FDNY witnessing the molten metal, Leslie Robertson, the structural engineer of the WTC noted: "As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running," at the National Conference of Structural Engineers on October 5, 2001.


Of course what does he know; what does he think he is, the structural engineer for the towers? Oh, wait a minute. . . .

Phil, this is all very intriguing material. And thanks for reporting the statement from Robertson. I wonder what must really be going through his mind.
Tony Szamboti Wrote:Thermite very likely would have been used on critical joints and wouldn't have been anywhere near the stairwells.

Location of initial structure failure correctly identified. Cause pure speculation and not evidence to support this... other than your political beliefs. The stairs being in the cure were adjacent to core columns... but all the vertical shafts very what was defined by core columns.

The columns were certainly not involved in the collapses and the only plausible explanation I can think of is controlled demolition with devices eliminating their ability to provide structural resistance. In addition to the lack of column involvement and no deceleration problems for a natural collapse in the North Tower there is also video evidence of focused and concentrated blowouts which can only be from squibs. See this short video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8

Squibs... you don't know what caused the material to be ejected other than over pressure and there are many things ASIDE from bombs which cause over pressure.

Don't you understand that the building got stronger as you moved down the tower? It was a virtual pyramid strength wise. The columns under the 28 story load on the South Tower were built to withstand an average of four times the load above them, just like the columns under the 12 story load on the North Tower were built to withstand an average of four times the load above them. The further down you went the bigger the columns got to handle the bigger load above them.

Column strength had not to do with resisting the collapse. You know it was the floors which broke free, where shattered and flowed down inside the tower with no column involvement. The facade columns fell away after losing bracing and the core collapsed from Euler caused instability.

So why didn't the perps just burn all those SEC files with a few cans of gasoline? They chose the simple operation to dismantle (according to AE911T) a floors of 81 columns?.... or more likely the joints / connections of the massive transfer structures which supported the 40 stories of the core over the Con Ed sub stations.

Take of your blinders and be intellectual honest about the observations and learn to distinguish between your speculation driven by your bias and the actual observations and data. Yes CD could produce the observations... but there is no evidence for it and the heat was weakening those connections leading to the global failures. You refuse to accept this causality as possible. I think you are incorrect. False certainty on your part.

And no need to call someone who disagrees with you a plant or agent of the fascists. That, Tony, is very telling. Attack the character of those who disagree with you. A cheap shot and rather unconvincing... especially without a smidgen of evidence.
Albert Rossi Wrote:
Phil Dragoo Wrote:[URL="http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_07.htm"]

[/URL]
...

Phil's note: We see a "drill" conducted at the scene of a covert operation, as per that said to be in progress in Dealey, at Murrah where ATF heros broke open elevator doors--oh, that's right, they lied.

...
[URL="http://www.ae911truth.net/videos/gallery/MoltenMetalFlowsatGrPFC.wmv"]
[/URL]In addition to the FDNY witnessing the molten metal, Leslie Robertson, the structural engineer of the WTC noted: "As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running," at the National Conference of Structural Engineers on October 5, 2001.


Of course what does he know; what does he think he is, the structural engineer for the towers? Oh, wait a minute. . . .

Phil, this is all very intriguing material. And thanks for reporting the statement from Robertson. I wonder what must really be going through his mind.

This Robertson quote... needs context and verification.

But note that the engineer Irwin Cantor of bldg 7 stated that he believed diesel fires weakened and led to the failure of the transfer trusses and the collapse of 7.

Robertson is not an expert and building collapses or fires which burn for months under rubble of burning collapsed buildings. As him about the design decisions he made which facilitated his towers to collapse so easily. Ask him to explain how they came to collapse. That would be telling.
I find David Chandler's video giving evidence of the sounds of sequential explosions captured in the directional mic of NBC TV reporter Ashleigh Banfield just prior to the collapse of WTC 7 to be persuasive.

"We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I

"We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl
This is just nonsense.

The distraction of the sound that Banfield heard was the stucture breaking and collapsing int he load trqasfer region below floor 7 as I mentioned. You can see the dust being ejected from this. And the low rumbling sounds are not percussive sounds that explosives make. This is typical of Chandler usinghis bias and attempting to dress it up with what appears to be scientific analysis.

Were there rumbling sounds associated with all the collapses? YES Just before or as motion begins (release) YES.

Please consider that sound travels 1100 feet per second. Witnesses on the ground would hear sounds of the twins tops crashing down 1 second after they could see it. This IS disorienting for sure, but none of these witnesses could connect the sound as occuring BEFORE the motion or collapse. The sounds were made AS the structure was collapsing.

Building 7 is hardly different. The banfield interview was conducted at leat 5 city blocks north of WTC 7 and by the time they heart something.... the rummble of the collapse... it is underway and they see the dust ejections... which they confuse as the pressure wave of an explosion. However it doesn't even LOOK like what an explosion produces.

More smoke and mirror of the prattling David Chandler who has mislead too many naive people.

Learn to think and analyze.

Truust but Verify.

You found this convincing because of your confirmation bias... you are hunting around to find proof of / for your fantasy. David is one hell of a snake oil salesman... but one of many.

What this clip does show is that the failure occured in the lowest floors where the load transfer structures were located... and supports the transfer truss theory as well as what the building's engineer Cantor believed. it refutes NIST and AE911T's fantasies. This is not sufficient evidence to deminstrate TTF, but one of many bits of evidence which in the aggregate supports that theory. All observations must support the correct theory.
Tony Szamboti Wrote:I don't think I saw your observation that no firefighters reported thermite in the stairwells.

There was only one radio transmission from firefighters who were near fires, and that from the South Tower three minutes before it fell, when chief Orio Palmer said they had reached the fire on the 78th floor and said they could knock it down with two lines. Thermite very likely would have been used on critical joints and wouldn't have been anywhere near the stairwells.




I beg to differ. A simple view of a cross-section blueprint of the tower would show the stairwells were mixed in to the core columns. The You-Tube video I linked showed that thermite burns with extreme sparkling intensity and smoke. If there were thermite packs in the columns they would have been seen burning for a few seconds and would have raised a burst of radio reports of thermitic fires in the stairwells by the firefighters who were trained to notice such things. Not a peep.




Tony Szamboti Wrote:The columns were certainly not involved in the collapses



You've been arguing they were. They would have to be by science. How could they not be? The North Tower, for instance, probably had a good percentage of the core cut through because of the center hit of Flight 11. I also wonder if a direct hit on a floor pad might push the whole pad through the core laterally like a cutter. The transfer of mass would be huge with a speeding 767.



Tony Szamboti Wrote:and the only plausible explanation I can think of is controlled demolition with devices eliminating their ability to provide structural resistance. In addition to the lack of column involvement and no deceleration problems for a natural collapse in the North Tower there is also video evidence of focused and concentrated blowouts which can only be from squibs. See this short video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8



I don't mean to start any thread problems but that video is laughable. Any fool can narrate a video to see and say what he wants. I heard a voice assuring me of things he wanted to see in that video. What I saw in that video fit exactly the collapse dynamic I tried to explain in my previous posts. First the controlled demolition people are saying there was thermite residue found in the wreckage. Yet here we have the narrator telling us a series of timed explosives charges cascaded in sequence down inside the building. So which one is it? Funny how that cascade happens exactly in synch with the pancaking floor pad theory. What CD proponents fail to fathom is the accelerated compressed air blast phenomenon that would collapse the floors faster than gravity and create all those visual clues the narrator is calling signs of explosions. This force would blast the core columns and the outer frame as you are seeing happen in the video. The outward force seen in those explosive dust bursts is something that would, by science, unzip the outer frame. A study of modern explosives shows that their components can be traced in wreckage residue. As I've already explained the unique hanging floor pad design with an inner core and outer frame may explain the lack of deceleration in the North tower. There was some delay in the initiation of the collapse where that deceleration could have occurred according to the design of the tower, and I don't see any detonation flashes in those cascading explosions.




Tony Szamboti Wrote:Don't you understand that the building got stronger as you moved down the tower? It was a virtual pyramid strength wise. The columns under the 28 story load on the South Tower were built to withstand an average of four times the load above them, just like the columns under the 12 story load on the North Tower were built to withstand an average of four times the load above them. The further down you went the bigger the columns got to handle the bigger load above them.



You obviously didn't absorb what I wrote before. Did it ever dawn on you what your video is showing is exactly the collapsing floor dynamic I spoke of where extreme air blast pressure caused by floor pads displacing air under extreme weight appeared as explosions and crushed the inner core as it progressed downward? Not only would this downward progressive dynamic occur faster than gravity but it would create results that were identical to what you see in the collapsing tower. What we are talking about here isn't a sturdy pyramid of structure under the collapsing section but a funnel of force contained by the outside frame that transferred extreme energy down the column in a unique phenomenon caused by the tower's hanging floor design. A pyramid doesn't have a huge structural void like the towers did. What we are talking about here is the isolated point where that extreme air blast pressure is turned laterally and focused on the columns in a direction where they were vulnerable to lateral forces they weren't designed for. While the vertical resistance of the columns may have been designed for 4 times overkill they were not designed for a massive force cutting against them laterally on an individual floor basis. You are looking at that lateral force in your video. It isn't explosives. It's extreme, blasting compressed air pressure.


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  WTC-7 Before Collapse - Video of activities inside and outside Peter Lemkin 0 4,991 04-12-2015, 09:45 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New Detailed Analysis of WTC 7 Controlled Demolition Peter Lemkin 0 5,236 01-12-2015, 04:42 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  The case against the NIST WTC 7 collapse initiation analysis Tony Szamboti 4 4,047 04-11-2013, 07:11 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New Analysis Summary Of 9-11-01 Insider Trading [with some very interesting facts, if true]! Peter Lemkin 4 5,553 28-10-2013, 03:01 PM
Last Post: David Guyatt
  Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis: Redux Lauren Johnson 0 3,728 16-08-2013, 03:39 AM
Last Post: Lauren Johnson
  New Seismic Analysis Further Points to Controlled Demolition.... Peter Lemkin 0 3,720 03-12-2012, 05:21 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  911 Meta Analysis Jeffrey Orling 18 10,680 23-10-2012, 08:54 PM
Last Post: Albert Doyle
  STill the best and most comprehensive timeline and information source for 911-related events Peter Lemkin 0 2,698 10-08-2012, 08:10 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New theory explains collapse of Twin Towers- Aluminium and water explosions Magda Hassan 7 9,256 27-09-2011, 05:47 PM
Last Post: Jeffrey Orling
  First Wikileaks Cable possibly related to 911, Al Quaeda, etc. Peter Lemkin 0 6,482 26-09-2011, 08:02 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)