quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp if you look at the last few pages of the other 911 thread (the big one) culrout posted a list of "professional engineers" who are members of scholars for 911 truth. i merely took their names and searched the PE registry of the states in which they reside to see if they were or ever have been licensed. in all cases save 1 or 2, none of them had ever been licensed as an engineer. the two taht were, were not civil engineers. i have never argued the suspicious events leading up to and during 911, BUT what i do understand much better than most forum members is the way in which that building was designed, and the weakness it had. one of my proff's from uni was actually involved with the study done by the ASCE following 911, i belive it was part of the FEMA report or released shortly there after. anyways he did a lecture on it in class the one day and explained in great detail the short commings of the desing especialy in the realm of fire protection, for the record my prof, professor hadjisophecleus (sp) is the chair of the canadian fire safety research council, and a highly distinguished professor of structural engineering. the molten metal (if it was indeed molten metal) could have been insulated from cooling by the tons of debris on top of it. a tremendous ammount of heat was caused by teh buildings collapse, there is alot of energy dissapated in an event like that and that energy has to go somewhere. Forensic engineering is not an exact science. there is no way to ever find out exactly what happened step by step. the final solution is almost always based on a series of most probable events. despite how much you CT people hate the word "pancake" theory.... it is the most feasibly failure mode for that structure given the dammage sustained by teh impacts and ensuing fires. i belive PKC posted a picture of rubble form ground zero that clearly showed a section of concrete that looked like a boulder with what looked like office papers sandwiched between layers of concrete.

I'd probably believe it too but that theory holds so little water. The buildings came down at virtually freefall speed which for the most part rules out the Pancake Theory when given the fact that it's kinetic energy would be partially absorbed by each successive collapsing floor. That is, unless the support beams were cut which would allow them to fall freely.

The cleanup crew even remarked how they couldn't believe that the steal beams came down in such cleanly cut sections.

I thought Morgan Reynolds (professor emeritus at Texas A&M University) said it well here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp the molten metal (if it was indeed molten metal) could have been insulated from cooling by the tons of debris on top of it. a tremendous ammount of heat was caused by teh buildings collapse, there is alot of energy dissapated in an event like that and that energy has to go somewhere.

these guys saw it:



and John Gross of the NIST acts like he had no clue:


(a little redundant as both of these were posted above)

quote:

Originally posted by Sunsnail Why would there be multiple explosions?

Because it takes a few to bring down structures like the World Trade Towers.

quote:

the molten metal (if it was indeed molten metal) could have been insulated from cooling by the tons of debris on top of it. a tremendous ammount of heat was caused by teh buildings collapse, there is alot of energy dissapated in an event like that and that energy has to go somewhere.

The molten metal was present before they even started to cool off ground zero with water.

I am going to have to take the rescue workers and firefighters side on this one, they where actually present at the scene unlike that criminal (John Gross) from NIST who denies it being there at all.

quote:

Lone Gunmen episode that aired prior to September 11th in which an inside faction of the government posing as terrorists hijacks a 727 by remote control and targets the World Trade Center. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lone_Gunmen Pilot episode "predicts" 9/11 In a foreshadowing of the September 11, 2001 attacks, subsequent conspiracy theories, and the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the plot of the March 4, 2001 pilot episode of the series depicts a secret U.S. government agency plotting to crash a Boeing 727 headed for Boston into the World Trade Center via remote control for the purpose of increasing the military defense budget and blaming the attack on foreign "tin-pot dictators" who are "begging to be smart-bombed." This episode aired in Australia less than two weeks before the 9/11 attacks, on August 30.

I like this clip where at about two and a half minutes into it Dubya talks about how the terrorists were instructed to plant the explosives high enough in the building so that it would prevent those who were trapped above from escaping.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I like this clip where at about two and a half minutes into it Dubya talks about how the terrorists were instructed to plant the explosives high enough in the building so that it would prevent those who were trapped above from escaping.

Sometimes I wonder if he really IS that stupid, or if he's dropping hints to warn us of some other controlling factor.

Hmm... naaaaaaaah, couldn't be.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X

what are you trying to convey with this one?

can't hear any bombs in this one, and he was in the building.

can't believe i'm doing this.

jsut looking at how the buildings collapse it's pretty obvious the structural failure that took place.

the one with the most weight to bear relative to the initial impact naturally falls first.

then the second comes down in on itself plain as day from the top all the way down to the ground. not the other way around like in controlled demolitions.

Last edited by Q5echo on Aug-28-2007 at 11:54