Fire Protection Engineer: 9/11 BOMBSHELL INTERVIEW

[PhysicsExist]

Only if you are so delusional that you actually think the entire scientific community would turn it's back on something you claim is wrong. But they haven't. The collapse event has been studied at great lengths. The fact you're not smart enough to understand some very simple concepts doesn't mean "reality has been hijacked forever". Your credibility as some kind of expert in the field is further undermined by your constant mis-use of English. High jack is not the same as hijack. Sorry to harsh your mellow, but maybe some time out in the sunlight would do you good.

You're insulting my intelligence. Trust that I am far from delusional. The scientific community has CNN film to base their hypothesis off and little else. As there was no independent scientific investigation.

You insult your own intelligence and the intelligence of everyone else when you pretend the scientific community gets the basis of their hypthesises from CNN. That is fucking RE TAR DED!!!!! Go back and crawl under your truthtard rock. You're not even worthy of being called a truthtard.

Explosive Residues
Independent researchers have discovered a highly engineered explosive-incendiary material in several dust samples collected near the WTC site. In their paper, entitled Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe, nine researchers, led by chemist Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen, conclude:

“[T]he red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”

REFERENCES

Harrit, Farrer, Jones, Ryan, Legge, Farnsworth, Roberts, Gourley, Larsen, “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe,” Bentham Open Access, 2009. http://rememberbuilding7.org/downloads/Full_Thermite_paper.pdf

 

[TakeAStepBack]

provide proof? Cite source? Show me the scientific evidence of the anomalies I spoke of here, as well as building 7. I'll wait here for it.

Calling me names doesnt make your assertion correct.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

That's the best part. People who walk around with their sheeple blinders on can never provide proof of any of the anamolies that even the official report dodged. They simply claim, "
it can all be easily explained!" And proceed to show no evidence or proof for their claim.

Sorry, but I'm not buying your fiction and personal opinion. Fact or GTFO

 

[SFC Ollie]

You're insulting my intelligence. Trust that I am far from delusional. The scientific community has CNN film to base their hypothesis off and little else. As there was no independent scientific investigation.

You insult your own intelligence and the intelligence of everyone else when you pretend the scientific community gets the basis of their hypthesises from CNN. That is fucking RE TAR DED!!!!! Go back and crawl under your truthtard rock. You're not even worthy of being called a truthtard.

Explosive Residues
Independent researchers have discovered a highly engineered explosive-incendiary material in several dust samples collected near the WTC site. In their paper, entitled Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe, nine researchers, led by chemist Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen, conclude:

“[T]he red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”

REFERENCES

Harrit, Farrer, Jones, Ryan, Legge, Farnsworth, Roberts, Gourley, Larsen, “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe,” Bentham Open Access, 2009. http://rememberbuilding7.org/downloads/Full_Thermite_paper.pdf

Wow, that is really awesome.

Your paper says that 0.1% of the dust collected was made up of these red chips that they are calling similar to nano-thermite.

0.1%...... I wonder how many tons had to actually been placed in the towers to get that much in a dust sample?

It simply doesn't work.......

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Good job, SFC. Now, provide evidence, the scientific kind, that shows how the buildings essentially turned to dust in the first place. Then, I would like to know how building 7 came down. The commision report completely omits building 7. So, since I'm sure the subject of pulverization is too complex, just the building 7 stuff will suffice.

I'll wait here.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Good job, SFC. Now, provide evidence, the scientific kind, that shows how the buildings essentially turned to dust in the first place. Then, I would like to know how building 7 came down. The commision report completely omits building 7. So, since I'm sure the subject of pulverization is too complex, just the building 7 stuff will suffice.

I'll wait here.

I'm sorry, I agree that the 911 CR and the NIST reports have covered and are correct on all the main points. You may read those reports for your answers. Not much sense in me repeating the only official investigators....

BTW you do understand that the 911CR didn't mention 7WYC because it was not their intent or job to discuss scientifically why the buildings collapsed. They were focused upon the Hijackings that caused it all. And the steps leading up to the attack. It was NIST's job to explain what happened after the attacks. And they did so. I disagree with a few of their points but for the most part they got it right.

And the main point is that the planes did it........

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Thanks for proving my point. No independent scientific investigation. I believe you're done here. "The planes did it."

 

[Patriot911]

Thanks for proving my point. No independent scientific investigation. I believe you're done here. "The planes did it."

Really, dipshit? What about the Purdue study? What about the BRE Centre for Fire Safety Engineering study done at the University of Edinburgh? How about a study by the international engineering firm Arup?

Thanks for proving your ignorance on the matter yet again.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Thanks for proving my point. No independent scientific investigation. I believe you're done here. "The planes did it."

No, I am not done here. I enjoy laughing at you clowns too much.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Thanks for proving my point. No independent scientific investigation. I believe you're done here. "The planes did it."

Really, dipshit? What about the Purdue study? What about the BRE Centre for Fire Safety Engineering study done at the University of Edinburgh? How about a study by the international engineering firm Arup?

Thanks for proving your ignorance on the matter yet again.

You simply can't debate without name calling. It really doesn't prove anything to name call. It also makes your credibility questionable.

As for the purdue study, here is my rebuttal.

A Purdue University computer simulation of the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks shows a 3-D animation of how the hijacked airplanes plowed into the towers, stripping fireproofing material and causing the skyscrapers to collapse. (June 18 http://video.aol.com/video/computer-simulates-world-trade-center-attacks/1928677 Now to counter this which I consider more propaganda.
Let us assume this is possible. Then an explaination needs to be made of the complete collapse of WTC 7 which was not hit by a plane in 6.5 seconds in it's own neat footprint. How could this cause molten pools of metal?

The media never fully investigated issues like the "official" cause of the twin towers collapse , their speed of collapse , the demolition style, and one of the biggest smoking guns of them all, the incredible "collapse" of Building 7 . Never before in the history of man had steel structures like this collapsed due to fire, especially in the way these did. Building 7, not hit by an airplane and right next to or further than significantly more damaged burning buildings that did not collapse, collapsed perfectly and "symmetrically" in demolition style in about 6.5 seconds into its own neat footprint. News reports at the time remarked how significantly similar this collapse looked to controlled demolitions. This included Dan Rather and other prominent mainstream media personnel. For a short video of this go here . Most people today are unaware of the collapse of this building. Go here to listen and view a live report on ABC with Peter Jennings describe the similarities of demolition from the first tower collapse. The ABC correspondent mentions demolition, and Peter Jennings repeats this, then amazingly, the eyewitness who is a quarter of a mile away, changes his tune to describe the overwhelming fire, which was actually burning cold (thick black smoke) and the top of the building weakened caused the collapse. Nice pancake collapse theory (official theory) on the spot, after first admitting it looked like controlled demolition. Very strange wouldn't you say?

Neither the Media nor any government agency ever fully investigated or explained how the BBC reported Building 7's collapse a full 20 minutes before it happened. This discovery in particular led to a firestorm of controversy on the internet. The media never fully investigated nor held to task the leaseholder of the WTC complex Larry Silverstein, when he said on a PBS documentary that they decided to "pull" WTC 7. To watch a quick video of this go here . Here is another video . For extensive analysis and follow-up go here .

To quote Wikipedia: Silverstein said: "We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse." Silverstein's spokesperson, Dara McQuillan, said in September 2005 that by "pull it" Silverstein was referring to the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building, and confirming that they should evacuate the premises." It is interesting that it took almost a full 2 years to get an official response for this strange statement and no media or 9-11 Commission inquiry compelled the response. Patriotic citizens trying to gather facts helped force this revelation. That being said, the spokesperson's claims are dubious at best. On the very same PBS documentary Silverstein used the term "pull", another expert at the WTC clean-up also used the term pull to obviously mean demolish while describing how WTC 6 was going to be brought down. According to researcher Steve Watson, "The insurmountable problem with this explanation of Silverstein's statement is that there were no firefighters inside WTC 7."

Watson's thesis includes: " The FEMA report on the collapses, from May, 2002, says about the WTC 7 collapse: "no manual firefighting operations were taken by FDNY."

And an article by James Glanz in the New York Times on November 29, 2001 says about WTC 7: "By 11:30 a.m., the fire commander in charge of that area, Assistant Chief Frank Fellini, ordered firefighters away from it for safety reasons."

Watson adds, "Furthermore, even if he did mean "pull the firefighters" then why did he say "pull it", with no reference to anything other than the building? Consider also the timing: "they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse." Could it really be possible that some (nonexistent) fire brigade was removed from the building and just at that moment ("then") the building collapsed? Is there really any doubt here about what Silverstein meant?"
Silverstein ultimately made billions of dollars in insurance claims he had conveniently established before 9-11, having coverage that included terrorist attacks. According to Watson , "We have an owner who let slip that the building was "pulled" and we have firefighters on video telling people to get back as the building was going to ' blow up .'"

It takes weeks, maybe even months to plan demolitions of this nature. How did this happen? No investigation. No media analysis or pursuit from any government agency including the 9-11 Commission.

MOLTEN METAL AND CORE COLUMNS ERASED FROM MEDIA
The media never fully investigated why there were impossible pools of molten metal at all three collapses. Amazing video of streams of molten metal can be seen flowing out of the building right before the collapse. Also check pictures and analysis here .

Jet fuel cannot possibly get hot enough to melt steel let alone cause steel to become molten and stay that way for weeks. The media never fully investigated the false claims that the Twin Towers were built poorly when these were some of the most robust, extensive structures with massive core columns and redundant steel sub frames, steel outer meshing, and steel networks designed to survive multiple plane strikes of similar severity that hit them on Sept. 11th. The 9-11 Commission Report denied the very existence of these massive, over-engineered core columns !! Instead they stated that the core of each of the Twin Towers was "a hollow steel shaft". The media never fully investigated evidence of thermite or thermate which is routinely used to cut heavy steel and which photo evidence shows columns in the debris cut at 45 degree angles common with massive demolitions. A great Google video montage can be viewed here on this.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

But like I said. It really makes no difference at this piont anyway. You all have fun attacking each other and what not. This discusion has long since been deemed irrelevant in my mind.

 

[SFC Ollie]

What is irrelevant is that you are another one who disregards that 7WTC did not collapse in 6.5 seconds. Once again since it doesn't fit what you want to be true you don't count the 7 seconds prior to the main roof line moving. You know the 7 seconds or so that the penthouses fell into the center of the building, showing that the internal structure was gone before your 6.5 seconds even starts.....

DUH

Try another sock this one is ready for the laundry.

 

[Gamolon]

Thanks for proving my point. No independent scientific investigation. I believe you're done here. "The planes did it."

Really, dipshit? What about the Purdue study? What about the BRE Centre for Fire Safety Engineering study done at the University of Edinburgh? How about a study by the international engineering firm Arup?

Thanks for proving your ignorance on the matter yet again.

You simply can't debate without name calling. It really doesn't prove anything to name call. It also makes your credibility questionable.

As for the purdue study, here is my rebuttal.

A Purdue University computer simulation of the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks shows a 3-D animation of how the hijacked airplanes plowed into the towers, stripping fireproofing material and causing the skyscrapers to collapse. (June 18 http://video.aol.com/video/computer-simulates-world-trade-center-attacks/1928677 Now to counter this which I consider more propaganda.
Let us assume this is possible. Then an explaination needs to be made of the complete collapse of WTC 7 which was not hit by a plane in 6.5 seconds in it's own neat footprint.

This is your first mistake. WTC7 did not collapse in 6.5 seconds.

 

[Gamolon]

... collapsed perfectly and "symmetrically"...

Next mistake. How do you characterize the following sequence of collapse...

1. East penthouse collapses
2. Collapse moves west to the west penthouse
3. Perimeter facade and remainder of WTC collapses

...as perfect and symmetrical?

Do you know what symmetrical means?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

How long did it take then? Educate me folks. Educate me.....also a link that shows the building fall in its entirety would be cool too.

 

[Gamolon]

I see you don't really know..What's so hard about saying that??
Very well I will read through this, I did take notice that in the first few pages it states-
"Although ASTM International structural steel standards have evolved since the towers were built, the changes were relatively minor and not significant for estimating mechanical properties"

Regarding specifications of steel grade--
" ...other material properties may not appear in a specification yet are critical in building design ; the most important of those qualities is perhaps the elastic modulus, or stiffness, which DOES NOT appear in specifications because there is little variability amongst the various steel'..

So far I get the impression that steel used in the construction of buildings, are going to have the same properties and standards, and are used throughout the industry.
So why did the steel in the examples of the infernos in question, not behave the same as wtc7?
I'm not done researching, and will continue to learn more about this, but so far one would expect that the same grade/type of steel used in hirise construction would behave the same way.

BTW...Why didn't we see even a partial collapse do to thermal expansion in the N tower in 1975??

You answer my question first.

Let's take two of the same columns and secure them vertically in the ground. One will have a 10,000 lb weight on it while the other one won't. We'll subject both columns to the same fire.

Will the columns behave the same exact way?

Yes or no?

Will the vertical columns somehow remove itself ALL the way down well below the heated section...fast enough for the top floor to hit the ground almost as fast as a ball would if dropped right beside it?

Ask a structural engineer if a FAILED column provides any support.

 

[Gamolon]

How long did it take then? Educate me folks. Educate me.....also a link that shows the building fall in its entirety would be cool too.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loYmBaqgyDQ]YouTube - 9/11 WTC 7 Demolition - Penthouse Collapse With Explosion Audio (Extended)[/ame]

0:02 is the start of the penthouse collapse. The roof line disappears behind the biuildings in the foreground at 0:14. And that's not even the end of the collapse. That gives us 12 seconds right there. Almost double your 6.5 second "total collapse" claim.

Or are you going to tell me that the penthouse is not part of the total collapse sequence?

 

[creativedreams]

Well educated and very experienced "opinions" from experts in the field......oh but that would hurt your feelings so don't believe them.....

I have read and heard from quite a few well educated experts in a variety of fields who insist that the fires caused by airliners striking World Trade Center Towers One and Two could not have caused the kind of collapse of those two buildings, plus Building Seven, which we all saw happen on television. While most of these experts go into extensive technical detail to explain why such an effect is scientifically infeasible, which unavoidably implies that some sort of deliberate effort was made to facilitate the collapses, not one of them has volunteered so much as an educated guess on specifically what was done to facilitate those perfectly vertical collapses.

?

A pre-planned setting of controlled demolition is far simpler than you think.

The World Trade Centers underwent many months of construction renovations on the elevators and in and around the elevator shafts up to the day of 9/11

All the core vertical support columns are in and around the elevator shafts

The World Trade Centers even underwent many months of construction renovations on the vertical support columns up to the day of 9/11

The company that did the construction renovations on the World Trade Centers has worked hand and hand with Controlled Demolitions Inc

It even states on the Controlled Demolitions Inc website they do classified controlled demolitions for the U.S. government Defense Dept on sensitive projects both internationally and domestically

Controlled Demolitions Inc helped with the cleanup at ground zero as did the company that did the many months of construction renovations

The company who did the many months of construction renovations on the World Trade Centers up to the day of 9/11 had its CEO appointed by then Pres Bush to the Presidents Commission on White House Fellows

The weekend before the trade centers were destroyed there were complete power downs in the buildings and security was completely off.

There were Israeli Mossad proven to be working in and around the World Trade Centers also

There were Israeli Mossad arrested and on the News during the 9/11 time frame near the World Trade Centers with evidence of explosives and held in jail for months until word came from the top of the pyramid scheme to deport them

Some of the Israeli Mossad arrested near the World Trade Centers with evidence of explosives were proven to be active in the Israeli Military and explosive experts

Again...the company that did many months of construction renovations on the World Trade Centers up to the day of 9/11...not to mention the complete power downs and security loss the weekend before 9/11....Israeli Mossad Military explosive experts in and around the World Trade Centers....The CEO of the construction company doing renovations on the support columns getting appointed by Pres Bush to the Presidents Commission on White House Fellows.......starts to paint a picture how easy it would be to pull it off.

Not to mention...

it was proven the Israeli Mossad were in the U.S and among the terrorists that got on the planes....did they lure the willing terrorists on the planes to frame them?

It was slipped into the news only a couple months before 9/11 that a Boeing plane was remote operated successfully flying it and landing it without a pilot....did they remote fly the planes into the World Trade Centers to get world support to obtain one of the most strategic squares on the worlds chessboard?

There was a command bunker built on the 23rd floor of World Trade Center 7 to "fight terrorism".

This floor had millions spent on it reinforcing the floors walls, windows etc basically making it a treefort within sight of the Twin Towers.

Was this floor the cockpit for remote operating the planes on 9/11?
Was this floor used to visually see the exact impact points on the Twin Towers to set the sequence for the wireless explosives?

Note: The Pentagon too was undergoing construction renovations in the area that was affected on 9/11. The Pentagon just happened to get hit in the only area of the building that was undergoing a construction renovation to reinforce it's walls for a possible attack.

For those who make the arguement of hearing explosives....

Take your muffler off your car and listen to how loud it is.

The vertical support columns were all in the center core of the buildings with a muffler around them....

 

[TakeAStepBack]

That's not all of the buiilding............But it appears you're all right. I'm going to take my masters from cornell in structural/mechanical engineering back. I apparently cheated to get it.

I'm thankful that I have been educated on these events. I'll rest easy from now on. Signing off on this.

regards,
Dipshit

 

[Gamolon]

Good job, SFC. Now, provide evidence, the scientific kind, that shows how the buildings essentially turned to dust in the first place.

Turned to dust?

I don't think so. You need to start choosing better terminology and quit parroting everything you've read.