Debunking the WTC 9/11 Molten Steel Argument

[Bern80]

then I think you need to read the list some more .it is your argument that is unsound. one could have a army of educated and experienced and simply dismiss it all to no end using your logic .we counted on these men and woman to head are uranium enrichment projects .lead NASA projects commanding generals,milatery crash experts, top level CIA and FBI agents etc etc.. and there's not just one or two of them they have served with honor through multiple administrations i really don't believe they are all mentally ill or in a conspiracy with a agenda they have little if anything to gain and much to lose and the most disturbing part of it all to you should be why are you getting this info from eots., I have viewed independent films that feature these statements and they state this is the only voice they have ,they cant get a 5 min interview in the controlled media..no Glen Beck no Oriely or Anderson Cooper. they only want to talk to easy to dismiss celebrity's and shills that claim to represent those calling for a real investigation to come and talk about holograms..doesn't this raise a red flag for you..don't you question...why

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/

Of course I want to know the truth. By I'm also objective enough to see that those claiming to want the truth really aren't after that. They and you simply want some form of public affirmation that there is some conspiracy afoot. I know this isn't the only conspiracy you believe in. I bet we could back through pages of history and I bet you would have issues with any number of issues with the 'official' history of events. That screams lack of credibility. The evidence that you aren't interested in truth is in this very thread. I tried to have a real objective conversation about the questions you and your ilk have and you completely dismiss it.

We can sit here an debate how the towers fell or whatever, but neither of us are engineers and at the end of the day there are as many people with credentials backing one side as the other. Your main argument over and over has been these people have credentials. Clearly you have to resort to that because you probably don't have the engineering, physics or chemistry knowledge yourself to refute the 'official' story.

You say knock of the popular mechanics bit. Why? Why do you believe whole heartedly in one thing, but complete dismiss another? Those aren't teh actions of someone interested in trruth. You have yet to explain why the side that pokes big huge holes in the conspiracy theories shouldn't be given the time of day.

Are there questions we don't have sufficient answers to everything that happened or didnt happen that day? No. But again you can't seem to make the very basic distinciton between the goal of finding the truth and your horse with blinders on attempt to prove a conspiracy. there is a very real difference.

 

[eots]

Of course I want to know the truth

I DIDN'T ASK THAT I ASKED DON'T YOU QUESTION WHY PEOPLE OF THIS LEVEL CANT GET A INTERVIEW ON MAINSTREAM MEDIA

By I'm also objective enough to see that those claiming to want the truth really aren't after that.

SO IS THAT WHAT YOU CONSIDER THE MEN AND WOMAN OF PATRIOT RS QUESTION 911 TO BE...WHY ?

They and you simply want some form of public affirmation that there is some conspiracy afoot.

I know this isn't the only conspiracy you believe in. I bet we could back through pages of history and I bet you would have issues with any number of issues with the 'official' history of events. That screams lack of credibility.

NO THAT SHOWS A BASIC AWAYNESS OF HISTORICAL FACTS AND TO THINK OTHERWISE SCREAMS IGNORANCE OF HISTORY

The evidence that you aren't interested in truth is in this very thread. I tried to have a real objective conversation about the questions you and your ilk have and you completely dismiss it

.

I DISMISS ANYTHING FROM THE POPULAR MECHANICS THEY LACK ALL CREDIBILITY OR CREDENTIAL'S AS A RESEARCH INSTITUTE

I ALONG WITH NIST REJECT THE NIST REPORT.. WHICH SEEMS ONLY LOGICAL

We can sit here an debate how the towers fell or whatever, but neither of us are engineers and at the end of the day there are as many people with credentials backing one side as the other.

NOT TRUE THERE ARE VERY FEW CREDENTIALED PHYSICIST THAT WOULD SUPPORT THE WHITE HOUSE STORY THATS WHY THEY RESORTED TO THE CONTROLLED MEDIA LIKE P.M AND NIST TO SUPPORT THERE CLAIMS

Your main argument over and over has been these people have credentials. Clearly you have to resort to that because you probably don't have the engineering, physics or chemistry knowledge yourself to refute the 'official' story.

NO BUT I HAVE A BRAIN AND DEDUCTIVE REASONING AND LIKE A DETECTIVE SEE THE EVIDENCE ON A WHOLE AS CAN MANY OTHERS

You say knock of the popular mechanics bit. Why? Why do you believe whole heartedly in one thing, but complete dismiss another? Those aren't teh actions of someone interested in trruth. You have yet to explain why the side that pokes big huge holes in the conspiracy theories shouldn't be given the time of day.

EXPLAINED THAT ONE ALREADY

Are there questions we don't have sufficient answers to everything that happened or didnt happen that day? No. But again you can't seem to make the very basic distinciton between the goal of finding the truth and your horse with blinders on attempt to prove a conspiracy. there is a very real difference.[/

QUOTE]

NOT REALLY IF THE TRUTH HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY WIT HELD AS CLAIMED BY NIST AND THE 911 COMMISSION MEMBERS THEN A CONSPIRACY ALREADY EXSIST...A OPEN INVESTIGATION WITH PEER REVIEW WOULD SATISFY ME

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Ohh look his computer keyboard is broke, it only works with capitals now.

 

[eots]

Ohh look his computer keyboard is broke, it only works with capitals now.

THERES THE ANSWER RIGHT THERE..THATS THE REASON THERE IS NO TRUTH ..MINDLESS BROKEN HEADS WITH FOX NEWS QUIPS AND 30SEC SOUND BITE MENTALITY'S

 

[Bern80]

NOT REALLY IF THE TRUTH HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY WIT HELD AS CLAIMED BY NIST AND THE 911 COMMISSION MEMBERS THEN A CONSPIRACY ALREADY EXSIST...A OPEN INVESTIGATION WITH PEER REVIEW WOULD SATISFY ME

THAT is a lie eots and you know it. Based on your track and your beliefs that simply must be a lie. The TRUTH is you will be satisfied if AND ONLY IF it was found our government was responsible for 9/11. The following is not in dispute where your beliefs are concerned.

You believe are government played a major role in orchestrating 9/11.

You also believe things like the next Presideent has already been chosen.

That the world is essentially run by a coupel world organizations.

And yet you can sit here with straight face and say that you would be satisifed with a transparent, peer reveiwed investigation of the event of 9/11. Because to say that requires that you would also have to be satisifed with the results if those results revealed that things pretty much happened the way the 'official' report stated. Maybe they got some of the science wrong, fine. But your beliefe go so far beyond that that we're really talking about something totally different.

That is the reality of your statement. If the investigation process was satisifactory to you then that REQUIRES that you be satisfied with it's findings, even if they go against what you already believe to be the truth. And we all know there is no way in hell that's true.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

THERES THE ANSWER RIGHT THERE..THATS THE REASON THERE IS NO TRUTH ..MINDLESS BROKEN HEADS WITH FOX NEWS QUIPS AND 30SEC SOUND BITE MENTALITY'S

Yes I agree. looking in the mirror. Your being lead around by the nose.

Once again for the slow and mentally challenged amongst us. I do NOT watch Fox news programs I do not watch any TV news unless I happen to be channel surfing and my finger cramps while it is on one of those programs.

Your so far gone it is pathetic.

 

[eots]

Yes I agree. looking in the mirror. Your being lead around by the nose.

Once again for the slow and mentally challenged amongst us. I do NOT watch Fox news programs I do not watch any TV news unless I happen to be channel surfing and my finger cramps while it is on one of those programs.

Your so far gone it is pathetic.

ya ya blah blah..just go clean your guns..well get back to you when its time

 

[Lookout]

Very few are gonna argue that we need to know the truth. Where people like you and people like me part ways is that it to many it is really clear that you're interested in a little more than the truth. You have an agenda bent on proving a conspiracy. Having the passion you obviously have for that makes it hard to be objective as those two states aren't real compatible. The evidence for that is in the very question below. Some are legit. Some scream of a pre-conceived conclusion. Many of them are rehtorical questions that dance around the pre-conceived notion that the government was actually the lead conspirator in the events of 9/11.



That's a legit question if true.



This is an example of a question from the conspiratorial bent. It requires that one know an awful lot of things to even be in a place to ask it. It assumes there are in fact missile batteries around the pentagon. It assumes some SOP was not followed and thus whoever posed the question would have to know what the standard SOP was for that situation.



Again assumptions and the really big leap that the secret service was unconcerned, not sure how anyone could possibly know that. It assumes someone waited an awful long time to report the confirmed events to the President. Haveing a former roommate now in te secret service part of there job is to determine legitimate vs illegitimate threats. Again an awful lot needed to be known in order for someone to justifiably ask this question.



Again assumes said person(s) violated, intentional or otherwise some SOP. So first we would have to know what these were in order to hold someone accountable for violating them.



If they haven't been published how did we become aware of these allegations in the first place?



fair question if true of course. If he's so adamant about the truth you'd think he'd be talking regardless of the consequences.



Again assumes an awful lot. Starting with, if true, the presumption is human nefariousness rather than technical failure.



legitmate question, but one that has many far more plausible answers than government inside job.



I have to ask who found out about them in the first place? Again why aren't they talking? If true why should a trust the source?



The most plausible answer would be we didn't know that.



not to be harsh but I don't think one of the priorities of the 911 commission was or should have been to provide closure for families of the victims.



Reading between the lines the suggestion is that co-authoring a book with Condi should somehow, in of itself disqualify him from the job? Why?

The thing that you do not seam to understand is that...The only conspiricy theory about 911 is that of the U.S. Government. When ever I hear the term "Conspiricy theory" I only think about the bullshit the govt. has handed all of us and some people like yourself have gulped it down like a steak dinner after being starved for three days. It is becomming more and more easy to tell the gullable from the self thinkers...Can you say..."BAAA-AAA-AAA"? Believing everything the govt hands you on a silver platter is a cureable disease...It's called anti-brainwashing! It's not your fault, their techniques are extremely powerful and work very well. I wish you luck in your awakening and hope you pull through.

 

[Lookout]

ya ya blah blah..just go clean your guns..well get back to you when its time

Problem with that being...If no one is there when the shooting starts to tell him who we are supposed to be shooting at...He will be shooting at the wrong people!

 

[Toro]

Some more points on the supposed "demolition" of the WTC (which I have pilfered from elsewhere)

-------------->

The proposed demolition of the WTC would have required the placement of thousands of explosive charges. Since none were found in the rubble, we can conclude that they detonated with 100% reliability. Given that they were allegedly placed in a hurried fashion (over a weekend according to the "power-down" claims) and that airliners were then flown into the Towers and one of the towers subsequently fell on WTC7, how likely is that? Not one charge had its wiring dislodged, or was knocked out of place, or just didn't go off for whatever reason?

-------------->

To wire WTC7 for a demolition, these magical explosives would have had to:

* Have evaded bomb sniffing dogs upon entry into the building.

* Have been powerful enough to slice a column without actually being placed on the column. That or walls and entire offices would have had to have been removed in order to place them directly on the columns.

* Have been quiet enough to be missed by seismic detectors and audio equipment nearby.
* Have survived another building impacting onto them without severing det cord or prematurely exploding charges.
* Have survived 6-7 hours of building-wide fires.
* Have been detonated without any external visual signs.

* Have been undetected by staff and occupants of the building.
* Have been placed without the knowledge staff and occupants in the building.
* Have been placed by someone who were willing to keep their mouth shut over what they did, despite being involved in an event that killed 3,000 people.

 

[eots]

Some more points on the supposed "demolition" of the WTC (which I have pilfered from elsewhere)

-------------->

The proposed demolition of the WTC would have required the placement of thousands of explosive charges. Since none were found in the rubble, we can conclude that they detonated with 100% reliability. Given that they were allegedly placed in a hurried fashion (over a weekend according to the "power-down" claims) and that airliners were then flown into the Towers and one of the towers subsequently fell on WTC7, how likely is that? Not one charge had its wiring dislodged, or was knocked out of place, or just didn't go off for whatever reason

?

On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower." [WingTV]




Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company, Burns noted, was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Burns also served. [Utne]
According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."

To wire WTC7 for a demolition, these magical explosives would have had to:

* Have evaded bomb sniffing dogs upon entry into the building.

The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed. [NY Newsday]

* Have been powerful enough to slice a column without actually being placed on the column. That or walls and entire offices would have had to have been removed in order to place them directly on the columns

.


assumption

* Have been quiet enough to be missed by seismic detectors and audio equipment nearby.

July 16, 2007 - Former California Seismic Safety Commissioner Endorses 9/11 Truth Movement featured the statement of J. Marx Ayres, former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council and former member of the California Seismic Safety Commissio


]'http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_080104_eight_u_s__state_dep.htmn.


9-11 Research: Seismic EvidenceThe charts for the leveling of WTC 1 and 2 have one-tenth the vertical magnification of the three other charts. Note also that the times given on the charts ...
911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html - 24k


* Have survived another building impacting onto them without severing det cord or prematurely exploding charges.
*

Have survived 6-7 hours of building-wide fires.

small random fires

* Have been detonated without any external visual signs.

* Have been undetected by staff and occupants of the building.
* Have been placed without the knowledge staff and occupants in the building.

* Have been placed by someone who were willing to keep their mouth shut over what they did, despite being involved in an event that killed 3,000 people.

again the false assumption secretes cant be kept

U.S. Gov video bio weapon test in New york etc.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DG6GMNd-xN0[/ame]

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_071202_seven_senior_republi.htm

 

[Toro]

On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower." [WingTV]

How do they know that many, many engineers were coming in and out of the tower if there were no cameras to prove it?

July 16, 2007 - Former California Seismic Safety Commissioner Endorses 9/11 Truth Movement featured the statement of J. Marx Ayres, former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council and former member of the California Seismic Safety Commissio


]'http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_080104_eight_u_s__state_dep.htmn.


9-11 Research: Seismic EvidenceThe charts for the leveling of WTC 1 and 2 have one-tenth the vertical magnification of the three other charts. Note also that the times given on the charts ...
911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html - 24k

False. There is no evidence of any seismic activity in lower Manhattan on September 11, 2001.

http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC STUDY 8-06 w clarif as of 9-8-06 .pdf

 

[eots]

How do they know that many, many engineers were coming in and out of the tower if there were no cameras to prove it?



False. There is no evidence of any seismic activity in lower Manhattan on September 11, 2001.

http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC STUDY 8-06 w clarif as of 9-8-06 .pdf

there you are with your "popular mechanics" a site again never mind what a
state seismic expert says when there is a uncredited opinion of popular mechanics

 

[Toro]

there you are with your "popular mechanics" a site again never mind what a
state seismic expert says when there is a uncredited opinion of popular mechanics

Ad hominem attack. You do not address the issue but try to discredit the author. Answer the argument.

Seismographs at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, New York, recorded the collapses of WTC 1, 2 and 7. This data was later released to the public and currently appears on their website. Additionally, on 9/11 Protec field technicians were utilizing portable field seismographs to continuously record ground vibrations on several construction sites in Manhattan and Brooklyn for liability purposes.

In all cases where seismographs detected their collapses, waveform readings indicate a single, gradually ascending and descending level of ground vibration during the event. At no point during 9/11 were sudden or independent vibration "spikes" documented by any seismograph, and we are unaware of any entity possessing such data.

Of course, I'd use ad hominem attacks as well if I were confronted with this evidence.

Here is Protec

http://www.protecservices.com/

Here is implosionworld

http://www.implosionworld.com/

Here is Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University

http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/

Feel free to contradict the evidence rather than always trying to link it to (the highly credible) Popular Mechanics.

 

[eots]

Ad hominem attack. You do not address the issue but try to discredit the author. Answer the argument.



Of course, I'd use ad hominem attacks as well if I were confronted with this evidence.

Here is Protec

http://www.protecservices.com/[/url...versity [url]http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/

ya there it is all right.. again it says nothing about 911

Feel free to contradict the evidence rather than always trying to link it to (the highly credible) Popular Mechanics.[/

QUOTE]

and what are the credentials of the writers of this piece ..do you even have a clue ?

 

[Toro]

so what a demo company's web site with no reference to wtc what so ever

The point is to show that they are experts in demolition.

ya there it is all right.. again it says nothing about 911

Are you serious? The pdf file is from Protec and implosionworld.

They reference Columbia. Feel free to go find the documents at the site.

and what are the credentials of the writers of this piece ..do you even have a clue ?

Apparently you don't 'cause you didn't bother reading anything from sites.

From the Protec site.

Protec is recognized as a global leader in the field of Vibration Prediction, Monitoring, and Structure Inspections.

For over 30 years, Protec personnel have studied the effects of vibrations on structures as related to construction, demolition and blasting operations. From the world’s largest building implosions to the smallest road-reconstruction jobs,

Protec has performed critical documentation and vibration monitoring services on thousands of domestic and international projects. Beyond addressing potential damage claims, each program is specifically designed to maximize project efficiency and document regulatory compliance, thereby strenghthening the client’s reputation and mitigating insurance costs.

From the pdf

Protec is one of the world's most knowledgeable authorities on explosive demolition, having performed engineering studies, structure analysis, vibration/air overpressure monitoring and photographic services on well over 1,000 structure blasting events in more than 30 countries. These include the current world-record holders for largest, tallest and most buildings demolished with explosives. Protec regularly documents the world of more than 20 explosives contractors who perform structure blasting as a primary source of revenue (including extensive experience with every American company) as well as dozens more who blast structures in a part-time capacity.

Feel free to post something contradicting the evidence. You have not. Your only course of action has been to conduct ad hominem attacks.

 

[eots]

not those sites! your popular mechanics gurus..what are their qualifications

 

[cbi0090]

I just read this thread and I can't believe how removed everyone is from what has gone on regarding the WTC collapse. I suppose those of us within the structural engineering industry just sort of takes things for granted. I had no idea this kind of discussion was going on! There are so many references and studies that have been done and are continuing to be done regarding the incident I woudn't know where to start.
For the layman, I'd suggest looking into back issues of Engineering News Record (ENR), or the Structural Steel Institute (SSI) publication. They are more straightforward and understandable as they are meant to be read by engineers, contractors, architects, and facility owners. There have been many on-going articles about the various findings being done by nearly every engineering school, research institute, etc. in the country.
I hate to disappoint but the idea of a controlled demolition is so far out there, it's beyond fantasy. Anyone who would have wanted to do such a thing would not have approached it that manner at all. There is a lot of demolition and detailed preparation that occurs prior to even a controlled demolition of the kind you see on the TV. It's not something that could be done out of sight of the people within the building. It's a crazy notion.

 

[eots]

and now a word from the crazys

Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter. U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech). Former Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology. 22-year Air Force career. Also taught Mathematics and English at the University of Southern California, the University of Maryland, and Phillips University.
Video 9/11/04: "A lot of these pieces of information, taken together, prove that the official story, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is a bunch of hogwash. It’s impossible. … There’s a second group of facts having to do with the cover up. … Taken together these things prove that high levels of our government don’t want us to know what happened and who’s responsible.…

Who gained from 9/11? Who covered up crucial information about 9/11? And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place? When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney.

I think the very kindest thing that we can say about George W. Bush and all the people in the U.S. Government that have been involved in this massive cover-up, the very kindest thing we can say is that they were aware of impending attacks and let them happen. Now some people will say that’s much too kind, however even that is high treason and conspiracy to commit murder." http://video.go


Commander Dennis Henry, U.S. Navy Reserve (ret), BS CE, PE – Retired from U.S. Navy Reserve, Civil Engineering Corps after 20 years of service. Retired Licensed Professional Engineer, State of Missouri. 34 years of service as a City Engineer, designing bridges, roadways, storm, sanitary sewers, and traffic signals.
Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:
"Being a civil engineer and understanding the laws of physics, I know that a building cannot fall at free fall speed without the floors already falling also giving no resistance. I wish our Congressmen were as smart, and also showed some backbone and got a truly independent investigation going. Also, this 911 truth movement has shown to me that our press is as every bit controlled and spits out as much propaganda as I thought Pravda did for the old Soviet Union. My eyes have been awakened to many things, and I have come to learn that we do not live in as free a country as I thought we did, and with the passage of the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, it has become even less so." http://www.ae911truth.org




Aug. 21, 2007 - Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation featured the statement of James Quintiere, Ph.D., one of the world's leading fire science researchers.

July 16, 2007 - Former California Seismic Safety Commissioner Endorses 9/11 Truth Movement featured the statement of J. Marx Ayres, former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council and former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission.
Endnoteshttp://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7802




Capt. Daniel Davis, U.S. Army – Former U.S. Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director. Decorated with the Bronze Star and the Soldiers Medal for bravery under fire and the Purple Heart for injuries sustained in Viet Nam. Also served in the Army Air Defense Command as Nike Missile Battery Control Officer for the Chicago-Milwaukee Defense Area. Founder and former CEO of Turbine Technology Services Corp., a turbine (jet engine) services and maintenance company (15 years). Former Senior Manager at General Electric Turbine (jet) Engine Division (15 years). Private pilot.

Statement to this website 3/23/07: "As a former General Electric Turbine engineering specialist and manager and then CEO of a turbine engineering company, I can guarantee that none of the high tech, high temperature alloy engines on any of the four planes that crashed on 9/11 would be completely destroyed, burned, shattered or melted in any crash or fire. Wrecked, yes, but not destroyed. Where are all of those engines, particularly at the Pentagon? If jet powered aircraft crashed on 9/11, those engines, plus wings and tail assembly, would be there.

Additionally, in my experience as an officer in NORAD as a Tactical Director for the Chicago-Milwaukee Air Defense and as a current private pilot, there is no way that an aircraft on instrument flight plans (all commercial flights are IFR) would not be intercepted when they deviate from their flight plan, turn off their transponders, or stop communication with Air Traffic Control. No way! With very bad luck, perhaps one could slip by, but no there's no way all four of them could!

Finally, going over the hill and highway and crashing into the Pentagon right at the wall/ground interface is nearly impossible for even a small slow single engine airplane and no way for a 757. Maybe the best pilot in the world could accomplish that but not these unskilled "terrorists".

Attempts to obscure facts by calling them a "Conspiracy Theory" does not change the truth. It seems, "Something is rotten in the State."


Editor's note: For more information on the impact at the Pentagon, see General Stubblebine, Colonel Nelson, Commander Muga, Lt. Col. Kwiatkowski, Lt. Col. Latas, Major Rokke, Capt. Wittenberg, Barbara Honegger, April Gallop, Colonel Bunel, and Steve DeChiaro.

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/

 

[jillian]

I just read this thread and I can't believe how removed everyone is from what has gone on regarding the WTC collapse. I suppose those of us within the structural engineering industry just sort of takes things for granted. I had no idea this kind of discussion was going on! There are so many references and studies that have been done and are continuing to be done regarding the incident I woudn't know where to start.
For the layman, I'd suggest looking into back issues of Engineering News Record (ENR), or the Structural Steel Institute (SSI) publication. They are more straightforward and understandable as they are meant to be read by engineers, contractors, architects, and facility owners. There have been many on-going articles about the various findings being done by nearly every engineering school, research institute, etc. in the country.
I hate to disappoint but the idea of a controlled demolition is so far out there, it's beyond fantasy. Anyone who would have wanted to do such a thing would not have approached it that manner at all. There is a lot of demolition and detailed preparation that occurs prior to even a controlled demolition of the kind you see on the TV. It's not something that could be done out of sight of the people within the building. It's a crazy notion.

I think most people know that. But there's a group that seems to think otherwise, so looks for every little scrap of information (or lack of information) to support their fantasy. Part of the problem, and part of what feeds them, though, is that the investigation after really was pathetic.