Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
-
how much of the jetfuel was incinerated in the initial collision (the huge fireball at impact.. that had to be all jetfuel, right?)
would there be any fuel left to burn after, say, the first minute?
I know if I pour some gas on the ground and ignite it then the fire goes out in a matter of seconds.
just wondering if the fuel was still burning when the structure was compromised or was it entirely paper/furniture/etc burning at that time. ?
-
OK, so the whole 3000 degree thing is bogus. In any case, steel starts to fail before it even gets to 1000 degrees F, and jet fuel can burn at 1500 deg. Do a little googling and it's not hard to find reputable info. Where is the statement 3000 degrees for a week from? That's what I was laughing at, it's just rather suspect - there is no fuel source to sustain that kind of temperature.
-
There's a lot of energy in falling objects.
It turns to heat when it 'stops'... -
Well, yes, I understand about potential energy being converted to kinetic energy. Millions of tons of building material falling hundreds of feet will release a hell of a lot of energy. Not that there wasn't heat generated at all, It's just this 3000 deg thing is a claim of the truthers that jet fuel by itself couldn't get hot enough to cause the steel failure, hence must be explosives.
-
Its rather unfortunate that the entire 911 site was never designated a crime scene, that in, and by itself was a crime. If it had been, forensic exploration would have taken place. But someone made a decision to simply remove all the debris as soon as possible, before such action could or would have been allowed to take place. Hence there are only a few pictures of steel columns, like the attachment. Which raises the question about the the use of termite, and for which more that a few experts have lost their jobs, including Physicist Professor Stephen Jones. Does jet fuel really have the capacity to cut 2" thick steel diagonally? Note: the molten steel still remains solidified on the column as the temperature cooled. The official report is a total sham, and does not even discuss the collapse of WTC 7 which was not hit by a plane some 5 hours later.
-
@tomot said:
Does jet fuel really have the capacity to cut 2" thick steel diagonally?
No, but I bet ya a hundred stories of highrise collapsing will. -
-
@box said:
@tomot said:
Which raises the question about the the use of termite,
Highly trained Ninja Termites?
I think Pete left that one out of his funny pics post...
-
That's quite a well known picture of the column. There is no provenance for when it was taken. Truthers will have you believe it was immediately after the collapse...but there is no evidence for that. It could equally (in fact far more likely) have been taken days afterwards when the rescue and clear-up was well under way. Many such columns were then cut by oxy-acetylene in exactly that manner in order to create more manageable chunks for removal.
-
There is a wider shot showing what looks like oxyacetylene equipment nearby.
It's dirty tricks like this - and harassing members who don't toe the party line - that makes a mockery of AE911. Worse still it gets in the way of learning anything valuable from this tragedy.
-
@andybot said:
my main point of contention is that the explosives and the planes crashing would have to be coordinated to some degree. That would point to a broader conspiracy.
speaking of coordination...
sort of interesting to think about why the buildings were hit/collapsed in that order (wtc1 hit first fell 2nd)why did the demo engineer(s) time it in such a manner? you would naturally think that the 1st one hit would also fall first.. so they made a conscious decision to flip flop the sequence.. just curious as to why.. and why so late with wtc7? or maybe it was technical difficulties?
(*of course, all this assumes the buildings were brought down as a demolition instead of solely being an airstrike
)but leaving building 7 up for so long while it was rigged with explosives is just plain stupid of the engineers.. there's no way they could of been able to guarantee control of the building that day.. leaving it up so long left too much of a chance that their explosives etc would of been found by someone.
-
@unknownuser said:
i mean really.. what would it take? a group of 4 or 5 guys with proper security clearance working for a month or two? it's not that farfetched.
not any more farfetched than 20 guys learning how to fly commercial jets over a period of 3-4 years then hijacking them with box cutters and driving them into a few buildings..
both stories, to me, are just as likely to occur.
It's not like there wasn't already a plan to do some terrorism and blame it on Cuba...
@unknownuser said:
One of the most fascinating aspects of Operation Northwoods involved the proposed hijacking of an American passenger plane. The JCS proposed that a real plane containing American passengers would be hijacked by friendly forces disguised as Cuban agents. The plane would drop down off the radar screen and be replaced by a pilotless aircraft, which would crash, purportedly killing all the passengers. Under the plan, the real passenger plane would be secretly flown back to the United States.[14]
-
@alan fraser said:
Many such columns were then cut by oxy-acetylene in exactly that manner in order to create more manageable chunks for removal.
I wouldn't cut it this way, if I would be asked to. Would you? The length of the cut is ca. 1.6 greater when a width of the column. It wouldn't be safe either. It is a standard way one would position steel cutting charges to remove vertical resistance of the column.
-
So now you're a demolition expert too? presumably you'd cut horizontally, so you would have no control over which way it fell? Don't apply for a job as a tree surgeon.
I also can't understand this fascination with thermite. Truthers bandy it about like it was some kind of magic bullet. As TIG has already explained, it's just a simple chemical reaction that happens to be exothermic.
It's not even a low explosive, much less a high explosive; it's an incendiary. It generates a lot of heat...that's it. It's just as likely to weld stuff together as cut it apart. In fact that's been its primary use for over a century...welding lengths of rail track together.
Not being an explosive, it takes its own sweet time about severing anything. Also, not being an explosive, you'd need tons of the stuff...literally....on every floor. The notion that this would be used in what needs to be a split-second-perfect controlled demolition in preference to much more portable shaped charges that send a stream of vaporised copper instantly slicing clean through the columns is beyond absurd.
Truthers have posted a clip on YouTube showing a directed thermite ignition instantly severing a steel rod. However, they conveniently overlook the size of the necessary containment vessel compared to the thickness (or lack of) of the steel rod. Scale this up and you'd need something the size of a truck strapped to every column.
Its akin to suggesting that all those elaborate fountain displays you see in places like Vegas don't need computer controlled hydraulic systems but would work much better if you employed a few guys with millions of Coke bottles and a truck load of Mentos.
There is a cloud of utter incompetence surrounding 9/11...before, during and after. This is standard SNAFU for any government. It was exactly the same leading up to Pearl Harbor...which should have come as no surprise to anyone. I guess it's just a sign of the times (and the legacy of many, many Hollywood movies involving nasty NSA characters) that there were no such cries of "Conspiracy!" in 1941.
I'm surprised they haven't already made a movie about how FDR knew what was going down but supressed the information in order to create an excuse to get the USA into the war...maybe they have; and it went straight to video. You can't keep a good rumour-mill down. -
One doesn't have to be a demolition expert to know how to cut such a heavy thing to get it slide vertically.
Cutting it the way it is shown wouldn't give you much more control then cutting it horizontally. No one would start the job without an assistance of a crane anyway.Check the document starting from 1h 33m . They dsicovered the presence of nano-thermite in debris and explain differences between thermite and its modern version. This is a material of military use which really shouldn't be there.
-
These self-appointed experts call it 'nano-thermite'... but naming something doesn't make it that thing.
They admit it's mainly aluminum and iron-oxide, mixed with other stuff like carbon, but that would have resulted from the catastrophic happenings and does not mean it was manufactured elsewhere.There was undoubtedly molten metal present on the impacted floor-plates before the major collapse and the pulverization. It could have been a molten aluminium and iron/rust mixture.
Spraying this molten material into a fine aerosol [by 'explosive' collapse], mixed with a dust from other building-materials, it could coalesce in small 'droplets' of combined materials, giving this similar appearance [e.g. has anyone replicated this process; how is 'real' nano-thermite made etc].I do not think that they have demonstrated this is 'military-grade' lab-made explosive called 'nano-thermite'.
It might contain many of the same components, but could have be made in several 'natural' ways.The Danish chemist makes an unacceptable 'leap of assumption'.
He effectively says this is 'explosive' because the building was 'blown up' [...as (his) other 'evidence' shows...].Where were the comparative microscopic images of this 'dust' and bits of 'real' nano-thermite ?
If they existed and were to be all but identical it would be a lot more convincing.
Sayings it's so doesn't make it so, without proof.The chemist starts off with '[this dust]...is something we characterize as...', within a few seconds of edits it is 'thermite' - then it is 'nano-thermite'.
There is no proper proof offered as to its provenance or it's exact equivalence.
This is not science, it's unsubstantiated opinion [like mine ]I feel this misinformation is almost intended to obscure the real issues about official incompetence, before, during and after the tragic events of 9/11. Many things were done wrongly or inappropriately, but that does not mean there was a single conspiracy - perhaps there were several mini-conspiracies after the events, intended to cover arses; but concluding that there were such wicked acts like 'deliberate demolition' does not follow from the 'real' evidence. There are undoubtedly many weird and puzzling things about the events, adding these extra layers of obscurantism does nothing to help us try to understand what really happened...
-
Here's some rebuttals and interesting links http://www.cracked.com/article_15740_was-911-inside-job.html
http://www.debunking911.com/ -
Sums it up rather nicely.
-
Here's an alternative theory about molten aluminum reacting with water from the sprinklers and releasing hydrogen gas which then burns very hot/explodes and affects the steelwork etc...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftncKDv4JMs&feature=related -
broadening out some..
so, say you found definitive proof that 9/11 was a false flag attack… rummy & co. planned/coordinated/executed it and everyone knows it..
now what?
is anything going to change? (i mean- really change.. not just some reshuffling of personnel and maybe some jail time or death penalty for a couple of people)
would we all of a sudden have a "no sociopaths allowed in politics" policy?
it seems the only thing these people that are dedicating their lives to finding 911truth will actually accomplish, should they prove to be correct, is the right to walk around saying "see, i told you so!" …meanwhile, it's business as usual for the powers that be..
Advertisement