" There are singular moments history, dates that divide all that goes before from all that comes after "
George W H Bush
War By Way Of Deception
' Singular moments in history ' when a definite line is drawn in the sand dividing past and future, a moment when, even though you may not realise it at the time, irreversible change takes place and the world is never the same again, defining moments ... some good, some bad.
We all have them as individuals and collectively as generations, the bad, usually disasters ... assassinations ... terrorist attacks and wars.
' A singular moment in history, when irreversible change takes place ... the world changes forever ' This statement perfectly describes the events of September the 11th 2001 ... a moment of evil which brought irreversible change to the entire world.
The September the 11th attacks effected everyone life in someway ... it has led to the war on terror which has destabilized several countries in a region of the world which already had a history of instability. Human rights groups estimate over 1.3 million civilians have died due to the U.S led war on terrorism in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan ... the 2003 war in Iraq destabilized the country resulting in another war and the rise of the Islamic State ... all stemming from the 9/11 terror attacks.
Almost immediately after the attacks, there were a few lone voices in America questioning the official verison of the days events, these lone voices have over the years grown into multi-millions not only in the U.S but also around the world. A 2015 YouGov poll found that 38% of American's habour doubts about the official 9/11 narrative.
38% of the American population is 121,165,681 people ... Can they all be crazy conspiracy theorists ... throwing around wild accusations based nothing or are they right ?
Why do so many people doubt the U.S Government official story of the 9/11 terror attacks ?
Have you ever taken a good hard look at 9/11 ? ... What do you really know about the 9/11 attacks ?
The aim of this blog is to relate information that the majority of people may not know about the September the 11th terror attacks. the examination of the days events includes all the U.S government's official reports and findings ... the mainstream media coverage including the BBC Conspiracy Files and the alternative conspiracy theory hypothesis.
There are links to sources and most important links to film footage ( through Youtube ) of the events that took place on the day itself. It is good advise to view all the footage and to examine all the still photographs thoroughly so the reader is able to decide for themselves whether the basic elements to support any hypothesis were actually presence on the day.
The controversy surrounding 9/11 initially began with the collapse of the World Trade Center Twin Towers ... so this is where this examination of the days events will start ... in New York's W.T.C complex.
" Condemnation before investigation is the higher form of ignorance "
The September the 11th 2001 Terror Attacks
New York World Trade Centre Attacks
Table of Contents:
Chapter 1 .. The Collapse of the Twin Towers
Chapter 2 .. The Collapse of World Trade Center 7
Chapter 1 .. The Collapse of the Twin Towers
Construction of the Towers / 9/11 Commission Report
The Tower fires / Explosive force
Aluminium/Water Explosion Hypothesis
The Physics of the Tower Collapses
Controlled Thermite/C4 Demolition Hypothesis
Design and construction of the twin towers
The first step in determining how and why the twin towers collapsed is to establish how they were designed and constructed ... How strong were the twin towers ? ... What forces could they resist ?
How resistant were they to the aircraft impact forces and the subsequent jet fueled fires ?
The W.T.C twin towers were the first buildings outside of the military and nuclear industries that were specifically designed and built to withstand aircraft impacts.
The aircraft used in the design plans was the Boeing 707. The Boeing 707 has the fuel capacity of 23,000 gallons, the designers and engineers believed the towers could withstand multiple 707 impacts carrying their full fuel capacity.
The towers were constructed with a very strong and flexible outer steel mesh wall framework. The wall consisted of 236 columns, 59 on each face, from the 10th to the 107th floor. The supporting column beams were 36 inch by12 inch harden steel. The wall functioned like a square tube providing resistance to the combined effect of lateral winds and gravity loads.
The framework was strong and flexible designed to give in to impact force rather than resistance. The outer mesh framework was designed to act like a giant mosquito net, this combined with the flexible steel framework allowed the towers to absorb a high degree of kinetic impact force.
|Twin tower design|
Youtube Search Engine ... Building the Twin Towers ... 00:15:00
Google Search Engine ... Twin Tower Construction
The tower design consisted of a central inner core tube constructed from steel and concrete running the height of the buildings. Like the perimeter, the inner core was built with a 100% steel framework. Each tower consisted of 100,000 tons of harden steel and 390,000 tons of reinforced concrete.
The tower design used a truss floor system. Each floor was secured to the outer framework and inner core by 1000s of steel rivets and welds. The trusses were covered by 4 inch thick lightweight concrete slabs. The truss system allowed for load redistribution between the outer perimeter and inner core. The truss floor system was very strong and flexible adding to the overall strength of the buildings.
|The truss floor system|
As well as aircraft impacts the towers were also designed to withstand hurricane force winds. The flexible, strong design allowed the towers to resist constant winds of 74 – 156 mph. On a windy day people in the towers could feel the buildings sway as they gave with the motion of the wind.
In a BBC documentary made in the 1980s the architectural designer, commented that the twin towers were capable of absorbing multiple aircraft impacts due to the building’s design, the twin towers were built to withstand up to 13000 tons of impact force, an aircraft impact would generate 300-400 tons of impact force, well within the tower’s capability.
In an interview recorded on the 25th of January 2001 … Frank DeMartini, W.T.C construction project manager,stated that the biggest problem in the event of an aircraft impact would be fire from the jet fuel dumped into the towers. The buildings would be fine, a lot of people would die in the fires but the building’s structures would remain standing and intact, DeMartini stated he believed the twin towers capable of withstanding multiple aircraft impacts.
Youtube Search Engine … 9/11 Tower Architect 1980's BBC interview with designer ... 00:2:31
9/11 Frank DeMartini ... W.T.C construction manager ... 00:00:44
The W.T.C tower structural design ... 00:7:42
For more information on the Construction of the Twin Towers refer to the sources listed at the end of chapter 1
The towers were fire protected with fireproofing which included the floor trusses as well as the inner and outer steel framework. The buildings were regularly inspected by the fire service and there were no reports of dislodged or deflective fireproofing. The sprinkler system was installed in 1975 and contained 30,000 gallons of water, stored in six water tanks located on four floors and was also regularly inspected.
|The aircraft impacts|
The Columbia earthquake centre recorded the aircraft impacts at 8.46 am north tower / 9.03 am south tower. The observational footage of the impact on the south tower at 9.03 am confirms when analyzed that the oscillation of the tower was roughly equal to the designers and engineers predictions. The maximum deflection at the top of the tower was estimated to be a third of the drift resulting from the original design wind loads.
This indicates that the overall lateral stiffness of the towers wasn’t affected by the aircraft impacts.
The 9/11 commission report of 2004 acknowledged that the aircraft impacts did not weaken the structural integrity of the twin towers.
The 9/11 Commission Report … Released 2004
After constant pressure from the families of the victims of the attacks, the U.S Government reluctantly agreed to a public enquiry into the September 11th attacks. On November the 27th 2002, after an unprecedented 144 day delay, the 9/11 commission began an investigation into the days events.
The initial allocation of funding for the commission was very low at only three millions dollars, after repeated requests from the commission another eleven million dollars was released. Delays in receiving funding and information from the Bush administration hampered the commission’s process. Deadlines for the release of vital documentation from the white house were repeatedly missed ...some of the documents released had large portions blacked out.
The commission only received 25% of the information it requested.
Thomas H Keen … Commission Chairman
‘ We hasn’t had the information or the time we asked for ‘
George W Bush issued two Executive Orders to restrict the information from the White House;
November the 1st 2001 ... Executive Order 13233 ... Amendment to the Presidential Act of 1978 ... Prevention of public release of internal documents of the Executive Branch ... Classified documents concerning Executive Orders remain classified.
Google Search Engine ... Executive Order 13233
April the 1st 2003 ... Executive Order 13292 ... Amendment of President Clinton's Executive Order of 1995 which allowed for more public access to official White House documentation ... Amended to authorize the Vice President veto over releases of White House information.
Google Search Engine ... Executive Order 13292
President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney refused to testify in front of the commission. After public pressure they reluctantly agreed to talk to the commission, under certain conditions.
Interviewed together / Not separately * Not on record / No transcript * Behind closed doors
Most disturbing of all ... NOT UNDER OATH
|President George W Bush * 9/11 Commission Report * Vice President Dick Cheney|
In a court of law this would be considered ' Guilty Demeanor '
The scientific data for the 9/11 commission was provided by N.I.S.T
The National Institute Of Standards And Technology
The commission report stated that the collapse of the towers was caused by the intense fires burning in the buildings. The fires fueled by the jet fuel from the aircraft's and tower contents, burned at high temperatures of 650 c – 1015 c, melting and weakening the inner and outer steel framework causing the entire steel framework of both buildings to completely collapse.
Aviation fuel from the aircraft impacts was thrown into the towers starting fires, some of the fuel flowed away from the impact zones down the structure of the buildings causing high temperature fires on multiple floors. The sprinkler systems in both towers were disabled by both aircraft impacts. This aided the fires, fueled mainly by office contents, to spread from floor to floor. Due to the lass of a sprinkler system to fight the fires, temperatures rose high enough to melt and weaken the steel on multiple floors to collapse the entire tower structures.
The report concluded that intense heat from the aviation fuel and building content fires caused the twin tower collapses.
W.T.C building 7 ( Saloman Brothers building ) the third building to completely collapse on 9/11 was never even mentioned in the commission report.
For access to the 9/11 Commission Report of 2004 refer to sources at the end of chapter 1
The Twin Tower Fires
To establish whether fire collapsed the twin towers, it is necessary to examine the fuel source of the fires and the fire's strength and activity from impact to collapse.
The twin tower fire fuel source
N.I.S.T data from the commission report stated an estimated percentage of fuel that was burned up in the initial impact explosions. This percentage of fuel for both impacts was estimated at 20%.
An aircraft will only take off with the amount of fuel needed for it to reach its destination, with a little in reserve for delays in landing or emergencies. The estimate fuel load of the Boeing 767’s that struck the towers was 10,000 gallons as both took off from the same airport, with the same destination Los Angeles.
The tower designers built the towers with multiple impacts of 707’s with full fuel tanks of 23,000 gallons in mind ... the towers collapsed after a single aircraft impact with 10,000 gallons of fuel.
20% of 10,000 is 2000 … 2000 gallons burnt up in the initial impact explosions ?
There is very little film footage or photographic evidence regarding the north tower impact. The south tower impact was seen, filmed and photographed by 1000s of people, the footage viewed by millions around the world on the day itself. Since 9/11 multi - millions have viewed the impacts from multiple angles.
What information does the photographic evidence provide ?
|Aircraft impact fireballs|
Using the width of the towers as scale, gives a rough way to estimate the size of the impact fireballs ... the configuration of the impact fireballs matches the configuration of the fuel tanks on the Boeing series.
The two wing fuel tanks are kept full by a hydraulic feed from the main tank in the fuselage to keep the engines at maximum efficiency so the two side fireballs must be approximately 2000 gallons of fuel.
The side fireballs are roughly ¾ of the width of the tower in all three dimensions. The main fireball is roughly twice the width of the tower wide, a width in height and a tower width away from the tower.
A rough estimate of the size of the fireballs in the photograph above using the tower width as scale;
The two side fireballs …. Height = 156 ft / 47 m The central fireball …. Height = 208 ft / 63 m
Width = 156 ft / 47 m Width = 416 ft / 126 m
Depth = 156 ft / 47 m Depth = 208 ft / 63 m
The central impact fireball shows a trail of flames leading away from the tower to the small left hand fireball.
The fact that this explosion of fuel happened, at a rough estimate over a 100 ft away from the tower, indicates that this must have been the left wing fuel tank as the fuel would have to be contained in something for it to travel away from the tower, than explode. The right wing fuel tank explosion, although traveled away from the tower, exploded closer and so merged with the central fireball to produce a long fireball covering the entire width of the south tower and half the north tower width
This would make the combined explosive expansion of the central and right fireballs over 500 feet in width.
These fuel explosion fireballs are too big to attribute to only 2000 gallons of aviation fuel.
As the wing tanks are hydraulic feed, they would have contained almost their full compliment of fuel, 2170 gallons. Allowing maybe 170 gallons as the fuel in the trail of flames, means there would be at least 2000 gallons of fuel in the side fireballs.
|Is there only 2000 gallons of fuel in these fireballs ?|
The photograph on the right was taken 3 minutes after impact; how can 8000 gallons of fuel burn up so quickly ?
The side fireball fits inside the main ball twice, this would account for another 4000 gallons of fuel. This would make an estimated total of fuel burnt up in the initial impact fireballs as 8000 gallons.
This simple examination of a few photographs leaves the N.I.S.T estimation of 20% looking ridiculous low.
Using this method to estimate the fuel percentage;
It is likely that 80% – 90% of jet fuel was burnt up in the explosions… 20% - 10% thrown into the towers, most of it on fire … 5% - 0% flowing away from the impact zones down through the towers.
Youtube Search Engine ... Witness testimony: South tower activity ... 00:1:06
The most important percentage of fuel is the amount that flowed away from the impact zones down through the towers causing fires on multiple floors resulting in a complete collapse of both buildings.
N.I.S.T estimated that 465 cubic feet of jet fuel flowed away from the north tower impact zone. The south tower estimate was 397 cubic feet of fuel flowed down the through the building.
465 cubic feet …. 13.167354 cubic metres … Just under 14 cubic metres … North tower
397 cubic feet …..11.244178 cubic metres … Just under 12 cubic metres … South tower
Cubic volume of each tower 1,650,000 cubic metres
24.401532 cubic metres of aviation fuel caused the collapse of two buildings with the combined cubic volume of 3,300,000 cubic metres … combined steel tonnage of 200,000 … combined concrete tonnage of 780,000.
Even if the N.I.S.T estimation on fuel flowing away from the impact zones is correct, is it really possible for this small amount of jet fuel to flow away from the impact zones and down through the towers causing high temperature fires on multiple floors to collapse two buildings the size of the towers ?
The north tower, the lowest impact floor was 93 … the south tower 77 was the lowest impact floor.
In the north tower, 14 cubic metres of fuel would have to flow or drip down nearly all 92 remaining floors, burning consistently and at high temperatures of 650 c – 1015 c for a significant amount of time to melt and weaken the steel of both the inner and outer frameworks.
The south tower, 12 cubic metres of fuel flowing down 76 floors melting and weakening fire protected, 36 inch by 12 inch harden steel columns, 236 outer steel framework and 71 inner steel core framework columns.
Each steel fire protected truss floor was covered by 4 inches of concrete and would present a difficult and time consuming barrier for the jet fuel fires to breach. Steel melts 1015 c, concrete crumbles at 1000 c, aviation fuel cannot reach these high temperatures. Jet fuel has a rapid burning speed so each amount of fuel deposited on each floor would burn up very quickly, leaving only the contains of each floor to fuel the fires.
Aviation fuel has a very high burning speed of 1000 – 5000 lbs per hour, the fires in the north tower impact zone had died down within 20 minutes of the impact. The south tower impact fires followed the same pattern, the initial flames being replaced by thick black smoke. Black smoke is an indication of a fire struggling for fuel and burning low temperature fuel such as modern office equipment and modern building materials.
N.I.S.T acknowledged that the fast burning jet fuel burnt up in 10-20 minutes ... leaving the fire only low temperature fuel in office and building contents to burn, to enable the fires to reach and maintain temperature 650-1015 c.
Impact zone fire activity
A fire’s temperature cannot rise above the burning temperature of its fuel, low temperature fuels produce low temperature fires and they produce low temperature heat.
|The tower fires directly after impact|
South tower impact 9.03 am .... both towers smouldering 9.10 am
The two fuel sources are aviation fuel and office and building contents ... aviation fuel burns at a higher temperature than office and building materials at 825 c.
The aviation fuel source burning at a higher temperature stands a better chance of reaching temperatures capable of melting and weakening steel.
So could aviation fuel reach and maintain the temperatures needed to melt and weaken steel in the conditions and environment of the twin towers?
The south tower impact occurred at 9.03 am, 17 minutes after the north tower was impacted. The impact zone of the north tower at the moment of the south tower impact was bellowing black smoke not flames ... seven minutes after the south tower impact, the photographic evidence confirms the same process for the south tower fires.
Large fireballs produced by the impacts, burning up most of the fuel. Leaving only a small percentage of fuel thrown into the buildings, the majority of the fuel would be on fire. Within 10 - 20 minutes the jet fuel was burnt up leaving only low temperature fuel to burn and not much of it.
Even if there was a much higher percentage of jet fuel thrown into the towers, could jet fuel reach the temperatures required to melt and weaken steel ?
Steel melts at 1015 c, it weakens at 650 c …Aviation fuel burns at a maximum temperature of 825 c.
|A jet engine ... south tower impact zone ... north tower impacts zone|
Youtube Search Engine ... How a Jet Engine Works .. 00:9:30
The optimum conditions for aviation fuel ... a jet engine ... the impact zones ...not conducive to a high temperature jet fuel fire.
For aviation fuel to reach its maximum burning temperature the conditions and environment in which the fuel is burnt is critical. The environment would need to be enclosed, such as the combustion chamber in a jet engine, not gaping holes as there were in the sides of the impact zones. The fires were not contained which would keep the temperature low. The conditions such as fuel source would have to be constant, with a stream of the right mixture of oxygen and jet fuel.
These precise conditions did not occur in the twin towers and the fires in the impact zones behaved accordingly; flames at first, until the jet fuel burnt up, then smouldering and releasing clouds of black smoke ... these are characteristics of a fire burning at temperatures far too low to have any effect on the structure of the buildings.
In ideal circumstances aviation fuel could theoretically weaken steel but that small amount of fuel, under those conditions, in that environment simply would not be able to produce consistent 650 c temperatures.
Even in ideal circumstances aviation fuel could not burn at a high enough temperature to melt steel.
Molten steel from jet fuel fires is impossible.
If fires fueled by aviation fuel couldn't have melted and weaken the steel of the towers ... How would fires fueled by office and building material ?
For more information about jet engines refer to sources listed at the end of chapter 1
A progressive look at the north tower impact zone from impact to collapse reveals just how the
temperatures in the impact zones had cooled.
The north tower was impacted at 8.46 am; the flames were nearly completely gone and replaced with black smoke by 9.03 am when the south tower was impacted. Black smoke continued to bellow out of the north tower impact zone, until around 9.30-10.00 am by then there were almost no flames at all and very little smoke. Dark, black smoke continued to escape from the upper part of the impact zone and above, but the lower part of the impact floors were clear of both flame and smoke.
The impact zone did not appear to be hot as was evident by the presence of survivors signalling for help in the impact zone. Edna Cintron was photographed standing in the north tower impact zone at 10.09 am just nineteen minutes before the north tower collapse. Edna was able to stand in full view without being burnt by heat or choked by smoke.
|North tower fire progression|
North tower ... 11 minutes after impact ... 17 minutes after impact ... 24 minutes after impact
Note that there are no indications of fire on any floor below the impact floors.
|Edna Cintron standing in the North tower impact zone ... 1 hour and 23 minutes after impact ... 19 minutes before collapse|
If the impact zone was anywhere near the temperatures required to melt or weaken steel, it would not be humanly possible for Edna to stand where she stood. Edna was working on the impact floors and was present at from the moment of impact, right up to the moment of collapse.
If the impact zones were 650 c – 1015 c … How would people have survived in and around the impact zone until the moment of the tower collapse ?
Youtube Search Engine … Edna Cintron ... North tower impact zone ... 00:2:03
9/11 W.T.C fire timelapse ... 00:4:26
|North tower impact zone minutes before the collapse at approximately 10.18 am - 10.28 am|
Just ten minutes after Edna Cintron was spotted signalling from the impact zone of the north tower, the impact zone was ablaze again. Black, then white smoke bellowed from the impact floors and the spot where Edna was seen signalling for help was red hot with heat.
Youtube Search Engine … 9/11 W.T.C timelapse 800fps ... 00:2:53
Twin tower fire activity ... 00:24:11
Twin tower fire activity ... 00:13:30
How could this reappearance of fire be attributed to the jet fuel thrown into the north tower impact zone 1 hour and 30 minutes earlier ? ... or non-existent office fires ?
N.I.S.T … Hypothesis relays on the fuel from the aircraft's thrown into the towers spreading the fires ... while office contents fueled the fires to the point of collapse.
If all the aircraft fuel was either burnt up in the initial explosions or thrown into the building and burnt up in the first 20 minutes and the office fires didn't burn strong or consistently in the impact zones ... What fueled the fires back to life and what fuel source allowed the temperature of the impact zone to rise 100s of degrees within 10 minutes prior to collapse ... Not aviation fuel or office and building materials.
What fuel source allowed the temperature of the north tower impact zone to rise from being comfortable for humans to being hot enough to melt and weaken steel, this extreme change in temperature occurred within a matter of few minutes and cannot be attributed to jet fueled or building content fueled fires.
The spontaneous appearance of fire and extreme heat minutes before the collapse when all indications were that the fires had more or less burnt themselves out, suggested pre-planning rather than a naturally occurring event.
South tower collapsed at 9.59 am, the same sequence of events. Aircraft fuel burnt up within 20 minutes, fires died down and burnt out. Than minutes before the collapse the spontaneous appearance of fire and extreme heat, molten metal pouring out of the impact zone
Film footage and photographic evidence shows molten metal falling from the south tower impact zone.
Evidence that molten metal poured out of the south tower is overwhelming yet aviation fuel cannot melt steel, and the only other fuel source was lower temperature fuel.
The absence of a large portion of the steel at ground zero and the eye witness accounts supported by photographic evidence of a river of molten metal running underneath debris at ground zero for weeks after the day of 9/11 cannot be explained by jet fuel ... as jet fuel burns at too low a temperature to melt steel and keep it molten for weeks.
As jet fuel cannot melt steel, any explanation for the presence of molten metal in the collapse of the towers using the hypothesis of jet fueled fires is fundamentally scientifically flawed.
So what melted and weakened 200,000 tons of steel ?
These images show molten metal pouring out of the south tower.
|Images of the south tower impact zone minutes before collapse|
The image on the far left; shows molten metal falling hundreds of feet from the south tower impact zone.
Youtube Search Engine ... Molten metal falling from the south tower ... 00:00:33
The bottom photograph, second in from the left, shows the fires inside the impact zone sizzling and spitting, the appearance of this reaction is not consistent with a fire fueled by aviation fuel and modern office contains / modern buildings materials.
|Molten steel in a foundry ... heated to 1600 c|
Aviation fuel’s maximum burning temperature is 825 c … the melting temperature of steel is 1015 c.
Youtube Search Engine ... Molten metal at ground zero ... 00:00:35
Although there is indisputable evidence for molten metal being in and falling from the south tower impact zone and molten metal at ground zero, the U.S Government completely ignored this evidence and so gave no explanation for its presence.
It is an indisputable scientific fact that aviation fuel cannot reach the temperatures needed to melt steel ... It is a scientific impossibility for aviation fuel to melt steel.
The impact floors of the north tower …. 93 – 99 … The impact floors of the south tower …. 77 – 85
What happened on the 92 floors below the impact zone of the north tower and the 76 floors below the impact zone of the south tower ?
Film footage and photographic evidence confirm that the impact floors of both towers were for approximately 15 – 20 minutes on fire after the initial impacts and although the fires had almost completely gone out, they mysteriously reignited minutes before the towers collapsed.
In the impact floors … Flames and smoke were visible ….. There are visible signs of fire.
So what footage and photographic evidence is there to confirm the presence of fires on the 92 floors of the north tower and the 76 floors of the south tower ?
|The twin towers shortly after impact|
These photographs show the towers in the first 25 – 30 minutes after the impacts. There are absolutely no signs of fire on any floor below the impact zones of both towers. Yet the N.I.S.T collapse through heat of fire hypothesis depends on multiple fires on multiple floors.
|The twin towers impact zones smouldering ... the rest of the structures untouched by fire|
These are photographs taken before the collapses, showing no indications of fire below the 92nd and 76th floors of the towers, if there were fires burning intensely inside the buildings, wouldn’t there be visible indications of fire on the outside of the structures?
This means that even if the impossible was possible and the fires in the twin towers were hot enough to melt or weaken steel ... they did not spread below the impact floors.
So couldn’t have damaged the structural integrity of the majority of the buildings.
The twin tower shouldn’t have collapsed past the impact floors.
It’s important to note ... that the majority of floors in both towers were unoccupied ... most of those were unfurnished ... little or no fuel to feed the fire after the fast burning jet fuel had burnt up.
Normal everyday office fires from everyday causes would have had practically no fuel to feed on.
Although there were reports of fires in the basement and a few lower floors, these reports were made in reference to explosions occurring at the moment of aircraft impacts 92 and 76 floors above.
|The twin towers the moment of collapse|
These photographs taken at the moment of the towers collapses again show the floors beneath the impacts zone completely clear of any signs of fires.
|The north and south towers collapsing|
As they collapse the towers are clean and completely clear of charring, scorching and any blackening due to the effects of flame and smoke ... Do these buildings look like they are collapsing due to intense fires ?
How can fires burn inside a building to the temperatures of 650 c – 1015 c without showing any visible signs of fire on the outside of the structure ?
Where are the flames licking up the sides of the towers ?
Where is the smoke bellowing out of the windows ?
Why aren’t the outsides of the towers blacken and scorched ?
Where are the hallmark signs of fire ?
Where are the multiple fires on multiple floors ?
Youtube Search Engine ... Recording of firefighter communications in twin towers ... 00:10:57
9/11 WTC tower fire timelapse ... 00:4:26
The Twin Tower Fireproofing
There has been speculation online concerning the fireproofing being first ineffective in protecting the steel framework from the heat of the fires and secondly being dislodged by the aircraft impacts.
The fireproofing was in the process of being replaced due to the asbestos content ... it was not being replaced due to being ineffective in protecting the towers from fire.
The dislodging of the fireproofing on impacts is possible but most opinion is that the effected areas for the dislodging of any fireproofing would have been the impact zones ... not the rest of the towers.
After examining the fire activity in the twin tower impact zones and the rest of the tower structures it's obvious that the impact floor fires weren't burning consistently enough or anywhere near the temperatures needed to effect the steel structure of the impact zones ... until 10 minutes prior to collapse
The towers structure below the impact zones displayed no sign of fire whatsoever ... so the fires couldn't have melted or weakened the steel structure of the twin towers ... they didn't spread below the impact floors and just weren't hot enough ... with or without fireproofing.
In the history of steel construction, no steel framed high rise / skyscraper has ever collapsed through heat of fire before or since the day of September the 11th 2001.
It is possible for fire to weaken the steel framework of a building but the fires must be high temperature and burning at high temperatures for a significant amount of time. When these rare occurrences happen the result is a partial collapse. Complete collapses are incredibly rare and have only happened below the height of high rise, never above.
The taller a building’s height the stronger and thicker the supporting steel columns have to be, the steel columns of the twin towers were 36 inch by 12 inch harden steel. The strength of the steel columns combined with the design of the towers meant it would be extremely difficult for fire to collapse the towers.
In 1975 a fire broke out in the north tower on the 11th floor. It spread to six floors and burnt for three hours, no part of the building collapsed. A sprinkler system was installed into both towers due to the inquiry findings.
Youtube Search Engine ... 1975 W.T.C tower fire ... 00:2:31
In 1988 the Interstate bank caught fire and burnt for three hours. The buildings steel framework did not melt or weaken. It didn’t collapse, it remained standing.
|Mandarin Oriental Hotel|
In 2009 the Mandarin Oriental Hotel caught fire and burnt for three and a half hours. The building structure did not melt, weaken or collapse. It remained standing.
|Madrid Windsor Hotel|
In 2005 the Madrid Windsor Hotel caught fire and was an inferno, engulfed in flames for over twenty hours.
The Madrid Windsor hotel was half finished, had no sprinkler system. This building was not designed and built to withstand aircraft impacts and was not as well built or as strong as the twin towers.
Not only did the Windsor hotel not melt, weaken or collapse, it also supported the weight of a crane on top of the building.
Youtube Search Engine ... Madrid Windsor Hotel Fire
All three of these buildings were on fire for longer lengths of time ranging from 3 – 20 hours. The fires in these buildings were much hotter than the fires in the twin towers ... Yet all three remained standing,
Why did the towers collapse from less than 2 hours of much less intense fires on a few isolated floors?
North tower impact … 8.46 am …… North tower collapse … 10.28 am … 1 hour 42 minutes
South tower impact … 9.03 am …… South tower collapse …. 9.59 am …. 56 minutes
In the mid 1990s British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of experiments at Cardington to investigate the behaviour of steel framed buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated eight story building. The steel beams were left unprotected and exposure to temperatures of 800 – 900 c for 5-6 hours although some of the beams sagged, none were weaken to the point of collapse, none melted and the building didn’t collapse.
No collapse, full or partial was observed in any of the six experiments.
Google Search Engine ... Steel Construction Information
Youtube Search Engine .. 9/11 Experiments: The Mysterious Eutectic steel ... 00:9:42
If buildings that were designed and built as well as the twin towers can collapse that easily, with so little fire and heat, wouldn’t we see collapsing buildings due to fire more often in our daily lives ?
Examining the film footage and photographs, looking at the environment, the fuel source, the intensity and longevity of the fires in the towers ... is it really possible that these extremely well designed and built structures collapsed due to the heat of these fires ?
Other than the twin towers, how many times in your life have you heard or seen a complete collapse of a steel framed building, of any height, due to fire ?
Partial collapses, yes, but complete collapses are incredibly rare. If buildings can collapse, that were on fire for the length and intensity of the towers ... wouldn’t collapses be more common ?
Does this fit with what we see in our daily lives ?
The 9/11 commission report concluded that the twin tower collapses were due to the heat of the fires caused by the fuel thrown into the buildings by the aircraft impacts, although the fast burning jet fuel burnt up almost immediately after the impacts ... the fires fueled mainly by office contents were able to reach and maintain temperatures capable of melting and weakening the 236 outer framework and 47 inner core framework steel columns collapsing the entire structures.
When examined in detail this hypothesis is flawed by the fire’s environment and conditions, the low amount and low burning temperatures of its fuel source and the length time that the fires burnt.
There wasn’t enough jet fuel needed to spread the fires down past the impact floors, the fires in the impact zones died down very quickly. The gaping holes in the sides of the impact floors and the lack of a constant and strong fuel source means that the conditions in the impact zones were not conducive to producing temperatures needed to melt or weaken steel.
The fact that survivors were in and around the impact floors from impact to collapse shows there couldn’t have been the temperatures on the impact floors able to melt or weaken steel.
The fires in the impact zones didn’t burn constantly from impact to collapse. There were only 10 – 20 minutes of any significant fire activity after the impacts. For almost the next 34 – 44 minutes the south tower smouldered, the north tower, over 1 hour and 30 minutes of bellowing smoke not flames from the impact floors.
The fire spontaneously reappearing roughly 10 minutes before the tower collapses is not consistent with the behaviour of fire in these conditions and circumstances.
How could fires have melted and weakened the steel in the towers when they didn’t burn hot enough, long enough and consistently enough from impact to collapse?
There is absolutely no scientific, witness or observational evidence to support the multiple fires on multiple floors hypothesis which means there is no catalyst for the collapse of the majority of the tower structures.
The only conclusion is that the twin towers could not have collapsed through heat of fire.
The 9/11 commission didn’t address key issues such as the clear and overwhelming evidence supporting explosive force in the collapse processes.
The towers collapsed through their centres mass, at near free fall speed, into their own footprints.
The speed and the manor of the collapses were never addressed satisfactory in the report.
The evidence of molten metal underneath ground zero debris for up to four weeks after the collapses was completely ignored.
The third building to completely collapse on the day of 9/11, W.T.C building 7, was never even mention in the report.
The 9/11 commission report of 2004 … did not give any satisfactory answer to why and how the twin towers collapsed.
For access to the 9/11 Commission Report of 2004 refer to sources listed at the end of chapter 1
The Evidence of Explosive force
The 9/11 Commission report refused to recognise the evidence in support of explosive force being presence in the towers collapses, therefore gave no explanation for the overwhelming observational, scientific and witness testimony in support of explosions occurring in the collapse process of both towers.
The Columbia Earthquake centre recorded the aircraft impacts and the building collapses. A split second before each collapse they recorded explosions. This corresponds with multiple eye witness accounts of loud explosions an instant before the collapses and multiple softer explosions during the collapses.
Firemen and members of the public claimed to have heard multiple floor explosions, reassembling gun fire … Bang, Bang, Bang. Bang as the towers fell. Witnesses also claim to have heard explosions in the basements of both towers at the moment of the impacts and explosions in the basements at the moment the collapses.
|Firemen hearing explosions|
Youtube Search Engine ... W.T.C firemen hear explosions ... 00:00:29
The top sections of both towers exploded, throwing debris 100s of metres away from the collapse site.
The unexploded sections below the impact floors of both towers collapsed straight down, through the centres of their supporting mass or weight at near free fall speed. As the jet fueled fires on multiple floors to weaken the steel framework has been ruled out due to the lass of scientific and observational evidence of fire activity below the impact floors, the only possible explanation for the speed and direction of the collapses is the presence of explosive force to blow each floor to allow an unimpeded descent.
The scientific data and witness accounts of hearing explosions, point to explosive force being presence in the
collapse process of the twin towers.
Google Search Engine ... Earthquake data analysis
There is plenty of visual evidence to support the scientific and witness evidence.
By the time of the collapses all eyes and cameras were on the twin towers, there are multiple photographs taken at multiple angles and all show definite evidence of explosive detonations occurring down the height of the buildings.
Witness and Audio Evidence of Explosive Force
Firemen and rescue workers claimed to have heard explosions in the twin towers at the moment of impacts and as the buildings collapsed. Mainstream media correspondents at the W.T.C complex reported hearing multiple explosive detonations, not only as the tower fell but detonations occurring from the moment of the aircraft impacts.
There are many witness testimonies from members of the public to hearing and seeing explosions in the twin towers at the moment of both aircraft impacts and the moment of both tower collapses. With video cameras so readily available to the general public, there are dozens of independent recordings of visual and audio evidence of explosions coming from the twin towers from impact to collapse.
There are still frames illustrating the visual evidence of explosive detonations occurring in the towers, but to fully appreciate the evidence in support of explosive force in the tower collapses, it is important to spend the time to view the evidence in its original form with both visual and audio coverage.
There are hours of professional and amateur film footage of the events in New York on the September the 11th 2001, throughout the day there are numerous statements recorded describing explosions occurring in the twin towers and W.T.C building 7 … these statements are made by firemen, policemen, rescue workers, tower employees, media correspondents and members of the general public.
Here is a small selection of the footage of Witness testimony, visual and audio evidence of explosive force being presence in the twin towers;
Youtube Search Engine …
1. The south tower collapse close-up ... 00:10:57
Huge explosion at the top of the south tower …. multiple explosions down the tower
2. Evidence of explosives / Witness testimony ... 00:6:33
Witness testimony …. Molten metal / sparks falling from the south tower impact zone
Sound of huge explosion at the top of the south tower before collapse
Visual evidence of explosions at base of south tower …. Media reports of explosions occurring in the
Media interview interrupted by an explosion then south tower collapse.
3. Bush press conference / Detonation flashes / Evidence of explosions ... 00:8:06
Press conference by George W Bush after 9/11 in which he slips up and describes operatives placing
explosives in the towers
Examples of controlled demolition explosions occurring down the length of a building and detonation
Evidence of explosions occurring down the length of the towers under the debris cloud and detonation
flashes occurring down the height of the towers … Sounds of huge explosions occurring at the top of
White smoke pouring out of the north tower impact floors … Detonation flashes in W.T.C 7
4. North tower explodes close-up / repeated ... 00:1:49
Huge explosion at the top of the tower … Multiple detonations occurring down the tower
5 6 7
5. Visible explosions before collapae ... 00:1:21
Close up footage of a explosive detonation ejecting office furniture through a window
6. North tower collapse ... 00:00:52
Close up footage of north tower exploding / repeated
7. Witness testimony / detonation flashes / explosions ... 00:4:21
Witness describes large explosion, then multiple explosions as the tower fell … Detonation Flashes
8. MacQueen NYFD 9/11 witnesses
9/11 Commission Report Bars 503 1st responder eyewitnesses
Professor Graeme Macqueen of Hamilton University, Ontario Canada
Analysis of the witness testimony of New York Fire Department 9/11 personnel
Clarifying the descriptions of explosive force used it the statements
Comparing the number of fire department personnel statements that support the use of explosive force
rather than the official collapse hypothesis of no explosive force.
9. Eyewitnesses testifying to explosions in the twin towers ... 00:27:55
Eyewitness testimonies to hearing and seeing explosive detonations from impact to collapse.
Google Search Engine ... 9/11 Review: Witnesses to tower explosions
Journal of 9/11 studies ... Dr Graeme Macqueen
Eyewitnesses evidence: Explosions twin towers ... Dr Graeme Macqueen
The 9/11 Commission Report of 2004 found no evidence in support of explosive force being present in the twin tower collapses … No visual, no audio and no witness testimony.
Observable Evidence of Explosive Force at the Top of the Towers
The observational evidence in support of explosive force is overwhelming. The top of the towers exploding was filmed and photographed from multiple angles.
|Explosions at the top of the towers|
These photographs show the towers, the instant they begin their collapse. Debris was thrown at least a tower width ( 63m/208ft ) up and outwards away from the collapsing towers. Building collapses do not generate upward and outward force they will always take the least path of resistance in the direction of the gravitation pull of the earth when descending.
|Detonations at the top of the north tower moments prior to collapse|
A sequence of photographs showing the collapse process at the top of the north tower, smaller detonations are visible in the impact zone before the large collapse explosion.
|The towers exploding|
Would you say these buildings are Collapsing or exploding ?
|Multiple explosions visible|
The image on the left shows a large section at the top of the south tower tipping and falling away from the rest of the structure. The two photographs on the right; Show once again how far from the tower the debris was ejected by the collapses. In addition, there is visual evidence of much smaller explosions occurring lower down the towers.
The clouds of dust and debris descending from the explosions at the top of the twin towers covering the visual evidence of detonations down the height of the structures. These detonations must have been presence to account for the collapse speed and direction of the buildings.
|The south tower collapse sequence|
The south tower collapse … 9.59 am
Youtube Search Engine ... Top of the south tower exploding & tipping ... 00:00:13
South tower collapse: Multiple angles ...00:2:17
These three photographs of the moment of the south tower collapse show the top of the tower crack and fall away from the rest of the building.
The falling top of the tower than disintegrates in mid – air, suggesting not just one but multiple explosions. First explosion severed the top of the tower from the remaining structure another detonation explodes the falling top section.
Despite the scientific data and the overwhelming observation evidence for the presence of explosive force in the collapse of the top of the twin towers. The U.S Government categorically denied the presence of explosive force in the collapse process of the buildings that fell on September the 11th 2001.
Observable Evidence of Explosive Force on Multiple Floors
There is some photograph evidence of multiple explosions on multiple floors, this corresponds with firemen and tower employees claims of hearing and in some cases seeing explosions on multiple floors.
These photographs of both collapses show explosions occurring lower down the buildings
Detonation flashes appearing as the south tower collapses.
The photograph on the left shows multiple explosions top, middle and base. The photograph on the far right shows office contents being ejected from the tower by explosive force. Although these explosions were much smaller than the detonations that exploded the tops of the towers and they don’t seem powerful enough to bring down the buildings.
Nevertheless, the towers did descend straight down at near free fall speed indicating that much greater explosive force was at work inside the structures causing the buildings to implode rather than explode, the smaller outward detonations indicating the start of each explosive process.
Despite the observational and scientific evidence to support the presence of multiple explosive detonations on multiple floors, the U.S Government categorically denied the presence of explosive force in the collapse process of the buildings that fell September the 11th 2001.
Witness Testimony and Evidence of Explosions in the basements
There is observational evidence and witness accounts supporting explosive detonations in the basements of both towers. In an article on Chief engineers.org contains an account by stationary Engineer Mike Peceraro, describing damage to the basement and lobby of the north tower after the aircraft impact, this is supported by firemen and W.T.C worker’s reports of damage in the lobbies of both towers after the aircraft impacts.
William Rodriquez, a janitor who helped rescue victims from the towers during the attacks, described hearing a loud explosion in the basement of the north tower, then a second explosion at the top of the tower. The second explosion at the top of the tower was the aircraft impact.
William Rodriquez’s account of explosions in the north tower basement and lower floors is collaborated by the fire fighters Rodriquez rescued.
|Mike Peceraro ... William Rodriquez ... John Schroeder|
Youtube Search Engine … William Rodriquez 2006- 9/11, The last man out ... 00:57:58
An interview with John Schroeder ... 00:46:50
Witness to explosions in the basement ... 00:00:59
Photographs of the lobbies in both towers after the aircraft impacts, showing blast damage that couldn’t have been a result of the aircraft impacts on the 93 and 77 floors of the upper structure of the buildings.
|Firemen in the blast damaged tower lobbies|
Firemen in the blast damaged lobbies of the twin towers after the aircraft impacts.
|South tower lobby after impact South tower at the moment of collapse|
The south tower lobby after the aircraft impact showing signs of blast damage, debris and blown out windows visible.
The south tower at the moment of collapse, dust and smoke rising from the base of the building corresponding with witness accounts. The photograph on the left shows the south tower collapsing, with smoke rising from the base of the building.
|North tower collapse|
The left hand photograph shows the south tower collapse with explosive force evident at the top, middle and base of the building.
The series of photographs on the right show the north tower in the process of collapse, there is a visible rise of dust and smoke at the base of the tower, indicating explosive force.
Cars parked in the basement car parks underneath both twin towers showing explosive damage and high temperature heat damage.
|Heat damage to cars in the car park of the twin towers|
How did these car end up so badly damaged from heat, when they were 100s of feet below the jet fueled fires in the upper structure of the towers ... especially as the jet fuel had burnt itself out.
Despite the observational and witness account of explosive force in the basements of both twin towers, the U.S Government categorically denied the presence of explosive force in the collapse process of the buildings that fell on September the 11th 2001.
The Aftermath … Ground Zero
The debris field of the tower collapses was both wide spread as the debris field of the top of towers was 300 – 400 metres away from the collapse site and with the debris field of the remaining structures extremely localized as the majority of the towers fell into their own footprint.
The top sections of the towers were ejected with such force that large pieces of debris impacted building 100s of metres from the collapse site. At the same time, the majority of the building structures descended straight down and landed in or in close proximity of the site. In April 2006 … 300 bone fragments were found on top of the Deutsche building 400 feet away from the collapses. D.N.A tests revealed them to be W.T.C attack victims.
|Twin towers debris field Ground zero devastation|
The size of the debris field is show in the diagram on the left. On the right an aerial view of ground zero shows the level of devastation.
There were 2,606 victims of the W.T.C attacks … Over 1000 bodies unaccounted for
20,000 pieces of human remains found …. Only 293 intact bodies
Up to 200 human remains linked to one person
6,000 pieces small enough to fit in test – tubes
9,000 unidentified individual pieces of human remains
In the aftermath of building collapses there are big steel beams, large slabs and chunks of concrete, at ground zero were no large chunks or slabs. Instead pulverized concrete and a conspicuous lack of steel. Somehow through low temperature to non – existence fires a large portion of the 200,000 tons of steel framework of the towers had turned molten and was underneath the debris.
|The twin towers blown to pieces|
The scientific, observational and ground zero aftermath evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of explosive force rather than gravitational force.
Youtube Search Engine ... 9/11 Ground Zero
Molten Metal at Ground zero
It is a scientific fact that jet fuel fire’s can’t melt steel because of it’s burning temperature is too low, even if it could reach temperatures of 1015 c because of it’s rapid burning speed it couldn’t keep metal in the towers molten for any length of time.
So why were there reports of molten metal underneath the debris of the collapsed towers ?
|Firemen & rescue workers discussing on the heat at ground zero|
Youtube Search Engine … Molten steel under ground zero debris ... 00:7:06
W.T.C ground Zero Molten Steel(Part 1) ... 00:4:00
W.T.C Ground Zero Molten Steel(Part 2) ... 00:1:09
Firemen and rescue workers claimed there was a river of molten metal running underneath debris, firemen's boots were melting from the heat. Fires sprung up when debris was removed for weeks after the day of the collapses. Jet fuel can’t keep metal molten for weeks, days or even hours, another scientific impossibility.
There is plenty of photographic evidence to support these claims;
|Molten metal at ground zero|
|Extreme temperatures at ground zero|
Only three things can keep metal molten for weeks …Volcanic activity … Blast furnace … Thermite reaction
The 9/11 commission report did not acknowledge the presence of molten metal at ground zero so gave no explanation for this impossibility.
Despite the overwhelming evidence of explosive force in the collapse process of the twin towers, from 2001 – 2011 the U.S Government categorically denied the presence of explosive force in the collapse process of the buildings that fell on September the 11th 2001.
Aluminium/Water Steam Explosion Hypothesis
From 2001 – 2011 ... the U.S Government categorically denied the presence of explosive force in the collapses of the twin towers.
Through the efforts of the 9/11 Truth Movement to inform the American people of the scientific and observational contradictions and anomalies contained within the 9/11 commission report, public pressure mounted on the U.S Government and the mainstream science community to account for the obvious evidence of explosive force in the collapse of the twin towers.
In September of 2011 Christian Simensen … senior scientist for SINTEF
SINTEF Materials and Chemistry is a contract based institute offering high levels of expertise in the fields of material technology, advanced materials and nanotechnology, applied chemistry and biotechnology ... SINTEF work closely with the world’s major oil companies.
|Christian Simensen ... SINTEF ... Molten Aluminium/Water Explosion Hypothesis|
Hypothesis untested… Refuse to release findings … Only conclusions
The fires in the impact zones heated the aluminium of the aircraft fuselage and wings to temperatures of 548 - 600 c, turning the aluminium molten. The molten aluminium proceeded to, just like the jet fuel, flow away from the impact zones down through the structure of the buildings. The sprinkler system than soaked the molten aluminium causing powerful ejections of stream as the water instantly boiled on making contact with the molten aluminium.
Enough aluminium flowed away from the impact zones to cause stream explosions on multiple floors but leaving enough in the impact zones to cause huge explosions at the top of the towers which combined to collapse the buildings.
The contents of the impact floors formed a caldron around the aluminium, maximising the explosive force of the stream reaction causing huge explosions at the top of the towers.
The aluminium that dripped from floor to floor, released powerful enough explosive forces to cause the entire structure of the towers to give way and collapse.
The molten metal seen pouring out of the south tower was actually molten aluminium not molten steel, due to aluminium appearing orange/yellow under certain conditions.
Just as the commission report of 2004 …The report gave no explanation for the molten metal underneath the debris of ground zero.
Aluminium/ Water Stream Explosion hypothesis
What does examining all the elements involved in this hypothesis reveal ?
Heat source to melt the aluminium
The analysis of the impact images established that only a low percentage of fuel was thrown into the impact floors the subsequent jet fuel fires burnt out quickly, leaving only building contents to fuel the fires.
The analysis of the fire activity established that the fires in the impacts zones didn’t burn hot enough or long enough to produce the hundreds of degrees needed to weaken steel at 650 c, the aluminium hypothesis relays on the jet fuel and building content fires as its heat source this means the environment in the impact zones was not conducive with the circumstances needed to support this hypothesis.
From this To this in 17 minutes
North tower impact at 8.46 am North tower impact zone at 9.03 am
From this To this in 3 minutes
South tower impact at 9.03 am South tower impact zone at 9.06 am
So this hypothesis based on the fires ignited on impact as it's heat source is already flawed as to melt aluminium takes 100s of degrees and the fire activity within the impact floors indicates the complete opposite of a fire capable of generating 100s of degrees of heat. The impact fires weren’t burning consistently from impact to collapse and for the length of time necessary to reach temperatures to melt aluminium or any other metal.
Following through with the examination, next is to establish how much aluminium was perplexed into the impact zones and what condition it was in ?
Returning to the impacts photographs and the configuration of the fuel tanks in the aircraft gives a greater understanding of the processes and forces involved in the impacts.
Examining the impact explosion sequence gives a rough idea of the amount of aluminium which would have been perplexed into the impact zones and what condition it would’ve been in.
The main fuel tank in the fuselage between the wings is the cause of the main explosive force. Any part of the aircraft behind would’ve been blown away from the tower, not into it. This leaves the nose cone, fuselage in front of the wings and the wing aluminium.
The amount of aircraft aluminium thrown into the towers
Simensen … Claimed 30 tons of aircraft aluminium entered the impact zones
An examination of the impact sequence starts with establishing the impact force resistance of the materials involved.
Impact resistance is measured by the strength and density of the material.
Aircraft aluminium ….. Density 2700 kg / m^3
Harden steel ………… Density 8030 kg / m^3
Reinforced concrete … Density 2600 kg / m^3
The thickness of the materials involved in the impacts is also a major factor. The aluminium skin of an aircraft is only 1.5 – 2.5 inches thick where as the steel columns of the towers were 3 feet thick, the concrete columns were 3.25 feet thick.
The nose cone, front fuselage and part of the wings enter the towers, the fuselage behind the wings, the tail and part of the wings were blown away from the towers.
A 100 tons of aircraft traveling at 500 mph what forces would the aluminium encounter at the moment of impact ?
Kinetic force of the impact and explosive force of the fuel
As the nose and than fuselage contacted the tower the kinetic force of the impact would reverse back through the aircraft nose and fuselage, taking the least path of resistance as the stronger steel resisted the force. This would result in the thin steel framework of the aircraft’s structure instantly buckling and snapping ... the aluminium skin would be crushed, torn and concertinaed in on itself.
As the stream of kinetic energy continued to try and push through the steel, the steel’s impact resistance would start to decease, increasing the stress levels on the steel columns.
As the aircraft fuselage compresses, the main fuel tank would impact the tower, crushing the tank, igniting and exploding the fuel. The force of the kinetic and explosive energy would overwhelm the steel columns.
The steel would give way and the already torn, crushed aluminium would than be further ripped apart by being pushed through the steel and blown to pieces by the force of the following fuel explosion.
The strength and density of hardened steel columns vs the strength and density of a thin aluminium skin supported by a thin steel framework ... there no contest ... the steel columns win.
It is a commonly held myth that the aircraft's pierced the tower's framework and as a result a large portion of the aircraft's fuselage entered the impact zones virtually intact ... this is not true
The holes in the sides of the towers were a result of the speed of the impact, the kinetic impact force and the explosive force of the fuel ... not the strength of the aircraft's design or construction materials.
Whatever amount of aluminium that did enter the impact zones, would have been torn, ripped and blown to pieces, those pieces of aluminium would have thrown all over the impact zones.
The aircraft would not have stayed in one piece, the aluminium would’ve been scattered and in small pieces all over the impact zone.
Four photographs that show debris falling away from the towers at the moment of the aircraft impacts, this debris from the impacts would contain a large percentage of the aircraft’s aluminium
North tower South tower
For a better idea of what happened to the aircraft's on impact with the towers refer below;
Youtube Search Engine … 9/11 North tower impact ... 00:00:44
9/11 South tower impact ... 00:5:24
Even if there were a credible heat source would this be enough aluminium to cause such a huge explosion at the top of the towers and multiple explosions on multiple floors ?
The condition of the aluminium wouldn’t have been conducive to a huge release of explosive force because it would’ve been in small pieces, shattered, not in one single place in the impact zones. This would bring down the power of any release of explosive force.
The majority of the aircraft’s fuselage would have been blown to pieces by the force of the impact and fuel explosion.
The impact on the towers would’ve disintegrated the aircraft's and the aluminium skin would’ve been in no condition to cause any kind of explosion.
If a bird strike can do this damage to an aircraft, what would happen to the aluminium skin of a 100 ton aircraft traveling at 500 mph, if it impacted a building consisting of 100,000 tons of steel, 390,000 tons of concrete, designed and built to withstand aircraft impacts ?
A caldron to contain the molten metal
Even if the fuselage had stayed intact during impact and jet fuel fires had burnt hot enough and consistently from impact to collapse, as the temperature rose the aluminium would, as it wasn’t contained, soften and spread out. This would again lower the strength of any explosive reaction.
Simensen tried to circumvent this problem, claiming the buildings contains such as office furniture, equipment and buildings materials formed a caldron around the fuselage containing the aluminium increasing the explosive force of the aluminium/water reaction.
In a chemistry laboratory and in a metal foundry iron caldrons are used to contain molten metal heated to100s of degrees, such as molten aluminium.
Would contained molten aluminium be anymore explosive than dispersed molten aluminium ?
If what Christian Simensen and N.I.S.T are proposing is correct than molten aluminium contained in a steel caldron submerged in water should produce an observable explosive reaction.
Would the chemical reaction result in the aluminium exploding or would it simply result in the water boiling ?
Youtube Search Engine ... Molten aluminium contained in a caldron submerged in water
Could the the contents of the impact floors form a caldron and would it be effective ?
The force of the aircraft impacts and jet fuel explosions would not only have destroyed the aircraft but would be blown apart the contents of the impact floors. The probability is that the impact debris would be broken up, smashed and thrown all over the impact floors. The burning and melting temperatures of the materials that make up the contents of the floors are lower than 500 c.
This would result in the caldron giving way before the temperature rose high enough for molten metal, which would result in the molten aluminium mix spreading out, bringing down the strength of the explosive force.
The building contains would most likely not provide an effective caldron
Simensen … Orange/yellow glow through hydrocarbon mix … untested hypothesis
The orange/yellow glow seen in the impact zones and the orange/yellow stream of molten metal seen pouring out of the south tower impact zone, not having the silvery appearance of aluminium was explained by an untested hypothesis that the buildings contents mixed with the silvery molten aluminium changing its normal silvery appearance to orange/yellow ... this claim wasn't substantiated by any scientific experimental results.
Dr Steven Jones of Brigham Young University, Utah U.S.A
|Dr Steven Jones|
Dr Jones concluded that the buildings contents consist of hydrocarbons, these materials burn at a lower temperature than the melting point of aluminium. Dr Jones’s experiments proved that hydrocarbons float to the top of molten aluminium, appearing as isolated spots leaving the majority of the aluminium silver.
Just like oil and water, hydrocarbons and molten aluminium do not mix.
If it was molten aluminium in and falling from the impact zones, it would look primarily silver with a broken up appearance of dark orange/yellow patches. This is not what the film footage or photographic evidence shows, all the visual evidence shows a complete orange/yellow glow consistent with molten steel.
Christian Simensen's aluminium hypothesis has been endorsed by N.I.S.T ... Michael Ware assistant scientist at N.I.S.T tried to recreate the appearance of the molten metal observed falling from the south tower by mixing and heating aluminium and hydrocarbon materials ... the experiment didn't produce the results he was expecting.
Youtube Search Engine ... Michael Ware:Molten aluminium experiment
Molten aluminium with hydrocarbon materials, floating to the top of the molten mixture, the aluminium turning
silver as its leaves the caldron and comes in contact with direct sunlight.
Simensen … Orange/yellow glow through extreme temperatures
Simensen also concluded that the molten metal pouring out of the south tower impact zone was not molten steel but molten aluminium, concluding the orange/yellow colour of the molten aluminium was not only due to the mixing of aluminium with building contents. But also that aluminium can appear orange/yellow in daylight when heated to extreme temperatures of 930 c and above.
Dr Jones claims his experiments showed that aluminium will always appear silver in daylight conditions due its reflectivity. Molten aluminium with hydrocarbon materials, floating to the top of the molten mixture, the aluminium turning silver as its leaves the caldron and comes in contact with direct sunlight.
Youtube Search Engine … Steven Jones discussing 9/11 ... 00:7:35
|Molten aluminium silver in appearance and solidifying rapidly|
Molten aluminium heated to extreme temperatures, contained in a caldron orange/red in colour until free from the caldron when it regains its silver colour.
|Molten aluminium solidifying and silver in colour|
The photograph on the left shows; molten aluminium heated to extreme temperatures, contained in a caldron, under artificial light … as it’s poured, the aluminium immediately starts to cool down and solidify turning back to it’s silvery colour.
The photograph on the right shows; molten aluminium heated to extreme temperatures, contained in a caldron, in daylight conditions … as it’s poured, the aluminium free from the confines of the caldron, appears completely silver when exposed to direct daylight due to it’s low emissivity and high reflectivity.
More examples of molten aluminium silver in colour under daylight;
|Molten aluminium poured in daylight|
|Molten alumnium poured in daylight|
Youtube Search engine ... High temperature molten aluminium poured in daylight ... Part 1
High temperature molten aluminium poured in daylight ... Part 2
This is disputed by Dr Judy Woods a former professor of mechanical engineering at Virginia Tech.
Dr Woods argued that molten metal pouring out of the south tower was aluminium, that aluminium doesn’t appear silver in daylight conditions when heated to extreme temperatures. Claiming that molten aluminium appears orange/yellow in daylight conditions when heated to temperatures of 930 c – 1080 c.
Dr Woods claim is disputed by Dr Jones
Dr Woods claims is it impossible to be certain what metal poured out of the south tower impact zone by pure
observation, that nobody including Dr Jones can be sure.
|High temperature molten aluminium|
Temperature colour The photograph used by Dr Woods to prove her theory
The photograph on the right shows molten aluminium glowing, a hot golden colour; the men pouring the molten metal are wearing dark visors to protect their eyes from the intense reflective glow. This photograph was taken inside, under artificial light so doesn’t illustrate Dr Woods point.
If the colour of the aluminium in the photograph above is matched with the appropriate temperature on the left hand colour temperature chart it corresponds with the upper temperature scale. This would put the temperature of the molten aluminium in the photograph at 1050 c and above.
|South tower molten metal|
The photographs on the left and right of the colour temperature chart show the molten metal falling from the south tower impact zone; its colour is darker so it must be cooler than the aluminium in the photograph above.
The colour of the molten metal from the south tower corresponds with the colours representing the temperatures spanning 930 – 1050 c, this temperature range would accommodate both theories as steel melts at 1015 c and if molten aluminium ( when heated to high temperatures pass 930 c ) appeared orange/yellow in colour in daylight but all the experimental and observational evidence points to the opposite conclusion as regards the colour of molten aluminium under daylight conditions ... Silver
Regardless of the scientific different in opinion on the type of molten metal pouring from the south tower, the evidence at ground zero of molten metal underneath debris and the fires in the surrounding area of the collapse site heavily weighs the scales in favor of the molten steel theory.
|The molten metal at ground zero cannot be aluminium|
Photographs of molten metal underneath debris as it was being removed; described by firemen as a river of molten steel under the twin tower collapse debris.
|Molten metal at ground zero weeks after 9/11|
The photographs below show cars ablaze after being hit by debris from the tower collapses.
The aftermath at and around ground zero is more consistent with the molten steel theory rather than the molten aluminium. These effects are not due to molten aluminium of any temperature
The fact that, if the molten metal was aluminium it must have been over 930 c due to its colour means that whatever heat reaction melted the aluminium must have been able to burn at temperatures higher than 930 c.
The photographs below show cars ablaze after being hit by debris from the tower collapses.
|Fire damage around ground zero|
The aftermath at and around ground zero is more consistent with the molten steel theory rather than the molten aluminium. These effects are not due to molten aluminium of any temperature
The fact that, if the molten metal was aluminium it must have been over 930 c due to its colour means that whatever heat reaction melted the aluminium must have been able to burn at temperatures higher than 930 c.
This again, is proof that jet fuel cannot have been the fuel source for the heat reactions in the impact zones of the towers immediately before collapse as aviation fuel burns at a maximum temperature of 825 c
The heat reaction that caused molten metal to poured from the south tower couldn’t have been jet fueled
In an attempt to justify the colour of the molten metal falling from the south tower, as aluminium at high temperatures of 930 c ... the supporters of Christian Simensen's hypothesis, including N.I.S.T have contradicted themselves by then claiming the molten aluminium in the impact zones only needed to be heated to temperatures of 548 c to be molten.
This claim was made in respond to the obvious lack of visual evidence to support high temperatures fires resulting from the aircraft impacts and subsequent aviation fuel fires and because of the unsuitability of conditions and environment in the impact zones to high temperature fires.
So in an attempt to bring the temperature of the aircraft's molten aluminium down to appear to correspond with the fire's environment, N.I.S.T introduced other metal alloys into the molten aluminium mix.
Molten aluminium/metal mix
The N.I.S.T stated that modern air frames are constructed from 2000 aluminium alloys; these additions to the aluminium mix lower the melting point from 660 c to 548 c. They concluded that the fires in the impact floors could reach this temperature, but the observational evidence indicates the exact opposite as the fires didn’t burn consistently from impact to collapse.
People visible in the north tower impact floors just 19 minutes before the collapse, means that the jet fuel could not be responsible for the spontaneous appearance of the extreme heat reaction prior to collapse.
The north tower aircraft impact propelled more jet fuel into the impact floors than the south tower aircraft impact. This is evident in the size of the north tower impact fireballs, which were smaller than the south tower fireballs. This means the north tower is the aluminium/water hypothesis best chance of success as it provides more fuel therefore longer and hotter fire activity.
In the 2004 … 9/11 commission report … N.I.S.T estimated 20% of the fuel was burnt up in the initial explosions, leaving 80% thrown into the buildings. The N.I.S.T estimated cubic volume of fuel was slightly higher for the north tower in accordance with the observational evidence.
Impact sequence of the north tower at 8.46
|North tower impact|
The first photograph below shows the north tower impact zone a few minutes after impact, these fires are jet fueled
|North tower fire activity|
The second photograph shows the north tower impact zone 1 hour and 20 minutes after impact ... the third photograph shows the north tower impact zone 1 hour and 30 minutes after impact ... approximately 10 minutes before collapse.
Just after impact would be when the jet fueled fires would be at their strongest and hottest, so if the jet fueled fires were hot enough to reach temperatures of 500-600 c, logic dictates it would’ve been in the first minutes after impact when there was plenty of aviation fuel for the fire to burn.
|North tower impact zones 1 hour and 23 minutes after impact .... 19 minutes before collapse|
These photographs of the north tower impact zone were taken at 10.09 am, 1 hour and 23 minutes after the aircraft impact, just 19 minutes before the collapse. Not only was the impact zone free from fire and smoke but the temperature was cool enough for people to stand and signal for help.
Edna Cintron was standing in a position where the jet fueled fires should have been burning intensely. The aluminium hypothesis is based on the jet fuel from the impacts as its heat source.
The jet fueled fires burnt out within minutes of the impacts, yet the explosions caused by molten aluminium occurred, in the case of the south tower 56 minutes after impact, the north tower 1 hour and 42 minutes after impact.
As any fire fueled by any fuel source will burn until its fuel is burnt up, it is logical to assume that all the jet fuel was burnt up immediately after the impacts.
This means that the extreme heat in the impact zones minutes prior to collapse couldn’t be jet fueled, if metal of any kind including aluminium, was melted in the impact floors prior to the building collapses it wasn’t melted by aviation fueled fires.
There must have been another heat source presence in both impact zones prior to collapse.
|North tower impact zones 10 minutes prior to collapse|
These photographs were taken approximately 10 minutes before the collapse; the fires are stronger and hotter at collapse than impact, 1 hour and 32 minutes after the jet fuel was thrown into the tower and burnt up.
|North tower fire activity|
The fuel source of the fires immediately after impact because of the gap in fire activity, south tower 35 minutes, north tower 1 hour and 30 minutes, cannot be the fuel source responsible for the fires just prior to collapse.
How is it possible for the same fuel source to fuel both of these heat reactions ?
The photograph on the left shows the north tower impact zone minutes after the impact, as the fires would have had the most jet fuel to burn immediately after impact this would have been the optimum time for the jet fueled fires to reach the maximum temperature that the environment would allow.
Does the photograph on the left show fire activity capable of reaching and maintaining temperatures of 500 - 600 degrees Celsius ?
Whether the molten metal was pure molten aluminium melting at 660 c or an aluminium alloy mix melting at 548 c, these 100s of degrees of temperature did not exist in the north tower impact until the extreme heat prior to collapse.
Any fire fueled by any fuel source will burn until its fuel is burnt up, then it’s smoulders and is extinguished by lass of fuel, which happened to the jet fueled fires after the aircraft impact on the towers.
The temperature of the jet fueled fires even at impact could not have reached or maintained 548 degrees Celsius.
It is impossible for the jet fuel to have fueled the extreme heat reaction in the tower prior to collapse.
How could this high temperature heat reaction be caused by jet fuel that was thrown in and burnt up approximately 1 hour and 30 minutes before ?
The extreme heat reaction in both towers, approximately 10 minutes prior to collapse cannot be attributed to the jet fueled or building content fires.
Molten aluminium on multiple floors
Could molten aluminium drip down from floor to floor to cause the multiple floor explosions ?
The twin towers were constructed using the truss floor system. The truss system is very robust and has a high load barring capability. The steel truss floors were fireproofed and covered by 4 inches of lightweight concrete.
Concrete crumbles at temperatures exceeding 1000 c, melts at temperatures of 1500 c and above due to the mixture of silicate minerals it contains. The jet fueled fires in the impact zones could not have reached anywhere near these extreme high temperatures. So the molten aluminium would be nowhere near the temperatures needed to allow it to travel down the tower structures in the time required, each floor would prevent the flow of molten aluminium mix with a difficult and time consuming barrier to breach.
Aluminium has a very rapid solidifying time, the temperatures on the floors below the impact zones, would be
considerably cooler. This rapid drop in temperature would immediately start bringing down the temperature, solidifying the aluminium. Although aluminium is molten at 660 c, it flows with the consistency of water at 780 c, which means the temperature of the aluminium would have to be considerably higher than 660 c, even mixed with other alloys the temperature would’ve had to be higher than 548 c to allow the aluminium mix to drip down from floor to floor in a short space of time. The majority of the alloys mix would be aluminium so would maintain its characteristic of rapid cooling.
When molten aluminium makes contact with a surface cooler than itself it splatters into droplets and immediately starts solidifying, if any molten aluminium had dripped down from the impact floors the drop in temperature on the floor below would prevent the progress of the molten flow. If molten metal of any kind had flowed down below the impact floors, it would have started fires on the floors it reached. There were no signs of fire below the impact floors so the observational evidence does not support any hypothesis which relays on heat and fire on multiple floors.
The only way a molten flow could stay molten passed the impact floors, is if there were fires on the floors the aluminium reached. Fires capable of generating 548 c – 600 c heat to keep the aluminium mixture at a temperature for it drip through to the next floor. This process would have to happen on every floor the aluminium reached to keep it flowing and at high temperatures until the sprinkler system activated and the explosions occurred.
The lack of a heat source on multiple floors is a fundamental flaw in both hypotheses presented by N.I.S.T.
|Twin tower lobbies|
There were reports of explosions in the basements of both towers on aircraft impacts and as the towers collapsed. Witnesses and photograph evidence point to explosions in the basements of both towers at the moment of both impacts ….. How could the molten aluminium/water hypothesis have caused these explosions?
Explosions in the basements at the moment of collapses, which means the molten aluminium, would’ve had to have reached the lowest floors. Even if there was enough jet fuel to flow down the towers, even if the fires burned hot enough on each floor, even if there was enough aluminium to drip down through the towers, even if enough aluminium was disposed on each floor to produce powerful explosions to blown out the steel of each floor, there wasn’t enough time for molten metal to drip down the structure of the towers.
Even if there was enough heat and aluminium, there wasn’t enough time to make this incredibly unlikely hypothesis possible.
Molten aluminium on multiple floors, is there observational evidence ?
If molten aluminium flowed from floor to floor, it would’ve have started fires on the floors it reached.
If the molten flow had reached a furnished floor, it would’ve set fire to the floors contains, producing low temperature office fires. These fires would create visible signs of fire that would be observable from outside of the buildings. There were no visible signs of fire in any floors below the impact floors.
|Fire activity below the impact floors|
Here are photographs of the towers before they collapsed; Absolutely no sign of any fires of any kind below the impact zones. How can there be molten metal on multiple floors if the floors do not show signs of fire ? .... How is this possible ?
|fire activity below the impact floors|
Any molten metal would need a high temperature heat source to stay molten as it flowed down, floor by floor virtually the entire height of the towers.
With the main ingredient in this mixture of metals being aluminium, the cooling time of the molten flow would be rapid every minute away from a strong heat source would bring down the temperature of the Molten metal leading to it solidifying.
Molten metal as it progressed down the buildings would start fires on every floor that it reached, there should have been visible signs of fire down the structure of the towers and there wasn't.
How could molten metal flow from floor to floor ?
Twin tower outer & inner steel columns
If molten aluminium had been disposed on multiple floors, it would have to be a sizeable amount to blow out all the internal central core and external framework supporting columns.
|Twin tower perimeter framework|
Then there's the central core inner and outer steel columns
|Twin tower cores|
|Twin tower design|
|Twin tower central core columns|
100,000 tons of harden steel, 390,000 tons of reinforced concrete, blown to pieces and collapsed by the 2 and a half inches of aluminium skin of half an aircraft ... Is this possible ?
Can a molten aluminium/water reaction produce this amount of explosive force ?
|Fire activity below the impact floors|
The sprinkler system
The sprinkler system is pivotal in the hypothesis, without a functional sprinkler system there is no water. That means no ejection of stream. The sprinklers would’ve had to have soaked the aluminium in its molten state to cause such powerful explosions, this means the sprinklers didn’t activate until temperatures in the entire towers had risen past 548 c - 600 c.
The sprinklers waited until the slow flowing molten aluminium had enough time to flow down the 76 floors of the south tower and 92 floors of the north tower.
The sprinkler system in the south tower didn’t activate when the temperature rose to 100 or 200 or 300 c, it activated at exactly the right amount of time after the impact to be the final factor in a bizarre and highly improbable series of events that collapsed one of the most well designed and built building in the modern era.
Then, 29 minutes later the exact same bizarre, improbable scenario occurred again in the north tower collapse at 10 .28 am.
In the 9/11 commission report of 2004, N.I.S.T stated both sprinkler systems in both towers were disabled by both aircraft impacts ... They used this to substantiate the fires taking hold and spreading.
Not only was the sprinkler system working but it conveniently waited the appropriate amount of time to complete the aluminium/water hypothesis. If the sprinkler system had behaved normally it would have activated much earlier putting out any fires, jet fuel or otherwise and soaking all combustible material on each floor. Sprinklers operating no fires … no molten aluminium … no collapses. Sprinklers not operating … no water for aluminium stream explosions … no collapses.
Is a molten aluminium/water reaction capable of such extreme explosive force ?
Youtube Search Engine ... Molten aluminium/water reaction ... Part 1
Molten aluminium/water reaction ... Part 2
Molten aluminium/water reaction ... Part 3
The aluminium/water steam explosion hypothesis is flawed scientifically due to the lack of heat, time and aluminium. The series of events that would’ve had to have taken place is so improbable but the most improbable event is the physics of the collapses themselves.
The twin towers collapsed at near free fall speed, a nearly unimpeded descent, for this to have happened as a result of the aluminium hypothesis, each steam explosion on each floor would’ve had to have detonated at exactly the right moment to allow the floor from above to descend unimpeded. The probability against each explosion occurring at just the right time to produce an almost unimpeded descent is incredibly high.
The only other water source put forward other than the sprinkler system was burst water pipes which is even more unlikely to produce a perfectly timed explosive sequence.
This precise explosive sequence happening twice in one day is ridiculously high.
This precise and highly improbable collapse process occurring as a result of a highly improbable and highly implausible scenario such as the molten aluminium explosion hypothesis, what are the odds?
Twice in one day, is this really possible?
|Ground zero devastation|
Just like the 9/11 commission report of 2004 ... the Aluminium/water steam explosion report of 2011 made no mention of the molten metal beneath the debris at ground zero so again gave no explanation for its presence. The presence of molten metal at ground zero for weeks on end cannot be explained by the aluminium/water hypothesis.
So N.I.S.T ignored this evidence in they report of 2004 ... so did the aluminium/water hypothesis of 2011.
|Molten metal at ground zero|
No amount of aviation fuel … No amount of aluminium can account for molten metal at ground zero.
|Sliced steel beams at ground zero|
The supporting steel beams at ground zero look cut or sliced, not blown apart by random explosions.
Any collapse hypothesis that relays on a jet fueled fire heat source cannot result in the conditions found at ground zero, so the aluminium hypothesis cannot account for molten metal under debris for weeks or for the presence of steel/iron/concrete fusion through extreme heat.
The precisely cut steel beams cannot be explained by the aluminium/water explosion hypothesis.
None of the observational or scientific evidence at ground zero supports the aluminium explosion hypothesis
The photographs below are of fused steel and concrete; for steel and concrete to fuse through heat the temperatures in the towers would’ve had to have reached 1500 c and over.
|Fused steel/concrete at ground zero|
There is overwhelming scientific, observational evidence and witness testimony of molten metal at ground zero available for everyone in the world with a computer to view and examine including N.I.S.T
N.I.S.T has repeatedly ignored this evidence over a course of 10 years ... in the 2002 ... F.E.M.A Building collapse report ... in the 2004 ... 9/11 Commission report and in the 2011 ... Molten aluminium explosion report ... so in each report gave no explanation for its presence underneath W.T.C debris.
Aviation fuel cannot fuse together steel/iron and concrete ... all three official report collapse hypotheses depend on an aviation fueled heat source that simply wasn't presence in the twin towers.
|Prolonged fires at ground zero|
As debris was removed fires appeared, burning at extreme temperatures weeks after the day of the collapses.
|Extreme heat at ground zero weeks after 9/11|
The precise cuts of the steel beams cannot be attributed to random aluminium explosions … nor can the pulverised concrete, to reduce the concrete of the towers to dust would take implosions inside the concrete columns … drilling and inserting explosive charges would be necessary.
Molten aluminium explosions would have resulted in randomly torn and twisted steel beams … Not molten metal and precise cuts … just as molten aluminium explosions would have resulted in large chunks of concrete debris … Not pulverised concrete and dust.
Although the aluminium/water steam explosion hypothesis accounts for explosive force, it relays on a constant extreme heat source which jet fuel cannot provide, not only on the impact floors but on multiple floors below the impact zones.
This jet fuel heat source was not presence in the twin towers, which leaves the hypothesis scientifically flawed. It is impossible for the towers to have collapsed through the aluminium/water steam hypothesis.
The heat source, the amount of aluminium and the time needed to allow this hypothesis to be possible, just wasn’t presence in the twin towers on September 11th 2001.
Just as the 9/11 commission report of 2004, the aluminium/water steam explosion report of 2011 does not give a satisfactory answer to why and how the twin towers collapsed.
W.T.C Twin Tower Aluminium Cladding
It has been suggested in recent years that the exterior aluminium cladding was in some way responsible for the towers collapsing below the impact floors. Aluminium was used as cladding for the exterior of the twin towers due to its flexibility allowing it to give with the wind and its reflectivity causing the towers to shine in sunlight.
|Twin towers aluminium cladding|
Twin towers aluminium cladding flexible and reflective
The Dubai Address hotel fire … New Years Eve 2015
The Address hotel caught fire due to a near by firework display, the building burnt for one and a half hours, the fire was strongest on one side of the building. Flames engulfed one side of the hotel and concerns were raised about the aluminium cladding on the exterior of the building. The concern was that the cladding was helping to spread the fires due to its ability to conduct heat.
When this was reported on CNN and the BBC both broadcasters made referenced to the twin towers fires,
implying there were similarities between the building fires.
|The Dubai Address Hotel fire|
|No fire activity down the buildings|
As there was no fire activity below the impact floors, the only aluminium cladding that could have been effected by heat would have been on and around the impact zones. The cladding below the impact floors would have been buckled, bent and torn by the force of the detonations that happened down the height of the towers and damaged by the fall from the collapsing structures.
|Twin tower steel beams with localized molten aluminium|
The twin towers inner core and outer steel framework supporting columns; melted aluminium can be seen around the precise cuts of the beams. No melted aluminium has run down the columns, indicating that the heat reaction was small and localised around the cut areas of the steel beams.
|Aircraft aluminium in the south tower debris|
In these photographs; some of the aluminium cladding can be seen in the background and foreground, it appears to be bent, buckled and in places ripped but not burnt or melted from heat.
The right hand photograph above; shows a piece of the fuselage of flight UA 175 from the south tower … A piece of aluminium fuselage that was supposedly melted by extreme heat and exploded by a water reaction
|Twin tower aluminium cladding|
Piles of aluminium cladding from the twin towers showing no signs of exposure to extreme heat
The twin towers aluminium cladding batter, bent and ripped
Not burnt or melted … No fire or heat damage
The Physics of the Twin Tower Collapses
Both the twin towers collapsed by the exact same process, they fell through their centres of mass, at near free fall speed into their own footprints. This is a very precise collapse process which could only occur if a certain precise sequence of events had taken place.
The spontaneous appearance of extreme heat in the impact floors minutes before collapse can’t be explained by either the jet fuel fire hypothesis or the aluminium/water explosion hypothesis.
Examining the collapse process shows that the structures descended straight down through what should have been the greater path of resistance, through the centre of their supporting weight or mass.
Returning to the 2004 … 9/11 commission report, the descent straight down was explained with the hypothesis of a pancake collapse.
The Pancake Collapse Hypothesis
A pancake collapse is when the weight of the collapsing floor above brings down the floor below, collapsing
the building floor by floor.
The time a pancake collapse can take varies from structure to structure depending on the height, mass and strength of the building collapsing … the time of the collapse also depends on the strength of the floor system. The tower truss floor system was extremely strong, each floor had a high weight barring load capability. A pancake collapse would’ve brought down the outer framework but not the central core of the towers ….. If a pancake collapses had occurred, the central core of both towers should‘ve remain standing.
Although a pancake collapse of the twin towers was possible, due to the design and strength of the truss floor system, a complete pancake collapse of the twin towers was highly unlikely. If a complete pancake collapse had occurred in the towers, the estimate time of the collapses would be 87.9 – 96.7 seconds. This estimated time takes into consideration the height, mass and strength of the buildings.
The twin towers …. 110 floors …. 1,362 feet high …. 500,000 tons mass
100,000 tons of steel ……………. 390,000 tons of concrete
Seismic and observational evidence … South tower collapse speed … 9 seconds - 13 seconds
North tower collapse speed … 11 seconds - 15 seconds
The 2004… 9/11 commission endorsed the approximate ten second time for both collapses … but gave no explanation for the speed of the collapses.
A pancake collapse is not a possible hypothesis due to the speed of the collapses being too fast. The floor below would impede the descent speed of the collapsing floor.
Therefore the pancake collapse hypothesis is scientifically flawed due to the speed of the tower collapses.
The commission report of 2004 did not acknowledge the spontaneous reappearance of fires or the intense heat in the impact zones minutes prior to collapse. The molten metal pouring out of the south tower was never mention or the presence of overwhelming observational evidence in support of explosive force and molten metal underneath debris for weeks.
After 10 years of public pressure N.I.S.T endosed the aluminium/water hypothesis to try and account for the overwhelming evidence in support of explosive force. This hypothesis again depends on a constant high temperature heat source of jet fuel in the impacts zones and on multiple floors.
These conditions have been proven not to have existed in the twin towers, so the molten aluminium explosion hypothesis cannot account for the collapse process.
|North tower collapse sequence|
Even if it were possible and conditions were conducive to the aluminium explosion theory, the probability against the aluminium/water reaction on each floor occurring at the exact right moment to produce a staggered detonation sequence down the entire height of the building resulting in a nearly completely unimpeded descent straight down is incredibly high.
The probability against two buildings on the same day achieving this precise timely by chance through a natural occurrence ( without human intervention ) unbelievably high.
Balance of probability …. What are the odds ?
The two theories put forward by N.I.S.T for the collapse process are flawed because they don’t contain the right elements to correspond with the scientific or the observable evidence.
What are the elements the correct collapse hypothesis would have to contain ?
1. The spontaneous appearance of extreme heat in the impact zones minutes prior to collapse.
2. The correct hypothesis must not depend on a constant heat source in the impact zones or any other floor
in the towers.
3. Huge explosions that destroy the impact floors and the section of the towers above
4. Precisely positioned and timed, staggered detonations the height of the buildings allowing a near free fall
descent through their centres of mass, into their own footprints.
5. The hypothesis must result in molten metal beneath the debris and be able to keep it in a molten
state for weeks after the collapses.
The twin tower collapse hypothesis must account for all five points, so it corresponds with the scientific and observational evidence.
Occam’s razor is a problem solving principle used when multiple hypotheses are presented for a single problem.
William Occam theorised that when considering multiple hypotheses;
‘ The one with the fewest assumptions or the most obvious and simplest solution is most often the correct one '
What hypothesis when applied to the collapse process wouldn’t relay on assumptions ?
What hypothesis explains all the scientific and observational evidence ?
What hypothesis explains the physical processes involved in twin tower collapses ?
What hypothesis is the most obvious and simplest solution to the problem of how and why the twin towers collapsed ?
Controlled Thermite/C4 detonations
Controlled Thermite/C4 Demolition Hypothesis
To establish the most obvious hypothesis Occam’s razor was applied.
Walter Chatton proposed an anti – razor … theorising;
‘ Simplicity is a not satisfactory determination of truth, life is too complex, with two many variables to assume that the most obvious and simplest solution is the correct one ‘
Does the controlled demolition collapse hypothesis correspond with five elements listed on the previous page?
1 . The spontaneous appearance of extreme heat in the impact zones minutes prior to collapse.
|People in the north tower impact zone 20 minutes before collapse|
North tower impact zone roughly … 10.09 am
This photograph was taken roughly 20 minutes before the collapse. People couldn’t have been in the impact zones if the jet fuel fires had reached temperatures to weaken steel or melt aluminium. The initial impact fires burnt out quickly within the first 20 minutes after the aircraft impacts.
Both N.I.S.T hypotheses depend on jet fueled/building content fires as their heat source but the behaviour of the heat reaction in the impact zones from impact to collapse was not consistent with the behaviour of a fire fueled by aviation fuel or building contents.
For the fuel from the impacts to have been responsible for the heat reaction minutes before the collapses, the impact zones should’ve been consistently ablaze from impact to collapse and they weren’t.
So if all the jet fuel was burned up in under 20 minutes, what fueled the fires back to life ?
What caused the fires in the impact zones to reappear and reach such extreme temperatures ?
Youtube search Engine … Edna Cintron in north tower impact zone ... 00:1:04
|North tower fires minutes before collapse|
North tower impact zone minutes before collapse ... Split second before collapse
Approximately 10.18 – 10.28 am the north tower impact zone burning furiously, a very intense orange/red glow beneath the flames. First black, than bellowing clouds of white smoke engulfing the top of the north tower.
A jet fuel fire wouldn’t be able produce temperatures of 930 c – over 1000 c to melt aluminium or steel. The fires in both impact zones were active for 15 – 20 minutes after the aircraft impacts, both died down, then reappeared 10 minutes before the collapses with extreme heat which lead to a huge explosion at the top of both towers.
Thermite and C4 explosives can account for the heat reaction and the explosions in the impact floors and above, fulfilling the 1st and 3rd requirements to be the correct hypothesis.
Jet fueled fires are not capable of acting in this way, both N.I.S.T hypotheses depend upon the jet fuel and building contents fueling the fires from impact to the point of collapse.
A jet fueled fire at any time from impact to collapse in these conditions and this environment, would be unable to generate its maximum burning temperature, let alone temperatures 100s of degrees higher than 825 degrees celsius.
|South tower impact zone|
The first two photographs are of the south tower impact zone at 9.06 am …. 3 Minutes after impact
Three minutes after impact there’s no inferno, no raging fires but a few small isolated pockets of fire.
Where are the jet fueled fires ?
The third photograph is of the south tower was taken at 9.49 am …. 10 minutes before collapse
This photograph is of the south tower impact zone was taken at 9.52 am …. 7 minutes before collapse
|South tower impact zone|
High temperature heat reaction inside the south tower impact zone moments before collapse
The aircraft impacted the south tower on the corner of the building because of this … more of the heat activity inside the tower is visible. The close-up photographs of the south tower impact floors show a heat reaction with a very distinct appearance.
This appearance is not conducive with a fire fueled by jet fuel or building contents but this unusual appearance is associated with one extreme heat reaction … Thermite Reaction
Youtube Search Engine ... Evidence of themite in the south tower ... 00:2:22
Thermite in the south tower ... 00:1:44
Molten steel in the south tower ... 00:00:59
Thermite reaction, the high temperature reaction consistent with this appearance
Photographs of thermite reaction; the appearance of a thermite reaction corresponds with the appearance of the heat reaction in the south tower impact zone.
Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of metal powder fuel and metal oxide. When ignited by heat thermite undergoes a redox reaction. Most varieties are not explosive but can create brief bursts of high temperature in a small area.
Thermite burns at 2200 c … Steel melts at 1015 c
Thermite cuts through steel like a hot knife through butter
There are witnesses and film footage of small thermite explosions which generated showers of sparks occurring as the south tower impact zone burned intensely minutes before collapse.
|Thernite explosion .....explosion from the south tower|
Youtube Search Engine ... South tower thermite explosion / thermite sparks ... 00:1:10
South tower thermite explosion / Molten metal ... 00:1:08
Explosion at the top of the south tower ... 00:00:50
|Examples of thermite reactions|
More examples of thermite reaction; the two photographs to the right are examples of thermite explosions. The middle photograph is of thermite reaction inside a building …When compared to the heat reaction in both towers the similarities are unmistakable.
2. The correct hypothesis must not depend on a constant heat source in the impact floors.
|Extreme heat reaction in both tower impact zones|
North tower impact zone South tower impact zone
These photographs of both impact zones show characteristics of a huge thermite reaction. Thermite reacts quickly when ignited and would account not only for the appearance of the heat reaction but also the spontaneous fires and extreme heat in the impact zones moments before collapse.
Thermite has a rapid ignition speed, when thermite is ignited it reacts instantly producing bursts of high temperatures of 2200 c.
This means that the thermite hypothesis does not need a constant heat source and can provide an explanation for the spontaneous heat reaction, meeting both the 1st and 2nd requirements for the hypothesis to be correct.
|The tower impact zone fires reigniting before collapse|
The first two pictures are of the north tower ... the third, the south tower minutes before collapse.
|The twin towers bellowing white smoke minutes before collapse|
South tower collapse …. 9.59 am North tower collapse …. 1028 am
Both towers released black, than huge clouds of white/grey smoke this is a characteristic of a thermite reaction.
|Thermite reaction producing white smoke|
These photographs show thermite reactions producing white/grey smoke; The materials thermite is burning
produces the black smoke with the thermite reaction itself producing much lighter white smoke.
Youtube Search Engine … Thermite smoke / thermite reactiom comparison ... 00:6:15
|The south tower bellowing white smoke than explosions|
Photographs of the south tower collapse; showing clouds of white/grey smoke conducive with a thermite
|The twin towers producing white smoke|
Photographs of the north tower collapse; showing clouds of white smoke conducive with a thermite reaction.
There is a substantial amount of scientific and observational evidence in support of the combined use of thermite charges in severing the tops of the towers and C4 explosive detonations to than explode them, to produce a huge cloud of dust and debris which covered the descent of the structures.
|Exploding top of the towers producing debris clouds|
Photographs, of the dust and debris descending around the towers as they collapsed; Obscuring the explosive process at work as the structures descend.
|Huge explosions at the top of the towers|
The jet fuel fires from the impacts burnt up within 20 minutes, than the fires smouldered, in the case of the south tower for approximately 40 minutes, the north tower approximately 1 hour 30 minutes. Then roughly 10 minutes before the collapses, both impact zone fires reappeared, stronger and hotter than before, this is not consistent with fire activity regardless of fuel. Fires burn fuel until the fuel is burnt up, the jet fuel fires would’ve burnt until the jet fuel was burnt up, than they would burn whatever flammable material was available.
This would be the contents of the impact floors which were low temperature fuel sources which corresponds with the bellowing black smoke, a signal that a fire is struggling for fuel and burning low temperature fuel. The fires fueled by the aircraft impacts cannot be the fires that re-appeared minutes before the collapses. As jet fuel fires cannot account for the spontaneous appearance of extreme heat and the aircraft’s aluminium cannot account for the huge explosions these hypotheses can be ruled out through scientific and logical reasoning.
Thermite can account for the spontaneous heat reaction and all the observational evidence strongly supports this hypothesis as the extreme heat reaction within the towers matches the exact appearance and behaviour of thermite. The bellowing clouds of white/grey smoke and the molten metal pouring out of the south tower can both be attributed to a large thermite reaction.
A Large thermite reaction combined with explosive force would result in the intense fires and extreme heat damaged in the surrounding area of ground zero. All the scientific and observational evidence, points to the use of thermite in the impact floors of both towers. The aircraft’s aluminium, being so little in quantity, torn apart and blown all over the impact zones cannot account for the detonations at the top of the towers … but military C4 explosives can.
|Thermite reaction ... south tower ... C4 explosion|
Thermite incendiaries and military C4 explosives; these are the only two components that fit the scientific and observational evidence.
The two N.I.S.T hypotheses put forward to account for the spontaneous heat reaction and huge explosions in the impact floors of both towers cannot be the correct hypothesis.
The most logical and obvious hypothesis to account for the collapse process in the impact floors is controlled thermite/C4 detonations.
Controlled thermite/C4 demolition can account for every aspect of the scientific and observational evidence of the collapse process at the top of the towers.
3. Precisely positioned and timed, staggered detonations the height of the buildings allowing a
near free fall descent through their centres of mass, into their own footprints.
The explosive processes at work in the impact floors are very clear and visible, the explosive processes at work down the rest of the structure of the buildings are not as clear and visible.
This doesn’t mean they don’t exist and can’t be proved. Confirmation of the existent of gravity is achieved by observing its influence in the physical processes around us therefore confirming its existent. The same can be achieved by observing the influence of explosive force.
The collapse speed and direction confirms the existent of explosive force. The section of the towers, beneath exploded top sections descended nearly completely unimpeded, through the structures centres of mass. This confirmed physical process could only happen if explosive force was at work to clear the path for the descending top unexploded sections of the towers. This is scientific confirmation of explosive force in the collapse processes of the towers.
The aim of controlled demolition is to collapse the building into its own footprint to minimise the debris damage to the surrounding area. To achieve this, the explosive detonations occur deep inside the structure to cause the building to implode rather than explode, these interior explosions are triggered by smaller detonations attached to the outside of the structure.
The jet fueled fire hypothesis of the 2004 … 9/11 commission report couldn’t account for these explosive detonations, so the commission ignored the evidence and refused to give an explanation for the speed of the collapses.
The 2011 … N.I.S.T Aluminium/water explosion hypothesis offered an explanation for the evidence of explosive force and the speed of the collapses with a hypothesis based on a bizarre and highly improbable series of events, dependent on very precise conditions. These conditions and the environment needed to allow this hypothesis to be possible did not exist in the twin towers.
Even if this scenario was possible, the probability that each detonation would occur at precisely the right moment to produce the collapse times is incredibly high against. This makes the probability against the aluminium hypothesis, even if the conditions were conducive ridiculously high.
So what was the cause of the multiple explosions on multiple floors ?
What visible evidence of the explosions on multiple floors is there ?
The explosions down the mid section of the towers are smaller and less noticeable than the explosions at the top but were observed by witnesses, firemen and members of the public that stated they heard and in some cases saw multiple detonations as the buildings collapsed.
Multiple witnesses described the sound as similar to multiple gun fire, one detonation after another in quick succession, firemen and members of the public told news reporters of explosions as the towers fell.
The picture below, on the far right shows what appeared to be an office chair being ejected by the explosive force of one of the mid tower detonations.
The 2004 … 9/11 commission report claimed these detonations were puffs of air being pushed out of the building by the collapsing floors from above as part of the pancake collapse hypothesis. The pancake collapse hypothesis is a scientific impossibility due to the speed of the descents. Pancake collapses tend to trap the floors contains inside the building, puffs of air due to collapsing floors do not generate enough force to propel office furniture through a window.
|Multiple detonations down the towers|
The only explanation is the position, time and sequence of the detonations. When a controlled demolition of a high rise building is preformed, the charges are detonated simultaneously to produce an unimpeded descent.
The same can be achieved by staggering the detonations by a fraction of a second and blowing out each floor a split second after the previous floor. This technique is harder to time, so it is harder to achieve a completely unimpeded descent resulting in the structure’s ultimate free fall speed.
Controlled demolition with charges detonated simultaneously to produce an unimpeded descent.
The explosive blasts on the outside of the building are called squibs, these are small explosive charges used to trigger much larger detonations of high explosives inside the structure, designed to implode the building.
The multiple charges are placed on multiple floors down the height of the structures. The squibs are triggered in a sequence that detonated the high explosives to implode the building to produce a straight down descent. The squibs would usually be visible as the structure descends.
Detonated in a staggered sequence, the squibs would only be visible at the top of the structures as they descended. Synchronised with the collapse speed of the buildings, with an increasing cloud of debris from the top section of the towers descending over the collapsing buildings, the squibs would in theory be obscured from view.
The explosions that collapsed the majority of the tower structures were triggered by detonated on multiple floors on the outside of the buildings.
If they weren’t in clear view, then they were under the falling debris of the top sections of the buildings.
Each exploding floor would produce debris which would merge with the descending debris cloud, producing a huge, hot descending debris and dust cloud covering the collapsing structures and the squibs.
The south tower collapse at 9.59 am
|South tower collapse|
The top section of the south tower cracks and falls away from the rest of the structure and than explodes in mid air; these photographs show huge explosive force and more evidence of a thermite reaction.
The first photograph shows flashes from explosions detonating down the south tower, misfires triggered a split second too soon. The second photograph shows a smaller explosive charge detonating underneath the debris cloud of the top section of the south tower.
|South tower exploding|
The south tower collapse sequence; Huge debris cloud covering the descent of the building and the explosions that must have detonated down the structure to allowed an unimpeded descent straight down at free fall speed.
|South tower collapse|
The south tower collapse; The last part of the structure to collapse was the inner core. The photograph on the right shows the core of the tower collapsing after the outer framework.
|South tower collapse|
The south tower collapse and debris cloud descending down into the W.T.C complex.
Youtube Search Engine … South tower collapse compilation ... 00:8:46
The north tower collapse at 10.28 am
|Small explosive detonations|
The three photographs above show squibs detonating underneath the collapsing top section of the north tower.
These three photographs show the outward explosive force activity in the north tower impact zone prior to the huge explosion that destroyed the top of the building.
The first photograph was taken split second before the explosion at the top of the north tower, the second shows the north tower as the top is exploding. Both show evidence of smaller outward explosive force just beneath the impact floors.
|North tower impact zone|
This close-up of the north tower impact zone seconds before the explosion and collapse; shows signs of smaller outward explosions. These smaller detonations triggered the large charges that began the collapse process.
|North tower collapse sequence|
There is observational evidence of explosive charges detonating underneath the impact floors of the north tower at the moment of the collapse process. The explosive charges detonating further down the building were misfires that detonated split seconds too early, the majority of the charges detonated in the correct sequence to create a nearly completely unimpeded descent.
|Huge dust clouds from the north tower collapse|
A Huge hot, dust and debris cloud pushing through New York City from the north tower collapse, reassembling a volcanic pyroclastic flow. These dust clouds were pushed outwards along the ground by a powerful force.
|North tower collapse|
The north tower dust cloud of hot pulverized concrete rising high into the sky and descending down and through the streets of New York City.
Youtube Search Engine … North tower collapse compilation ... 00:6:09
Explosions at the base of the twin towers
The stronger part of a building is the base which supports the entire weight of the structure. The taller the building the thicker and stronger than base supporting columns must be to support the structures weight.
|Firemen in the blast damaged twin tower lobbies|
Both lobbies of the twin towers showed signs of blast damage immediately after the aircraft impacts, this corresponds to the witness statements which confirm explosions in the basements of both towers.
The janitor in the north tower, William Rodriquez who was working in the basement at the moment of the aircraft impact, stated that there was a loud explosion and the walls were cracking around him, then he heard the aircraft impact the 93 floor of the tower.
Rodriquez pulled a man to safety by the name of David Felipe, who was severely burnt by the basement explosion. David was so badly burnt he had flesh hanging off his arms and face.
|Explosions at the base of both towers|
At the moment of collapse, both towers show signs of explosions in the basements. This is again confirmed by witness accounts of hearing and seeing detonations at the base of both building as they collapsed.
|Examples of controlled demolition showing large explosions at the base of the buildings|
When a controlled demolition is preformed the explosion at the base of the building has to be sizable due to the weight barring thickness of the supporting columns of the structure.
In the case of the twin towers there were two explosions reported at the base of the buildings. The first explosions occurred in the same instant of the impacts. The sound of these detonations would’ve been disguised by sound of the aircraft impacts so the explosions would be less noticeable to the people working in the lower floors of the towers.
With people in shock, scared and confused, the damage in the lobbies would’ve been attributed to the impact force of the aircraft's.
By the time of the collapses the lower floors of the towers and the surrounding area of the W.T.C complex would’ve been cleared of civilians, so large more powerful thermite charges would be used to cut through the tower’s steel supporting beams. This would result in large quantities of molten metal beneath the debris at ground zero. The sound of this explosion would be disguised by the sound of the collapsing buildings.
Youtube Search Engine … Explosions in the WTC basement before the aircraft impact ... 00:1:45
Ist aircraft impact / explosions: witness testimony ... 00:3:03
W.T.C twin towers debris/dust cloud
|Dust clouds expanding into the Hudson river Dust clouds expanding through Manhattan|
Dust clouds expanding into the Hudson River. Dust clouds expanding through Manhattan
The dust clouds reached the ground in approximately 12 seconds they pushed outwards in all directions covering buildings, cars and people in a wave of hot, solid, fine dust.
The amount of energy required to expand the dust clouds of both towers was many times the entire potential energy of the towers elevated mass attributed to gravity.
The gravitational energy from the collapses of the buildings wasn’t enough energy to expand the clouds out as far as they reached or to account for the speed they traveled.
|The pyroclastic flow of volcanic dust cloud north tower collapse dust cloud|
Underground pressure push huge clouds of volcanic dust over the land, the tower collapse dust clouds reassemble a pyroclastic flow.
The twin towers dust and debris clouds expansion and speed can be account for with the use of C4 explosives in the collapse processes.
The dust settled in ground zero and the surrounding area, due to the wind direction it settled thickest south and east of the W.T.C complex. The dust formed a layer three inches thick, 5 – 6 blocks away from the collapse site, it covered virtually everything with a fine, toxic layer. The dust penetrated cars, buildings, air conditioning systems and people’s lungs.
Youtube Search Engine … South tower collapse dust cloud ... 00:1:26
North tower collapse cloud ... 00:2:06
Inverted mushroom dust cloud ... 00:2:03
North tower collapse dust cloud timelapse ... 00:3:52
North tower collapse dust cloud: Elevatored view ... 00:4:06
|Twin tower dust and debris|
|Dust covered streets of Manhattan|
|Dust covered New Yorker's|
Youtube Search Engine … Mirco explosions & vaporization of debris ... 00:6:35
Dr Mark Health: Inside the dust cloud ... 00:3:17
Hundreds of 9/11 1st responders die of cancer ... 00:3:11
9/11 'Dust Lady ' dies from stomach cancer ... 00:1:45
The controlled demolition hypothesis can account for all the explosive detonations the height of the towers without a constant heat source so fulfills the second and third requirements to be the correct hypothesis for the collapse process of the structures below the impact floors.
4. The hypothesis must result in molten metal beneath the debris and be able to keep it in a molten state for weeks after the collapses
It is a scientific fact that aviation fuel cannot melt steel, yet there was molten steel/iron underneath debris at ground zero for weeks after the building collapses.
|Molten metal at ground zero|
Firemen stated there was a river of molten metal flowing under the debris, that fires were springing up as debris was cleared weeks after the day of September the 11th.
|Molten metal at ground zero|
The majority of the thermite would’ve been used in cutting through the twin towers supporting columns at the base of the structures which would account for molten metal under debris.
|Thermite reaction on a car|
Youtube Search Engine … Ground zero: Molten metal / Fires / Heat ... 00:7:40
NYFD Molten steel / Extreme heat Evidence on display ... 00:1:33
15/16/17/18 ground Zero Experts Speak Out
Part 1: Melted Steel and Molten Iron ... 00:9:24
Part 2: Iron microspheres ... 00:1:58
Part 3: High Tech Incendiaries in WTC Dust... 00:5:16
Part 4: Experts Agree ... 00:3:41
The fire damage to cars in the surrounding area of the twin tower collapses
|Burning cars at ground zero|
Cars parked in the surrounding area of the W.T.C complex burning intensely hours after the collapses, jet fuel cannot account for this intense heat reaction after the collapses. The jet fuel fires started with the impacts … South tower 56 minutes before collapse … North tower 1 hour 42 minutes before collapse
How can jet fuel fires or aluminium/water explosions accounts for these prolonged, intense fires at ground zero and the surrounding area after the collapses ?
|The effects of thermite|
This is a characteristic of thermite which produces bursts of high temperatures over a small area, so its effects are located close to its position. This is why thermite is used in controlled demolition to precisely cut through supporting steel columns of a building.
|The effects of thermite|
The photographs above shows two New York police cars; one badly burnt at the rear with the front undamaged, the second one badly burnt at the front and free from heat damage at the back. Some of these cars were located 100s of metres away from the collapse site, suggesting that this heat reaction was ejected by the explosive force from the top of the towers. Cars were ablaze up to seven blocks away from ground zero.
|Steel beams from ground zero|
|Steel beams from ground zero|
Thermite reacts instantly when ignited and would’ve taking a matters of seconds to slice through the base of the supporting steel columns of the twin towers.
The majority of the thermite would’ve been used in cutting through the twin towers supporting columns at the base of the buildings. This would account for the large quantity of molten steel underneath debris at ground zero.
How would thermite charges be install to the supporting columns in a controlled demolition ?
|Installing thermite charges|
Thermite burns at temperatures of 2200 c and would slice through the steel supporting columns in seconds and with the precise detonations the height of the structures, this would allow the towers to collapse straight down virtually unimpeded.
The photograph on the far right is a close-up of one of the supporting columns at ground zero, sliced diagonally and melted as if cut by an angled thermite charge.
Youtube Search Engine … Molten metal at ground zero ... 00:12:09
How could an aluminium/steam explosion result in these precise cuts of harden steel beams or the fusion of steel with concrete at 1500 c ?
|Fused steel/concrete from ground zero|
The photograph on the left shows thermite burning through concrete and brick, the photograph in the centre shows thermite burning through a steel beam.
The photograph on the far right shows a sample of concrete and steel from ground zero, fused together through a heat reaction of over a 1500 c …. Thermite burns at temperatures of 2200 c.
|Sliced steel beams at ground zero|
|Sliced steel beams at ground zero|
These columns look sliced/cut …the cuts appear precise not randomly blown part by explosive force
Thermite charges angled and straight, would’ve left the tower columns looking exactly like this
Youtube Search engine … Ground zero: Fused steel and concrete ... 00:1:19
WTC Iron workers testimony ... 00:3:41
9/11 Experiments: Part 1 ... 00:14:29
9/11 Experiments: Part 2 ... 00:2:32
Independent Ground zero forensic evidence
In 2008-2009 … a group of respected scientists including Dr Steven Jones of Brigham Young University, Utah U.S.A and Dr Niels Harrit of University of Copenhagen, Denmark conducted a series of tests on multiple samples of 9/11 W.T.C dust and steel.
|Dr Steven Jones Dr Niels Harrit|
Youtube Search Engine … Dr Niels Harrit discusses WTC debris/collapses/thermite ... 00:12:04
Dr Niels Harrit
“ Nano-thermite composite can be sprayed or even painted onto surfaces, effectively forming an energetic or explosive paint. The red chips we found in the W.T.C dust conform to their description of thin films of hybrid inorganic/organic energetic nano-composites ... We found unreacted thermite. "
|Dust & steel samples from ground zero|
The photograph on the left is of W.T.C steel samples containing thin chips of nano-thermite composites, the centre photograph shows a dust sample containing iron oxide a product of a thermite reaction. On the right a sample of W.T.C dust containing traces of nano-thermite
Dr Steven Jones and Dr Niels Harrit are both respected in their fields of science and hold positions of responsible in their respective universities.
They both have good, solid reputations so there is no reason to doubt the findings in these independent scientific papers. Although the mainstream media have been slow in reporting these controversial scientific findings, the data can be verified online.
Independent Forensic tests confirm the presence of thermite incendiaries at ground zero
The controlled thermite/C4 demolition hypothesis can account for molten metal underneath debris at ground zero, it can keep it molten for weeks and it can also explain why nano-thermite has been found in W.T.C dust and steel.
Thermite is an instant high temperature heat source so fulfils the second and fourth requirements to be the correct hypothesis for the conditions at ground zero.
Opportunities to install explosives in the towers
Controlled demolition is of course, pre-planned and the explosives are pre-planted so how and when would there have been opportunities to place explosives charges in the towers before September the 11th.
Controlled demolition charges have to be precisely placed and timed to produce the collapse process of the towers. This takes expertise, time and access to the entire buildings from top to bottom, inner core and outer perimeter framework.
Explosives would have been placed inside the concrete columns to produce the pulverized concrete at ground zero this would mean drilling into the three foot of reinforced concrete with heavy drilling equipment.
In the months leading up to 9/11 there was a major renovation of both tower elevator systems. The renovation was undertaken by a company called ‘A.C.E Elevators ‘. It was reported in the March addition of Elevator World magazine as being ‘the most extensive in the history of elevator construction’.
The elevator system in the twin towers allowed direct access to the buildings inner central core columns, gaining access to the central core would‘ve been essential in planting explosives around the core columns.
To authorise the elevator renovation, the permission of the twin tower lease holder would be essential.
|Larry Silverstein twin tower lease holder Installation of a angle thermite charge|
There is no officially record of the renovation but it was reported in the elevator industry main worldwide publication and has been verified by W.T.C employees.
Scott Forbes a British employee of a business located in the towers has stated there was unscheduled construction work in process in the months and weeks leading up to September the 11th. The elevators to certain floors in the upper section of the towers were not operating.
Scott and other W.T.C employees reported hearing sounds of heavy machinery and loud drilling, floors were said to be vibrating and shaking. For months, each morning, employees were findings their offices covered in thick dust. There was no official reason given at the time for the construction work and there have been no official acknowledgement of the work ever taking place but multiple W.T.C employees have confirmed that the construction work was undertaken.
The majority of the floors in the twin towers were unoccupied, employees stated that they were re- located to different floors so unscheduled construction work could take place on their regular office floors.
Youtube Search Engine … 9/11 Elevator Access ... 00:9:38
Access / Security / Business & governmental connections ... 00:11:01
W.T.C complex …. Security ….. Securacom Inc.
On the 8th – 9th of September 2001, there was an unscheduled power down in the twin towers;
There were no surveillance cameras …no code security on doors
On the 9th-10th-11th of September 2001, twin tower security was downgraded;
There were less guards … no searches of the buildings … no bomb disposal dog patrols
The security downgrade was acknowledged by Securacom but no reason for it was given.
Although there were opportunities to plant explosive charge in the towers in the months leading up to September the 11th.
These opportunities could only be have existed have with the cooperation of the twin tower lease holder to authorise the elevator renovation and cooperation of Securacom in downgrading twin tower security.
|Larry Silverstein Marvin Bush|
Twin tower lease holder Larry Silverstein Marvin Bush; Younger brother of George Bush
Owner of the three buildings that collapsed on 9/11 Director of Securacom Inc.
Youtube Search Engine … Interview with Scott Forbes ... 00:5:23
Sercuracom / Secuirty access ... 00:5:16
Apply a process of elimination to all the observational, scientific and witness evidence to how and why the twin towers collapsed.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle … Sherlock Holmes
“ Eliminate the impossible and whatever remains, how ever improbable, must be the truth “
There are three proposed hypotheses for the collapse of the twin towers;
Melted/weakened steel/Jet fueled fires hypothesis … 2001-2011 ….... N.I.S.T ... 2004 … 9/11 Commission Report
Aluminium/water steam explosion hypothesis …..... 2011-Present … N.I.S.T ... 2011 ... Revised Report
Controlled thermite/C4 demolition hypothesis …..... 2001-Present .... 9/11 Truth Movement
Through scientific examination and logically reasoning the two hypotheses proposed by N.I.S.T can be eliminated as impossible.
Whatever remains, is the controlled thermite/C4 demolition hypothesis, as all the observational, scientific and forensic evidence points directly at controlled demolition, there is no aspect of this hypothesis that is improbable.
The controlled demolition hypothesis can account for;
The spontaneous extreme temperature heat reaction in the impact zones prior to collapse
The appearance and behaviour of the heat reaction in the impact zones prior to collapse
The clouds of white smoke bellowing out of the impact zones prior to collapse
The molten metal pouring out of the south tower impact zone prior to collapse
The huge explosions at the top of the towers
The multiple detonations the entire height of the buildings
The explosions in the basements
The collapse speed and direction
The pyroclastic flow of the dust clouds
The presence of molten metal at ground zero weeks after the collapses
The precise angled slice/cut of the steel supporting columns at ground zero
The pulverized concrete at ground zero
The steel/concrete fusion at ground zero
The independent forensic evidence of nano-thermite incendiaries in ground zero dust and steel
Given the overwhelming evidence in support of controlled demolition, it’s easy to except this hypothesis as the correct one to explain how and why the W.T.C twin towers collapsed.
What is hard to except is its implications
Additional Relative Information
Twin Tower Insurance Policy
The north trade centre tower opened for business in 1970 … The south trade tower centre in 1972 … from the day they opened to the day they collapsed the W.T.C twin towers had never made a profit.
In April 2001 … just six months before 9/11 the U.S Government privatize the twin tower lease.
Businessman Larry Silverstein brought the lease. A condition in the lease contract gave Silverstein a no-bid contract on any re – building of any future re – development of the W.T.C complex.
In taking over the twin tower lease, Silverstein also took on the twin towers insurance policy, the policy already covered terrorist attacks, so Larry Silverstein exchanged a few months of premium payments for a huge insurance payout due to the September 11th terror attacks.
The twin towers, two buildings that had never turned a profit, due to extremely high running costs, resulting in
high office space rental fees, leading to most of the commercial office space in both towers being unoccupied, these two building that were a financial albatross to both owner ( New York the port authority ) and lease holder were demolished and replaced with huge insurance payouts.
After the 9/11 attacks Silverstein took the insurance company to court arguing that two aircraft impacts constitutes two terrorist attacks which constitutes two insurance payouts.
Silverstein won the court case and was awarded 4550,000,000 Dollars.
Larry Silverstein was immediately given a no – bid contract to re – develop the W.T.C complex.
W.T.C building 7 ( Saloman Brothers Building ) lease and freehold was also owned by Larry Silverstein.
Building 7 like the towers was running at a lost due to the high costs of running the building. Silverstein received another 700 million Dollars for the collapse of W.T.C 7.
Google Search Engine ... WTC Insurance 1
W.T.C Insurance 2
9/11 … Insider Trading
Put Option … An option to sell assets at an agreed price on or before a specified date
A put option is a bet that the value of the stock will fall
The level of put options purchased around the world in the week before September the 11th 2001 was six times higher than normal … according to the BBC and CNN these countries reported 9/11 insider trading;
U.S.A / Germany / U.K / France / Canada / Japan / Monti Carlo / Switzerland / Hong Kong / Italy / Spain / Belgium / Luxemburg / Singapore
Four companies that had 100s of put options brought in the week before 9/11;
The two airlines involved in the attacks
A.B.C New ... reported that both American Airlines and United Airlines had increased put option activity.
American Airlines put option activity rose 60 times higher than normal on the days before the attacks
United Airlines put option activity rose 90 times higher than normal on the days before the attacks
No similar trading occurred on any other airlines
Two companies occupying office space in the W.T.C complex
The Chicago Board of Options Exchange ... reported that companies connected to the attacks had increased put option activity.
Morgan Stanley put option activity rose 27 times higher than normal on the days before the attacks
Merrill Lynch put option activity rose 12 times higher than normal on the days before the attacks
With the right insider knowledge … there’s money to be made from unforeseen terrorist attacks
Youtube Search Engine ... A.B.C News report on 9/11 insider trading ... 00:2:20
Google Search Engine ... 9/11 Insider Trading
BBC report ' Sick Share Deal '
The Twin Tower Fireproofing
The twin tower fireproofing contained asbestos and was over- due to be replaced. The towers already had two waivers and were on their final warning from the U.S Health and Safety department. The estimate cost of re-fireproofing the towers was a billion dollars.
When Silverstein brought the twin tower lease, he inherited the legal and financial responsibility for the re-fireproofing of the towers. The re- fireproofing had already started when Silverstein brought the leases by September the 11th 2001 ... only 10 floors of the north tower and 16 floors of the south tower had been completed.
Floors completed in the south tower ….77 – 78 / 82 – 92 / 96 – 99
Impact floors in the south tower ……... 78 – 85
Floors completed in the north tower ….. 92 – 100 / 102
Impacts floors in the north tower ……... 93 – 99
Google Search Engine ... Replaced twin tower fireproofing
South tower impact floors North tower impact floors
South tower re – fireproofed floors North tower re – fireproofed floors
W.T.C Twin Tower ... Sources of information
( W.T.C Building 7 Collapse Examination Below Twin Tower Sources )
Google Search Engine;
Wikipdia ... The Design and construction of the twin towers
The Construction of the World Trade Center
9/11 research: Twin tower construction
The World Trade Center: Statistics & history
The History of steel construction
Steel frame construction
Metallurgy / Engineering /Aviation fuel
Engineering toolbox: Metal melting temperatures
Influence of temperature on metals
The characteristics of aluminium
Optinum conditions for aviation fuel; Jet engine
How a building implosion works
Reference books .. The history of steel construction … Karl B Habormann
The art of demolishing, dismantling, imploding, toppling and razing …Helene Liss
Engineering material and metallurgy … Amandoop Singh Wadhwa
Properties and physical metallurgy …John E Hatch
Aircraft fuel systems … Bill Neese
Mainstream Media … BBC … CNN … FOX news …ABC news
Footage & photographs of the twin towers … Eye witness accounts
News reports on the day / months & years after the day
Columbia Earthquake Center
Seismic data / collapse times
F.E.M.A 403: World Trade Center Building Study ... W.T.C Twin Towers
Scientific data provided by N.I.S.T
Endorsed by the Depatment of Commerce
9/11 Commission Report ... 2004
Collapse through melted and weakened steel
Scientific data provided by N.I.S.T
Endorsed by U.S Department of Commerce
SINTEF: Christian Simensen Twin tower Collapse report ... 2011
Collapse through aluminium/water explosions
Scientific data provided by SINTEF / N.I.S.T
Endorsed by N.I.S.T
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth ( A&E )
Dan Barnum …Bachelor Degree of Architecture
Richard Gage …Architect
Kelly David …Bachelor of Science Degree
Scientists for 9/11 Truth
Dr Steven Jones ; Professor of chemistry. Brigham Young, University Utah, U.S.A
Dr Neils Harrit ; Professor of chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Demark
2014 ... Joint Paper
“ Ethics and the official reports about the destruction of the world trade centre twin
Towers on September the 11th 2001: A case study “
Collaboration ; Scientists for 9/11 Truth … A & E for 9/11 Truth
Institute of Electrical & Electronic Engineering ( IEEE )
The September the 11th 2001 Terror Attacks
New York World Trade Centre Attacks
Chapter 2 … The Collapse of World Trade Centre Building 7
Although the focus of attention regarding the controversy surrounding the September the 11th New York attacks has from the start been on the collapse of the twin towers, in recent years the focus has switched to the third building to completely collapse … W.T.C Building 7.
The collapse of building 7, although reported on the day received very little coverage in the mainstream media in the years after the attacks. This news blackout of the collapse of W.T.C building 7 by commercially controlled media lasted for years …the effect was people either not knowing of its existence and those that did attached no great importance to its collapse.
The non-existent media coverage made it possible for the 9/11 commission to completely omit W.T.C building 7 from the 2004 report.
|W.T.C Building 7, also known as The Solomon Brothers Building|
In May of 2002 … F.E.M.A released a report on all three building collapses that occurred on the day of 9/11.
This report was put together and presented by F.E.M.A a government agency rather than the 9/11 commission report which was supposed to be a public enquiry. A government report is a government issued document designed to inform the public about an issue or occurrence, typically the document supports the issuing body’s philosophy on the matter … A public enquiry is an independent body formed to investigate an issue or occurrence presented in a public forum where all interested parties can attend and contribute.
The 2002 report stated that all three buildings collapsed due to heat of fire … F.E.M.A concluded that W.T.C Building 7 was the third of only three steel framed high raise buildings ( the first two being the twin towers ) in the history of steel construction to completely collapse due to heat of fire … The F.E.M.A 2002 report was heavily criticised by the 9/11 truth movement.
Public awareness of building 7’s existence and collapse grew due to the efforts of the 9/11 truth movement
campaigning and lobbying for years for a public enquiry and explanation for the collapse. The U.S Government were again reluctant to open any public enquiry but unable to ignore the growing public pressure for an explanation for the collapse of W.T.C 7.
In November 2008 N.I.S.T … released … The progressive collapse due to thermal expansion report
Design & Construction of W.T.C Building 7
F.E.M.A Building 7 Collapse Report 2002
N.I.S.T Building 7 Collapse Preliminary Reports 2004
N.I.S.T Building 7 Progressive Collapse Due To Thermal Expansion Report 2008
Media Coverage of W.T.C 7 / Prior Knowledge of a Collapse
Building 7 Instability / Controlled Thermite / C4 Demolition
9/11 New York Building Collapse Conclusion
Design & construction of W.T.C Building 7
World Trade Centre Building 7 was opened in 1987 … it had 47 floors and was 610 feet or 185 metres in height, the building had 1.8 million square feet of space and was built with 40 thousand tons of steel.
Construction of W.T.C 7 started in 1983 … the building was built above a Con.Edison substation that was installed in 1967. The final design of the building was much larger than originally planned, this extra weight and height was compensated in the structural design by including a system of gravity column transfer trusses and girders to transfer the increased gravitation loads to the smaller foundations.
|Con Edison substation .... Gravity transfer girders|
W.T.C 7 had six diesel oil fuel tanks …. 9th floor … 50-100 gallon tank / 8th floor ... 275 gallon tank / 7th floor … 275 gallon tank / 5th floor 275 gallon tank …these four tanks were supplied by two larger tanks in the basement … 23,100 gallon tanks.
Emery Roth & Sons the architects who designed the entire W.T.C complex, including building 7 have been over the last 40-50 years one of the most influential architectural firms in New York. The firm’s architectural contribution has changed the appearance of Midtown and Lower Manhattan.
Emery Roth & Sons designed … the Pan Am building … the W.T.C complex … the Citicorp Centre
Tishman Reality & Construction the company who built the W.T.C complex also built the Madison Square Garden complex.
W.T.C building 7’s design and construction was regarded as state of the art at the time of it’s opening in 1987.
In 1989 the Solomon Brothers Brokerage firm brought the freehold and lease to building 7. The Solomon Brothers spent 200 million dollars on a refurbishment of the building … the work included the removal of floors, the adding of elevators and reinforcing of the gravity load transfer steel girders and the supporting columns. The refurbishment was to convert the building into a brokerage house which requires height ceiling trading floors … double - height floors.
“ We built enough redundancy to allow entire portions of floors to be removed without affecting the building structural integrity, on the assumption that someone might need double – height floors. “
Floors contribute to the overall integral strength of a building by bracing the structure, when floors are removed it lowers the overall strength of the building. This is compensated by reinforcing the structure’s supporting columns.
As part of the 1989 refurbishment W.T.C building 7’s supporting columns were reinforced with 375 tons of steel … additional fireproofing was also installed around all the steel girders and columns.
W.T.C building 7 supporting columns were reinforced and had two layer of fire protection
F.E.M.A 2002 … Building 7 Collapse Report
W.T.C Building 7 … Damage Sustain
F.E.M.A stated in their report that building 7 sustained some damage from the north tower collapse at 10.28 am, they said that the extent and severity of the damage was unknown. The report claimed that the south side of the building was damaged to some degree and the subsequent fires started at this time.
North tower collapse 10.28 am … W.T.C building 7 can be seen in the foreground
So what photographic evidence is there of the damage sustained by building 7 ?
The south face of WTC 7 which was facing the north tower was hit with the most debris, for most of the day, right up to the point collapse the south face of WTC 7 was obscured from sight by smoke coming from a combination of sources.
The first being WTC 7 itself, the other two were WTC building's 5 and 6 ... which were both hit by far more debris than building 7. Both WTC 5 and 6 sustain far worst debris impact damage and were on fire far more intensely than building 7.
In the BBC documentary ' The Third Tower ' the narrator claims smoke was bellowing out of WTC 7 south face, which initially it was but the program never emphasized fact that WTC 5 and 6 were also on fire in close proximity to WTC 7 ... WTC 6 was a raging inferno producing a lot of the smoke raising from the area of the south face of WTC 7.
These photographs shows, the top of building 7 … there is minor damage visible on the south side face at the top of the building but apart from that, no damage. It is important to note that the penthouse on top of the roof is untouched and undamaged by the north tower collapse.
These photographs show smoke bellowing from the south side of building 7 … it’s difficult to see the damage to the building due to the smoke. The west side of building 7 seems virtually undamaged.
The photograph on the left shows a hole in the back and the side corner of building 7. The right hand photograph shows debris damage to the south western corner, floors 24/25/37 and 46 appear to be damaged.
The damage to W.T.C building 7 seems to be confined to the south western corner, there is significant damage to the lower south west corner of the building. Although there is some damage visible to the south face of the building because of the smoke obscuring the view of the south face, it’s difficult to make a proper assessment of how badly damaged W.T.C 7 was by the collapse of the north tower.
The north face of building 7 was completely untouched by debris impacts, so suffered no damage.
In the BBC documentary ' The third Tower ' the narrator comments that most people had seen the image of the untouched north face of WTC 7 and that this had the effect of misleading the public into thinking the damage to the building and the subsequent fires wasn't severe enough to collapse the building.
The very fact that the west,east and north faces of the building suffered little or no debris damage and didn't appear at any time to have any severe or widespread five activity proves that a complete, global symmetric collapse would be highly unlikely.
If the building were to have collapsed as a result of either debris damage or fire activity primarily on the south face, WTC 7 would most likely have had a staggered collapse direction towards the south rather than complete vertical descent ... severe debris damage or fire activity primarily to the south face, if any collapse had happened would most likely have been partial and southernly in direction.
Where was building 7’s location regarding the north tower collapse ?
W.T.C 7 was located 300 feet away from the north tower.
What damage was there to the buildings next to W.T.C Building 7 ?
|Verizon Building ....................................... U.S Post Office / Federal Building|
Verizon building on the left sustained minor damage from the collapse of the north tower, it incurred further damage from the collapse of building 7 at 5.20 pm. The U.S Post Office or Federal Building seems to have little or no damaged, there is not much photographic evidence of the damaged to the Federal building from the north tower collapse. Although these buildings were damaged by the tower collapse, it’s logical to assume that W.T.C 7 due to its more central position, relative to the north tower, would be hit by more debris therefore sustain more damage.
The both buildings were damaged more severely from the collapse of building 7 at 5.20 pm than the north tower collapse at 10.28 am.
What damage was there to the buildings between the north tower and building 7 ?
These two photographs show W.T.C 6 after the collapse of building 7, all the damage is from the north tower collapse and subsequent fires. The photograph on the right shows both W.T.C 6 and W.T.C 5
These photographs shows the damage to W.T.C 5 from the collapse of the north tower, both W.T.C 5 & 6 sustained far more damaged than W.T.C 7 as a consequence of being located almost directly underneath the collapsing tower.
The two photographs on the left and right show building 7’s complete collapse. The aerial photograph in the centre shows the stark different between the partial collapses of W.T.C 5 & 6 and the complete collapse of W.T.C 7.
As W.T.C buildings 5 & 6 boar the brunt of the tower 1 collapse and the damaged to these two buildings, was far more severe than the damage to W.T.C building 7 … logically if any of these three buildings were to completely collapse it should have been W.T.C 5 & 6 … not W.T.C 7.
W.T.C building 6 had the majority of the debris from north side of W.T.C tower 1 fall onto its position … tower 1 exploded from the impact floors upwards … from the 93rd - 110th floor … as W.T.C 7 was 300 foot away from the tower its logical to assume that the debris that struck building 7 was from the top of the tower … 17 floors.
Building 6 being the structure closest to the north face of tower 1 … would have been struck by the majority of the debris from the north side collapse of nearly all 92 floors of tower 1 … most of the tower below the impact floors
This is evident from the huge hole in the centre of the remaining structure of building 6 … there is a smaller hole to the left of the central hole but the majority of the building outer steel framework is still standing. Some of the outer portions of roof have survived the tower collapse.
Whatever the full extent of the damage to W.T.C 7 due to its distance from the tower and the tower collapse process resulting in the majority of the tower’s structure descending straight down … the damage to W.T.C building 7 would most lightly have reassemble the damage sustained by the Verizon building, W.F.C building or the Deutsche building … at this debris field distance W.T.C building 7 was the only building that completely collapsed.
It is difficult to put together a clear picture of the structural damage sustained by building 7 as a result of the collapse of the north tower, being the most central building at that distance from the tower collapse means it was lightly that W.T.C 7 would sustain the most debris damage of the buildings at that distance.
Considering the amount of damage sustain by W.T.C 6 which partially collapsed but didn’t by any means completely collapse its hard to see how W.T.C building 7 could completely collapse from the debris damaged from the north tower.
Both the F.E.M.A report of 2002 and the N.I.S.T report of 2008 concluded that the collapse of W.T.C building 7 was due to the fires resulting from the debris impacts not the debris impacts themselves.
W.T.C Building 7 Fires
The fires in building 7 started as a result of debris from the north tower collapse at 10.28 am, first reports put fire on floors 6/7/8/9/10 and 19 of the south face of the building. Later on in the day there were reports of fire on the 27th and 28th floors of the west face … there were also small fires on the 12th floor on the east and north faces.
Were these fires strong enough to collapse the building ?
The south face of W.T.C building 7 was the side of the building struck by debris and was reported as having the strongest fire activity … how strong were the fires on the south side of building 7 ?
Photographs of the south side of building 7 bellowing dark smoke … but no flames visible.
When studying these photographs it’s important to note two points; 1 … that the smoke from W.T.C 7 is merging with the smoke produced by debris from the collapse of the north tower and the smoke coming from the raging fires in W.T.C 5 and 6 which was positioned directly opposite. 2 … there is not much flame activity visible in any photographs of the south face of building 7 … mostly smoke.
It is important to emphasize that the smoke raising in the area of the south face of building 7 was a combination of the smoke mainly from two building fires ... WTC 6 & 7, the majority from building 6 which had by far the most extreme fire activity ... this point was not emphasized enough on the BBC's ' The Third Tower ' documentary.
This photograph on the left shows the top south western corner of building 7 in the first hours after the collapse of tower 1 … the second photograph is of the south western corner later in the day … the fire activity is strongest just after the debris impacts and seems to have weaken considerable through the day.
If the fires on the south side of the building were burning hot and out of control wouldn’t there be more fire activity … more flames ?
If the fires were burning intensely, the photographs would show flames underneath the smoke … there would be much more visible heat activity, such as flames and the orange/yellow glow of heat showing intermittently beneath the smoke.
These photographs show buildings with fires on one face … flames are visible ... showing that these fires were hotter than the fires on the south face of W.T.C 7 … none of these buildings collapsed … not even partially.
These photographs show the west side of W.T.C 7 … most of the west face …no flames … no smoke
There was debris damage to the south western corner of the building, the black scorching around the debris holes and dark or black smoke pouring out of the windows indicating some fire activity. Most of the west face of building 7 was free of debris damage and fire activity, even at the location of the debris damage on south corner of the western face of the building showed very little sign of intense fires.
These photographs show the east side of building 7 … there are flames and smoke midway up the building but the majority of the east side of the structure is free of fire. The east face of W.T.C building 7 was on fire … but was it on fire and hot enough to contribute to collapsing the building ?… there doesn’t seem to be any signs of fire on the lower floors on the east side of the building.
These photographs show the east side fires and part of the north face of W.T.C building 7 … flames are visible from some of the windows on the north face but the majority of the face is untouched by fire.
These four photographs show the north side of W.T.C building 7 … flames are visible on the mid floors of the building … the fires appear to be fairly strong but isolated on a few floors.
The two photographs directly above, were used in the BBC's ' The Third Tower ' to substantiate the strength of the fires and the heat they were producing, claiming that the heat from the fires was hot enough to melt the metal around the windows therefore the fire’s heat was hot enough to collapse the entire steel framed building … but the north face, when observed in full, shows isolated fires that weren’t strong or widespread enough contribute to any sort of collapse partial or complete.
Photographs showing the north face; the second photograph was taken at the moment of collapse
Do these photographs show fires capable of collapsing a building ?
In the BBC documentary ' The Third Tower ' ... WTC building 7 was referred to in the program as a raging inferno, that the building had been an inferno for hours.
If the BBC describe the photograph's above as a building that is a raging inferno ... How would they decribe the buildings in the photographs below ?
High Rise Steel framed Building Fires
The fires in building 7 started at 10.28 am … building 7 collapsed at 5.20 pm … 7 and a half hours later.
Were the fires in building 7 burning long and hot enough to result in a complete collapse ?
W.T.C Building 7 fires compared to other steel framed high rise building fires
Mumbai .. Jan 2015 / Shanghai .. Nov 2010 / Chechnya .. April 2013 / Siberia .. Sept 2014
42 stories … 14 hours / 28 stories … 8 hours / 40 stories ….. 29 hours / 25 stories ….. 3 hours
None of these steel framed buildings collapsed
Mandarin Oriental Hotel … Feb 2009 … 44 stories … 3 hours … no collapse
Guangzhou … Dec 2013 … 25 stories … 11 hours … no collapse
The Madrid Windsor Hotel … Feb 2005 … 32 stories … 20 hours … no collapse
The Windsor hotel was half finished … had no sprinkler system … the steel didn’t melt …the building didn’t collapse. The Windsor fire is used online to show the strength and resilience of steel to heat and as a comparison to the fires in W.T.C building 7. The different in fire ferocity and strength is immediately obvious and so is the aftermath … Windsor hotel remained standing … W.T.C building 7 completely collapsed.
The Windsor hotel … partial collapse
Although the Windsor fire has been used to discredit the official version of the collapse of building 7, it has also been used by supporters of the official explanation …claiming that the Windsor high rise building’s partial collapse validates the official explanation for the complete collapse of building 7.
The difference between the two fires could not be more obvious, the partial collapse of the Windsor building happened after hours of intense fires engulfing the entire structure. There was a partial collapse which is very unusual but does happen on rare occasions. On these rare occasions the part of the structure that collapses has been on fire intensely and for a considerable amount of time … until September the 11th 2001 no complete collapse of any steel framed high rise building due to fire had ever occurred and it has never occurred since.
Partial collapse Collapsed section Standing section
According to the 2002 F.E.M.A report on September the 11th 2001 at 5.20 pm … W.T.C building 7 became the third of only three high rise buildings in the history of steel construction to complete collapse due to the heat of fire … the first two being the W.T.C twin towers.
The Sprinkler System and Water Supply
In the F.E.M.A report it was stated that debris from the north tower collapse at 10.28 am damaged a water main in Vesey Street, Building 7 is separated from the rest of the W.T.C complex by Vesey Street. The Verizon building to the left of building 7, looking from the prospective of the north tower, also sustain minor damage from the collapse of the tower. So there was a substantial amount of debris in Vesey Street.
The photograph on the left shows; the Verizon building after the north tower collapse but before building 7 collapsed. On the left, a photograph showing Vesey Street after the tower collapses … building 7 still standing in the background, so it’s possible the water main was damaged by debris.
The New York Fire Department used water from the Hudson River to fight the fires in the W.T.C complex itself but stopped fighting the fires in building 7 hours before its collapse, this water was drawn from the western side of the complex … so why weren’t they using the same water source to fight the fires burning in building 7 ?
The photograph on the left shows the short distance from W.T.C building 7 to the Hudson River. The right hand photograph was taken some time before 9/11/2001; it shows the close proximity of the W.T.C complex to the Hudson River … a plentiful water supply.
In centuries passed, a chain of people, passing containers of water from hand to hand, used natural water sources to fight building fires located close to the sea, river or a lake.
In the 21st century it seems ridiculous for the authorities to claim a lass of water to fight the fires on September the 11th especially as the water from the Hudson River was already being used to fight the fires in the W.T.C complex … So why not W.T.C building 7 ?
N.I.S.T 2004 … Preliminary W.T.C Building 7 Collapse Progress Reports
Over the course of 2004 N.I.S.T released several preliminary reports concerning the collapse of W.T.C 7, these reports made three assumptions that have been proven to be wrong.
1 … N.I.S.T released a statement claiming the existence of a 10 story hole at a specific position at the base of the south face of the building, although they released this information with no provable evidence, it was backed by an article in the publication Popular Mechanics which is often used as a forum by N.I.S.T
In a series of articles in Popular Mechanics by N.I.S.T director Shyam Sunder which stated “ The north tower debris poked out a huge gouge in the front of W.T.C 7 … about a third of the south face to the centre and to the bottom, approximately 10 stories … about 25% of the building was scooped out “
N.I.S.T diagram … showing the damage they claimed the south face of building 7 sustained … there is no photographic evidence to support or refute this claim. This conclusion was reached due to one unsubstantiated witness statement while ignoring two contradictory witness statements.
1st contradictory witness statement … “ No heavy debris was observed in the lobby area as the building was exited “
If there was no debris in the lobby of building 7 … how could there be a 10 story gouge at the centre of the base of the building, the firemen in the looby and people leaving the building through the lobby after the debris impacts would have reported heavy damage if there had been a huge gouge in the front of the building … a third of the building centre and bottom … the atrium and lobby.
2nd contradictory statement … “ Debris damage across one-fourth width of the south face, starting several floors above the atrium which extended from the ground to the fifth floor, the atrium glass was intact “
W.T.C building 7’s atrium and lobby before 9/11 … Building 7 from the north face, fires midway up the building
The 2nd statement is referring to the debris damage above the fifth floor on the south western area of the south face of the building, the witness stated that the damage started several floors above the fifth floor and that the glass windows of the atrium were unbroken.
Both these witness statements describing the damage to building 7’s south face contradict the witness statement used by N.I.S.T to substantiate their assessment of the debris damage to W.T.C 7.
N.I.S.T did not mention the 10 story gouge down the centre of the south face of W.T.C building 7 in its final report of 2008 … concluding that the building fires caused the collapse not the debris impacts.
2 … N.I.S.T also used Popular Mechanics to discredit the design of building 7 suggesting that the design of the building was unsafe and vulnerable to collapse.
N.I.S.T through Popular mechanics prompted the myth that building 7 had a peculiar design because it was built on the Con Edison substation which had smaller foundations. The article ignored the gravity transfer truss and girder system incorporated in the building design by architects Emery Roth & Sons and that the gravity transfer system and the supporting columns were reinforced in the 1989 Solomons Brothers refurbishment
Gravity transfer system Cantilever transfer girder
N.I.S.T 2008 final report placed no significant on the design of W.T.C building 7 … conclusing the design of the building had no barring on its collapse.
3 … N.I.S.T made assumptions concerning the diesel fuel tanks contained in building 7 fueling the fires. N.I.S.T placed fires in locations where there were no reports or observational evidence of fire.
N.I.S.T used another article in Popular Mechanics to prompt the theory that the fifth floor diesel fuel tank helped to fuel the fires through a hydraulic feed from the two main basement fuel tanks.
In their 2002 report F.E.M.A acknowledged that the best diesel fuel hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence but in an article in Popular Mechanics Shyam Sunder stated that there were fires on floor 5 which burnt for 7 hours, There fires were being fueled by the smaller diesel tank on the fifth floor which was in turn being fed by the two main diesel fuel tanks located in the basement.
The photograph on the left shows the windows and the louvers on floor 5 … there are no signs of fire ... On the right is a photograph of a diesel generator recovered from the W.T.C collapse site.
There were no reports of fire on floor 5 from firemen or members of the public … there is no observational evidence to support fires on the fifth floor, there would have been smoke and flames visible from the windows on the fifth floor if there had been fires raging for seven hours. The louvers were closed on floor 5, if the diesel tank had been operating, to continuously feed the fires, the louvers would have been open.
In response to witness testimony stating that explosions were heard as building 7 collapsed, N.I.S.T claimed the basement diesel fuel tanks had exploded blowing out the supporting columns at their base, accounting for not only the sound of explosions but also the vertical collapse direction.
Diesel fuel has a much slower ignition speed than avaition fuel which lowers the explosive force of a diesel fuel explosion ... diesel fuel's maximun burning tenperature is also much lower than avaition fuel at only 210 c as opposed to avaition fuel's at 850 c.
With reinforced supporting columns that had two layers of fireproofing, W.T.C building 7 was more than capable of withstanding the diesel tanks explosion and resulting fires.
These claims by N.I.S.T became redundant when it surfaced that the New York Environment Health department found both main basement diesel tanks intact underneath the rumble of W.T.C 7 … the tanks were found to contain 23,100 gallons of diesel fuel nearly their full compliment of fuel … so they couldn’t have exploded or have been fueling the imaginary fires on floor 5.
In there 2008 final report N.I.S.T concluded that the fires that collapsed W.T.C building 7 were fueled by office contents … not diesel fuel.
N.I.S.T 2008 … Final W.T.C Building 7 Progressive Collapse Due To thermal Expansion Report
In the final report of 2008 … N.I.S.T concluded that debris hitting W.T.C 7 from the collapse of the north tower at 10.28 am caused fires in the building. These fires fueled by office contents spread and burnt out of control aided by the disabling of the sprinkler system by a burst water main.
These office fires burnt hot enough to produce what N.I.S.T termed as ‘a progressive collapse due to thermal expansion’.
N.I.S.T themselves admitted that a progressive collapse through fire had never happen before.
The fires raged long and hot enough to weaken one supporting column … column 79 weaken at the base through the loss of lateral support from a multiple floor collapse due thermal expansion. With the floors no longer able to provide bracing, the column give way and collapsed, this process lead to more floor collapses … resulting in the structure failure being passed from supporting column to supporting column. .
The collapse of column 79 caused a domino effect … starting a progressive structural failure which lead to the entire building collapsing.
The evidence of explosive force was never addressed satisfactory and the collapse direction, speed and symmetry never explained.
N.I.S.T produced two computer simulations of the building 7 collapse which simply do not match the observable evidence.
N.I.S.T refused to release their finding … Only their conclusions
So all the N.I.S.T scientific data has had no independent verification … We are being asked to trust them
What is a progressive collapse due to thermal expansion ?
A progressive collapse is when local damage from a single initiating event spreads from structural element to structural element, eventually leading to the complete collapse of the structure.
Office fires in the north east section on floor 12 heated the beams of the floor above causing them to expand by a few inches. This few inches of expansion by the floor beams pushed one horizontal girder 6.25 inches sideways … this forced the girder off its seat which connected it to the 79 supporting column.
The girder moving off its seat caused a collapse of the north east corner of floor 13 which led to multiple floors collapsing in that area. This resulted in only a few floors bracing column 79 which buckled without lateral support … when the 79th column buckled and collapsed, it caused the floors to collapse attached to the adjacent column which lost lateral support and in turn gave way … leading to a domino effect.
This caused a horizontal structural failure of first all 24 interior supporting columns … then the horizontal structual failure of all 57 exterior supporting columns.
This failure of all the supporting columns, exterior as well as interior, led to a completely symmetrical collapse of the entire structure at free fall acceleration … W.T.C building 7 collapsed in 6.5 seconds
N.I.S.T are claiming that normal office fire temperature heat caused the expansion of steel beams on one floor which in turn caused one single horizontal girder to move a few inches … resulting in a complete structural symmetric collapse through it’s centre of mass at free fall speed.
N.I.S.T … Fire computer simulation
The fire computer simulation that N.I.S.T provided is not consistent with the photographic evidence
12th floor on fire at 2.10 pm ...... on fire at 3.05 pm ................. fires out at 3.50 pm
There were fires on floor 12 but they were out at least 1 hour and 30 minutes before collapse.
N.I.S.T computer fire simulation showing the fire activity in the north east section getting progressively worst up to the collapse at 5.20 pm
N.I.S.T claim fires were raging in the north east section of the building, on floor 12, up to the moment of collapse and in doing so, caused the collapse at 5.20 pm. All the photographic evidence shows the fires in the north east section of the building had burnt out prior to 4.00 pm.
Claiming the fires stayed in one position is contradictory of their previous claim that the fires were being fueled by office contents which the fires burnt up quickly then moved onto the next area of the building containing flesh fuel.
Without a longer lasting fuel source it would be impossible for the fire to have burnt in the same area for a prolonged amount of time, it would have burnt through the fuel in that area, spread elsewhere or gone out. If the fires had already burnt up the contents of the 12 floor, it would be impossible for the fires to reignite prior to the collapse to provide the heat leading up to the collapse of the building … because there would be no fuel for the fire to burn.
Even if the fires were burning where N.I.S.T puts them is it really possible for seven inches of movement from one single horizontal girder to result in a partial collapse … let alone a complete collapse of a building ?
W.T.C building 7 wasn’t structural damaged from the debris impacts … it wasn’t on fire intensely or in the necessary areas for any length of time and yet the building completely collapsed.
A complete symmetrical collapse, through its centre of mass at free fall speed, due to the giving way of one single supporting column on the north east side of the building.
How probable is this ? … Is it even possible ?
The physics of W.T.C Building 7 Collapse
The diagram above illustrates the N.I.S.T fire thermal expansion hypothesis; showing heat expansion forcing one horizontal girder off its seat, which they claim caused a multiple floor collapse, resulting in the 79th column giving way.
N.I.S.T released too computer generated simulations of the building 7 collapse … one showing the internal framework collapse process and another to show the external framework collapse process.
N.I.S.T … Internal computer simulation
The N.I.S.T simulated collapse starts in accordance with the observational evidence … the collapse starting in the north east section of the building.
The N.I.S.T simulated collapse shows the kink in the top of the building … than the simulation shows the building folding inwards contradicting the observational evidence.
This is the computer generated simulation of the internal collapse progress starting in the north east corner of the building to fit the observational evidence, then the N.I.S.T model depicts W.T.C 7’s framework folding inwards which contradicts all of the observational evidence. The collapse did start in the north east section of the building but the all observational evidence proves that building 7 collapsed straight down, symmetrically at free fall speed.
The N.I.S.T computer simulation was the most complex computer model of a building collapse ever created, yet N.I.S.T refused to released the scientific data and workings of how they constructed this simulation.
N.I.S.T data regarding W.T.C building 7’s collapse has not been independently verified.
All the observational evidence regarding debris damage … fire damage, location and strength and the collapse process contradicts the N.I.S.T findings.
The debris damage wasn’t in the position N.I.S.T assumed it was … the fires weren’t in the positions and didn’t burn long or as hot as N.I.S.T assumed.
W.T.C building 7’s collapse started with the east penthouse suite sinking into the building, than a kink appeared on the north east side of the top of the building … as the penthouse suite and the rest of the north east section of the top of the building was completely untouched by debris impacts or fire activity, than the appearance of this kink couldn’t have been the direct result of the north tower collapse.
The N.I.S.T progressive collapse through thermal expansion hypothesis attempts to account for the position of the start of the collapse process by placing fire activity on the 12th floor of the north eastern corner of the building ... when all the fire reports and observational evidence contradict the N.I.S.T timing and strength of the fires on the 12th floor.
N.I.S.T … External computer simulation
N.I.S.T external computer generated simulation of the collapse of W.T.C building 7
The simulation depicts building 7’s outer framework folding inwards, sagging inwards due to the heat of low temperature fires on isolated floors. This computer simulation is completely at odds with the observational evidence which shows building 7 kinks at the top of the structure then descend straight down … not folding in on itself.
W.T.C building 7 descending straight down … not folding inwards
The photographic sequence above is of building 7’s first three seconds of descent, the slight kink at the top of the north east section of the structure is clearly visible. The N.I.S.T simulation does not show the symmetry of the descent … the building simply fells into its footprint … this is not what the N.I.S.T simulation shows.
The Collapse Speed and symmetry
Although the progressive collapse process started with heat expansion of the 13th floor beams, the structural failure started with the buckling of supporting column 79. This occurred due to a sequence of floor collapses weakening the lateral support to the 79th column causing it to buckle and give way, transferring the structural weakness onto the next column by causing more floor collapses, each column losing lateral support and in turn giving way resulting in a complete collapse or global collapse.
It’s important to note that during the Solomon Brother’s refurbishment of 1989, floors 1-6, 13, 18-46 which were occupy by the Solomon Barney Smith financial institution themselves were reinforced to support heavy equipment. Floors 9-13 were Secret Service floors and along with floor 23, the Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management were all bomb proofed … although this extra strengthening and reinforcing wasn’t presence on every floor, it would have increased the overall structural integrity of the building.
As the progressive collapse process started in a small area of the 12th and 13th floors of the north east corner of the building, it’s logical to assume that the building would collapse progressively in one direction, travelling away from the north east corner of the building … producing a staggered collapse with the north east section of the building impacting the ground first followed by the staggered descent of the rest of the structure.
N.I.S.T simulated progressive collapse …… W.T.C building 7 collapse sequence on the day of 9/11
The N.I.S.T simulation shows the building collapsing in a staggered sequence starting in the north east corner and progressing gradually through the structure. The simulation, as logic would dictate shows the north east section of the building impacting the ground first with the remaining structure following in a staggered sequence … but the observational evidence shows a spontaneous, symmetric, vertical collapse at free fall speed.
N.I.S.T simulation showing the floor collapse and the north east section of the building reaching ground level before the rest of the structure.
It would take time for each supporting column to lose the lateral support of the bracing floors, buckle and give way … each column remaining structural unaffected until the progressive collapse process reaches their location. If the north east corner was the first part of the building to structurally weaken and that structural failure was passed from floor to floor and column to column, then different sections of the building would have different collapse start times and ground impact times … a progressive collapse cause would result in a progressive collapse descent.
How can a vertical progressive floor failure that leads to a horizontal progressive structural failure produce a vertical, symmetric collapse ?
The N.I.S.T … 2004 9/11 Commission Report conclusion of a progressive pancake collapse as an explanation for the vertical descent of the twin towers was disproved by the speed of the desent, as a pancake collapse creates resistance through the floor pancake process itself.
The N.I.S.T … 2008 W.T.C 7 Collapse Report conclusion of a progressive collapse can be called into question due to the symmetry of the collapse not being consistent with the progressive collapse hypotheses main component of a progressive structural weakening starting in one single location leading to a staggered weakening of the entire building’s structural integrity … resulting in a progressive staggered building descent.
A progressive collapse cause can only result in a progressive collapse descent … yet W.T.C building 7 collapsed through it’s centre of mass while maintaining it’s symmetry, into it’s footprint at free fall speed.
Not only was the symmetry of building7’s descent inconsistent with a progressive collapse so was the speed of the descent inconsistent with the progressive collapse process which consists of a structural failure travelling progressively through the building. This staggered progression of structural failure can only lead to a progressive staggered descent which could not result in an overall free fall descent speed.
The timing of a building collapse descent speed starts with the first observational sign of structural collapse and finishes with the last piece of debris to impact the ground ... If different sections of the building’s structure had different collapse descent start times … logic dictates they must have different ground impact times.
If the structural failure is progressive then the descent must be progressive and cannot result in an overall free fall descent speed … yet building 7’s descent was symmetry and at free fall acceleration.
W.T.C building 7 descending symmetrically and at free fall acceleration
Building 7 collapsed in 6.5 seconds, at free fall speed, this was denied in the report of 2008 but in a technical briefing Shyam Sunder addressed the issue by claiming that W.T.C 7 took 40 percent longer to collapse than its free fall speed.
Shyam Sunder stated that the computer simulation model predicted that from the start of the building collapse to the 29th floor took 5.4 seconds where as free fall speed to the 29th floor would’ve been 3.9 seconds.This timing has been challenged and proven to be incorrect as the start point of the collapse process chosen by N.I.S.T was a few seconds before the actual collapse process began.
Later in 2008 N.I.S.T acknowledged the free fall speed of W.T.C building 7 but stuck to their computer simulation results and findings.
How did N.I.S.T explain the symmetry and free fall acceleration of W.T.C building 7’s descent … they didn’t … they simply refused to comment any further.
Youtube Search Engine ... W.T.C 7: N.I.S.T Finally Admits Free Fall
Part 1 ... 00:10:00
Part ... 2 ... 00:5:00
Part 3 ... 00:10:06
W.T.C 7 in Free fall No longer Controversial ... 00:10:00
Collapse Descent Direction
According to N.I.S.T … W.T.C building 7 descended vertically from a progressive collapse which began in the north east corner of the building and travelled from that location through the rest of the structure. All the supporting columns lost lateral support due to multiple floor collapses and buckled on floors 5-7, resulting in all the columns descending vertically.
The fact that individual areas of the building had reinforced floors and strengthened bomb proof walls, when other parts did not, suggests that an even symmetric, vertical descent occurring due to a natural collapse cause, progressive or otherwise is incredibly unlikely.
If an area is strengthened it will be more resistant to weakening, structure failure and collapse, regardless of the cause, this would slow down maybe even halt the progression of the collapse.
With a very high degree of overall structural strength and individual floors having extra strength through reinforcement, a collapse of any kind would have been highly unlikely … a symmetric, vertical collapse at free fall speed would have been incredibly unlikely to have occurred.
The N.I.S.T progressive collapse hypothesis process is a multiple directional process starting with a vertical
floor collapse which leads to a horizontal structural failure of the supporting columns resulting in a complete vertical collapse descent.
If the columns buckled and bend inwards at the base, starting in the north east corner and progressing towards the south west of the building, isn’t it more likely that the descent direction would be towards the south west, rather than straight down.
If a steel column is impacted by a force capable of cutting or severing the column ... then the remaining upper section will drop vertically from it's original position. The highest point of the column, depending on the column length, will descent in the direction that it's weight distribution and gravity dictate.
If the steel column is buckled or bent by the unsupported weight of the column itself ... as the buckled bottom section is still attached to the top section ... then the descent direction of the top of the column is more likely to be the direction of the bend rather vertical ... sideways rather than straight down.
The descent direction would be influenced by the direction of the travelling structural failure progressing in a horizontal direction towards the south west, pushing the building collapse sideways ... horizontal rather than vertical.
In order for the top section of each column to descend vertically, the bottom section of the column must not impede the top section's descent ... the bottom section of the column must be removed from it's position to allow for the unimpeded top section to descend vertically ... the column must be cut or severed to it remove from it's position to allow this to happen..
To stop the top section of the severed column ( the majority of the columns height ...W.T.C 7 ... 610 ft ) from toppling sideways as it descents ... the remaining length of supporting column must almost simulateously be cut into small enough sections to prevent the top heavy column from tipping sideways as it falls ... producing the vertical descent of each column ... in the case of W.T.C 7 ... 24 internal / 57 external columns
The most effective way to achieve this vertical descent is precisely positioned and timed explosive detonations.
A building can descend vertically through a natural occurring collapse cause but the probability against a completely vertical descent is extreme high due to the number of variables involved in producing a vertical descent. The bigger and taller the building, the more variables involved in the collapse process, so the higher the probability against a complete vertical descent occurring.
So what would be the probability of all 24 internal and all 57 external supporting columns of W.T.C 7 ... falling straight down in a completely vertical descent from a horizontal progressive structural failure ?
The Collapse Site
The building 7 collapse site is the consequence of a vertical building collapse, a neat pile of rubble, located in the building’s own footprint minimizing the debris damage to local surrounding buildings. W.T.C building 7 was considerably taller than the surrounding structures at 610 ft or 186 m in height.
Considering the height of building 7 and its close proximity to the surrounding buildings, it would be logically to assume the debris damage sustained by the surroundings buildings would be considerable. As the N.I.S.T progressive collapse hypothesis simulation shows a progressive horizontal collapse direction, starting in the north east corner and travelling south west, it seems logically to assume that the Verizon building to the south of building 7 would have been severally damaged by the collapse.
The Verizon building standing 498 ft or 152 m high … W.T.C building 7 standing 112 ft or 34 m taller
The left hand photograph again shows the close proximity of W.T.C 7 to the Verizon building … the right hand photograph shows the minor damage sustained by the Verizon building from the building 7 collapse.
The three photographs above show the neat pile of debris of building 7 … the outer walls have collapsed inwards covering the internal collapse debris … like a house of cards.
W.T.C building 7’s collapse site is actually how the collapse site would have appeared after a controlled collapse through explosives … a controlled demolition.
The collapse site was sectioned off by the FBI very quicker, making it difficult to confirm but there were reports of the effects of thermite as in molten metal at the collapse site.
The aim of a controlled demolition is to achieve exactly what building 7’s collapse achieved no or minimal damage to the surroundings buildings … this of course is achieved through strategically placed and timed explosive detonations.
Evidence of Explosive Force
The N.I.S.T 2008 final report concluded that there was no evidence of explosive force in the collapse of building 7 … they reached this conclusion by establishing a sound level that an explosion would have had to has reached to exist.
N.I.S.T calculated that the minimum charge needed to sever a W.T.C 7 supporting beam would be 9lb of RDX which produces sound levels of 130 – 140 decibels … N.I.S.T claimed they could find no evidence of such an explosion, no shattered windows, no eyewitness accounts and no sound recording. N.I.S.T investigation into explosive blast sound did not take into account noise abatement … the blockage or absorption of sound.
The approach N.I.S.T took when examining explosive force was the hypothesis of explosives being placed near or against the column, they didn’t explore the use of any other type of explosive charge … such as a thermite charge, If a thermite charge was used the explosive force necessary to sever the column would be a lot less than explosive force on its own therefore the blast sound would have been lower … windows could’ve remained unbroken.
Eyewitness accounts of explosive force
Former NYPD and 9/11 first responder describing the collapse of W.T.C building 7
Youtube Search Engine ... Interview with Graig Bartner
Part 1 ... 00:9:11
Part 2 ... 00:9:12
Part 3 ... 00:7:31
“ Somebody grabbed my shoulder and I started running and the shit hitting the ground behind me. And the whole time your hearing … Thoom! Thoom! Thoom! Thoom! Thoom! I think I know an explosion when I hear it … I wanna know what took that building down … it wasn’t a fire and it certainly wasn’t a plane! I was shocked at the official story!
Emergency medical technician and 9/11 first responder described what happen just before building 7 collapsed
Youtube Search Engine ... Kevin MacPadden interview ... 00:2:37
“ The Red Cross rep says to us ‘ You’re gotta stay behind this line because they’re thinking about bringing the building down! … He came back over with his hand over the radio ( you could hear ) what sounded like a countdown. At the last few seconds he took his hand off (the radio) and you heard 3, 2, 1 and he was saying just run for your life!
And then it was a another 2-3 seconds, you heard explosions, like BA-BOOOOM! And its like a distinct sound … BA-BOOOOM! And you felt a rumble in the ground, like, almost like you wanted to grab onto something … I knew that was an explosion … there’s no doubt in my mind. “
Deputy Director of the Emergency Services Department for NYC housing Authority
Youtube Search Engine ... Barry Jennings interview ... 00:21:09
Barry Jennings was rescued from building 7, along with Michael Hess, of the NYC Corporation Counsel.
Jennings stated that an explosion trapped them in building 7 and that he continued to hear explosions coming from different parts of the building before they were rescued.
Barry Jennings stated in an interview with A.B.C News;
“ Well, me and Hess were on the 23rd floor, I told him ‘ We’ve gotta get out of here ‘. We started walking down the stairs, we made it to the 6th floor … Big explosion blow us back to the 8th floor and I turned to Hess and I said, ‘This is it, we’re dead, we’re not gotta make it out of here’ “
Sometime before his death in 2008, Barry Jennings gave an interview to 9/11 Loose Change filmmakers Jason Bermas and Dylan Avery, where he describes in more detail the explosions he heard and felt while inside building 7.
“ All this time, I’m hearing all kinds of explosions and I’m thinking it’s the buses around me that are on fire, the cars that on fire, but I don’t see, you know but I’m still hearing these explosions. When they finally got to us they took us down to what they called the lobby and ‘ I said you’re kidding me ‘, Total ruins! Now keep in mind when I came in there, the lobby had nice escalators, it was a huge lobby and for me to see what I saw was unbelievable. “
Barry Jennings testimony has been questioned after discrepancies in the time he claimed to have entered building … at roughly 9.15 am and reached his floor to find it empty of people … yet the evacuation of his floor took place after 9.30 am … so Jennings should have walked onto a floor full people.
But Jennings also stated he was delayed reaching the 23rd floor by non-operating elevators and was directed to an alternative route up to floor 23 via the freight elevator by firemen in the lobby, with this delay between entering the building and walking onto the floor it’s conceivable that Jennings and Hess missed their colleagues leaving by a matter of only a few minutes.
This fits in with Jennings description when they first entered the 23rd floor ‘ Everybody was gone, I saw coffee that was on the deck with smoke still coming off it, I saw half eaten sandwiches … only me and Mr Hess was up there. ‘
In the 2008 report N.I.S.T timeline … Jennings and Hess are not rescued from building 7 until after midday, with them entering the building later than Jennings had stated in his account. Jennings claimed he and Hess were trapped in building 7 for 90 minutes but were rescued before midday.
Jennings also said in the Loose Change interview that the explosions occurred while both twin towers were still standing before any debris hit building 7. He seemed certain that both towers were still standing when they heard the first of the explosions in building.
Jennings stated that after a large explosion, he and Hess had signalled for help from the 8th floor window, firemen saw them but than ran away as the south tower collapsed at 9.59 am … then returned only to ran away again due to the north tower collapse at 10.28 am.
If Jennings and Hess entered and left the building on their timeline … then the first explosion happened before the tower collapses … if they entered and left on N.I.S.T timeline the explosions would co-inside with the tower collapses.
Michael Hess has confirmed Jennings account of explosions in the building and a photograph of Michael Hess waving for help from the 8th floor balcony confirms that the two men were where they said they were.
Michael Hess shouting for help from the eighth floor of W.T.C building 7 … Barry Jennings both stated they heard explosions inside building 7.
In the 2008 Loose Change interview Jennings claimed to have steps over dead bodies when evacuating the building … the fire fighter escorting Jennings out of the building told him not to look down, Jennings said in the interview that it felt like dead bodies. In October of 2008 Jennings gave an interview to the BBC as part of their Conspiracy Files program entitled ‘ 9/11 The Third Tower ‘
In the BBC interview Jennings’s account is the same as the account given to Loose Change except for the claim of stepping over dead bodies which Jennings stated again that he was told not to look down but said he was misrepresented by Loose Change … that he didn’t see any dead bodies. Jennings said in the BBC interview ‘ That’s the way they portrayed me and I didn’t appreciate that, so I told them to pull the interview
Loose Change producer Dylan Avery claims months before Jennings recorded the BBC interview, he contacted Jennings by phone to see how he was …Avery claimed Jennings told him he was having problems at work and could get fired and asked him not to air the interview which Avery agreed.
After Avery saw the interview given by Jennings to the BBC he released his entire Barry Jennings interview to show that Jennings wasn’t pressured or coerced , that Jennings gave his testimony freely and without outside manipulation.
The Loose Change … Barry Jennings interview can be seen on Youtube … Jennings is not prompted, 95% of the interview is Barry Jennings giving his testimony uninterrupted.
One of the very few times that Avery voice can be heard is when he calls the statement that Jennings has just made about dead bodies in W.T.C 7 as ‘ interesting ‘ as the official version is no casualties from W.T.C 7.
Youtube Search Engine ... WTC 7 Smoking Gun 9/11 ... 00:9:58
Radio interview ... 3:30 mins into this video
New York City News Radio … An interview with emergency worker broadcast live on 9/11
“ We were watching the building (W.T.C 7) actually ‘cuz it was on fire … the bottom floors of the building were on fire and we heard this sound, that sounded like a clap of thunder … turned around, we were shocked to see that the building … ‘Ah well’ … it looked like there was a shockwave ripping through the building and the windows all busted out … it was horrifying … about a second later the bottom floor caved out and building followed after that … we saw the building crash down all the way to the ground … we were in shock.”
Two New York firemen on a payphone close to building 7 when it collapsed
Two firemen were captured on camera by Lucia Davis, phoning their families just as W.T.C 7 collapses, their location is close enough to hear an explosion a second before the collapse … the explosion is loud and clearly audible
Youtube Search Engine ... WTC 7 Explosion ... 00:00:38
The fire fighter hands the phone over to his friend but his friend’s conservation is interrupted by a loud explosion.
All throughout the day TV news broadcasters in the studio and live on the seen were reporting other people and themselves hearing explosions … explosions with regards the twin towers and building 7. Explosions from W.T.C 7 were reportedly heard as early as 11.00 am … 30 minutes after the north tower collapse … 7 hours before the collapse of building 7.
Ashleigh Banfield … M/S M.B.C News reporter … 10.45 am
Ashleigh Banfield on camera testified to hearing multiple explosions during her coverage of New York attacks.
Ashleigh Banfield stated on camera;
“ We just heard one more explosion, that’s about the fourth one we’ve heard “
This statement live on air is not the only reason Ashleigh is significant … at the exact moment of building 7’s collapse, Ashleigh was conducting an interview with a member of the public roughly 800 metres north of W.T.C 7 … Ashleigh reaction to the collapse process and audio recording of the background noise of the building collapse is further evidence of explosions seconds before the collapse process begins.
Ashleigh Banfield … reporting hearing explosions … Ashleigh at the moment of the collapse
Ashleigh Banfield Interview … 800 metres north of W.T.C 7 … 5.20 pm
The interview was interrupted by the collapse of building 7 in the background … the start of the collapse corresponds to the screaming of the crowd. The seconds leading up to the start of the screaming and the start of the collapse are important because of the visual involuntary reaction from both Ashleigh and the interviewee.
The microphone was set at a low audio level to pick up speech a few inches away, so when the interview is listened to at a normal sound level, its hard to hear explosions … but the visual reactions of both women were caught on camera and show a startled response from both women who instantly turn their heads in the direction of building 7.
The camera is also pointing in the direction of building 7 so this reaction is not due a visual event or the camera would’ve captured it on film … so there must have been a sound which instantly captured the attention of both women.
Youtube Search Engine ... WTC 7 Explosive sound analysis Part 1 ... 00:9:57
These three frames of the film show the seconds leading up to the moment of the distraction … its clear both women were facing away from building 7 … so the distraction must have been a sound … at this moment building 7 is still standing … seconds later it begins to collapse.
These three graphs are the corresponding sound analysis of the interview … the first and second graphs are synchronized with the first and second frames above … the bottom graph corresponds with the bottom frame a split second before the collapse process started. The bottom graph shows the faint low and medium range sound disturbances, these disturbances are very difficult to hear but can be heard by playing the recorded interview at high volume.
When listened to carefully the sound recording contains nine blasts, 2 initial blasts then a split second gap, followed by seven evenly spaced blasts all over 2.5 seconds.
The commentary of Ashleigh Banfield as she looking at W.T.C 7 after hearing the blasts is as follows;
Ashleigh … ‘ Oh my God, look behind us, please pan in this way … be careful of your baby ‘ … this is it!
Background male voice … ‘ that’s the building coming down ‘
Ashleigh … ‘ Oh my god ‘
The moment Ashleigh says ‘Oh my God ‘at the beginning, is the moment of the last blast … when Ashleigh says ‘ this is it! ‘ the building hasn’t started to collapse.
When the male voice ( presumable the camera man ) says ‘ that’s the building coming down ‘ is the moment of the start of the collapse process, this is also the moment the crowd starts screaming. The first blast occurred 8.5 seconds before the collapse process begins … the last blast occurred 6 seconds before the collapse process begins.
C.B.S Film Crew … 950 metres north of W.T.C 7 … 5.20 pm.
Youtube Search Engine ... WTC 7 Explosive sound analysis Part 2 ... 00:00:51
B.B.C World News Update … Shortly after the collapse of W.T.C 7
B.B.C reporter close to the building 7 collapse site after the collapse describing the moment of collapse;
“ We were outside and the second explosion happened … there was a series of explosions “
These blast sounds were not part of the collapse process … they preceded the collapse of W.T.C building 7.
Bomb blasts occurring in building 7 throughout the day were recorded by both professional and amateur film crews and also members of the public as early as 10.45 am.
Naudet brothers … filmmakers
French documentary filmmakers the Naudet brothers were the film crew who captured on camera the first impact of flight AA 11 on the north tower at 8.46 am. They of course continued to film the day’s events unfolding around them.
At 10.45 am Jules and Geodeon Naudet were filming on Vesey St, about 480 metres west of W.T.C 7, as the brothers were walking down the street, they were approached by a policeman. As they engaged in conservation, you can clearly hear an explosion detonating in building 7. Shortly after this the brothers were 700 metres west of building 7 another explosion can be heard in the background.
Youtube Search Engine ... WTC 7 Explosion Recorded ... 00:00:13
Steven Spak … Video maker
Steven Spak a photographer/video maker and book publisher was filming outside St Paul’s Chapel approximately 400 metres east of W.T.C 7 at roughly 10.45-11.00 am. As the camera pans left, in the audio recording, over the radio chatter, a loud explosion can be heard.
Youtube Search Engine ... WTC 7 Explosion Steven Spak ... 00:2:17
Richard Peskin … Member of the public
Richard Peskin was situated in an apartment in Harrison St. roughly 650 metres north of building 7, Richard starting filming at 11.00 am after hearing an explosion and seeing smoke rise from the east corner of W.T.C 7. During his filming throughout the day, Richard recorded explosions coming from building 7 these explosions can be clearly heard.
Youtube Search Engine … Richard Peskin WTC7 Explosions ... 00:14:54
Explosions before the collapse WTC 7 ... 00:11:32
As the day progressed the media and several firemen attributed the explosions occurring throughout the length of the day to gas pipes that were damaged by the collapse of the twin towers.
Youtube Search Engine ... Mayor Giuliani press conference ... 00:1:23
In the 2008 final N.I.S.T report … Shyam Sunder stated they found no evidence of explosions occurring in W.T.C 7 throughout the day or as the building collapsed … No witnesses … No sound recording
Barry Jennings / Michael Hess * Graig Bartmar * Patrick McPadden * Ashleigh Banfield & camera crew
Some of the witness testimony to explosions in W.T.C building 7 that N.I.S.T ignored in their examination of explosive force being presence in W.T.C building 7 … How is it possible to dismiss all this audio and witness evidence ?
There were two reasons given by the authorities as to why they stopped fighting the fires in building 7, one was lass of water … the other was reports of the building being unstable, there were reports of groaning and creaking sounds coming from W.T.C 7.
N.I.S.T concluded in their final report that the debris impacts from the north tower collapse did no significant damage to the structure of the building … N.I.S.T stated that the debris impacts played part in the collapse and the observational evidence rules out overall fire activity … so if the building was unstable it wasn’t as a consequence of the terror attack.
If there were explosions detonating inside building 7 through the day, slowly weakening the structure of the building than the building would show signs of instability … it would make groaning and creaking noises.
This fits the audio and witness accounts of explosions and explains the reports of instability in the building.
Conclusion of N.I.S.T 2008 final report
In the preliminary reports of 2004 … N.I.S.T made three assumptions in the articles published in Popular Mechanics …10 story gouge … building design … diesel fed fires … when examined these claims are easily disproved, yet they presented them as possible collapse theories.
In the final report they dismissed these three theories in favour of the Thermal expansion / progressive collapse through fire hypothesis which just as the aluminium/water explosive hypothesis (twin tower collapses) has never happened before or since.
N.I.S.T placed fires in locations where there was no observable evidence of fires … at times that do not correspond with the witness reports and film and photographic evidence. All the observational evidence confirms that building 7’s collapse process began with the giving way of the east penthouse suite … the north eastern corner of the building.
The N.I.S.T hypothesis had to begin in this section of the building to fit the observational evidence … which is why they choose column 79 on the north east side of the building as the position to begin their collapse process.
After examining all the film footage and photographic evidence of the fires in building 7, it’s hard to see how the building collapsed due to the heat of these fires … they do not seem strong enough to cause any structural damage.
Steel does expand due to temperature but the fact that the fires were fueled by office contents means that the temperature of the fires couldn’t have reached high enough to result in such a large degree of thermal expansion, resulting in 6.25 inches of structural movement of a single hozirnatal girder.
The observational evidence contradicts N.I.S.T timing and position of fires, even if there were fires on the 12th floor up to the moment of collapse, would they be capable of causing such a high degree of thermal expansion leading to the collapse of the 79th column ?
Is it really possible for the collapse of one single column to start a chain of floor failures resulting the collapse of all the internal and external supporting columns ?
The computer simulation does not correspond with the observable evidence … it shows the building folding in on itself rather collapsing symmetrically.
Although N.I.S.T stated that the computer simulation was the most complex building collapse simulation ever created and used this simulation to substantiate the claim that building 7’s collapse was the first time in history a progressive collapse has occurred due to fire … they refused to released the technical data to show how the simulation was created and how they reached their conclusion of a progressive collapse.
N.I.S.T described W.T.C 7 collapse as an extraordinary event … unprecedented in history
A progressive building collapse through fire has never happened before … a building collapse through molten aluminium explosions has never happened before … what is the probability of the first three high rise buildings in history completely collapsing on the same day through two completely new collapse causes ?
The collapse speed of free fall was first denied, than acknowledged … but never explained
The parameters set by N.I.S.T for the examination of explosive force in W.T.C 7 were too narrow, they concentrated on one type of explosive, installed and positioned in one particle location … the charge being detonation against the column as opposed to being wrapped around the column.
The sound decibel level they set for the audio detection of explosions was based upon the blast sound travelling through the air unimpeded, free from absorption and blockage. N.I.S.T used these narrow parameters and this flawed blast sound model to base their examination on, claiming that they could find no other evidence to support explosive detonations … no witnesses … no sound recordings.
This is not the truth … not only were there plenty of witnesses but there were several audio recordings including mainstream media sources all claiming and recording explosions … N.I.S.T claimed they found none.
Shyam Sunder … N.I.S.T Lead Investigator
“ What we found was uncontrolled building fires similar to those we have seen in other tall buildings caused an extraordinary event .. the collapse of W.T.C building 7 was primarily due to fires. This is the first time we are aware of that a building over 15 stories has collapsed primarily due to fire. We are very comfortable with our findings. “
The scientific, observational and witness evidence confirm that N.I.S.T had no choice but to disregard the debris impacts, the building design and diesel fuel source as causes for the collapse of W.T.C 7, the only possible cause for the collapse left are the fires caused by the debris impacts … fires fueled not by diesel fuel but by normal, everyday office contents.
From looking at the observational evidence it’s obvious that the fires weren’t strong enough or wide spread enough to damage the structural integrity … the building was never engulfed in flames. As N.I.S.T had apparently found no evidence of explosive force, they had no choice but to relay on fires started by debris impacts but fueled only with office contents.
As no high rise building has ever collapse due to the effects of fire and with so many examples of steel framed building being on fire with much greater intensely and for must greater lengths of time … N.I.S.T manipulated the scientific data and ignored the observational evidence to create a completely new building collapse cause to suit their agenda.
N.I.S.T concluded that normal office fires that have occurred in previous buildings but never resulted in these buildings collapsing caused the complete collapse of a building with reinforced supporting columns, reinforced enough to have multiple floors removed.
Yet it collapsed through a few fires burning on isolated floors, fueled by ( in terms of weaken steel and causing a complete collapse ) low temperature fuel source … in normal office contents.
This means that this progressive collapse through fire could have happened in any office building anywhere in the world on any given day … the fact that this collapse cause happen for the first time on September the 11th 2001 was a coincidence … apart from igniting the fires, the terrorist attack had nothing to do with the collapse of W.T.C building 7.
N.I.S.T scientific data hasn’t been released in the form of a peer review publication … meaning the science that N.I.S.T has presented to the public has had no independent scientific verification … we have to trust them on the soundness of their scientific data. This is not normal protocol for N.I.S.T data releases, in all previous releases of N.I.S.T scientific data, independent verification has taken place as the final stage of the release process.
This is an unprecedented break in N.I.S.T protocol.
No explanation for the withholding of the scientific data as regards all three building collapses that occurred on 9/11 had been given until a leaked N.I.S.T document dated July 9th 2009 which was released online by a whistler blower revealed the finding which allowed N.I.S.T to withhold their data.
The document was released online and can be viewed on CRYPTOME.org and states;
“ the disclosure of the information of N.I.S.T investigation of the technical causes of the collapse of the World Trade Centre Towers and World Trade Centre Building 7 on September 11, 2001,
' might jeopardize public safety ' … therefore N.I.S.T shall not release the information. “
No further expansion on this explanation has ever been forth coming … such as how the release of the information would jeopardize public safety … this again N.I.S.T are keeping to themselves.
A new unprecedented cause of a building collapse occurred for the first time in history and causes for the first time in history the complete collapse of a high rise steel framed building due to normal everyday office fires that occur in every city … in every country … around the world … Yet according to N.I.S.T releasing their scientific data “ might jeopardize public safety “
Withholding scientific data that could prevent further building collapses, saving countless lives in the future “ is jeopardizing public safety “ and makes no logical sense at all.
William Occam theorised that when considering multiple hypothesis;
‘ The one with the fewest assumptions or the most obvious and simplest solution is often the correct one '
If you apply Occam’s razor to the problem of why N.I.S.T will not released their scientific data;
The simplest and most obvious reason why N.I.S.T will not release the scientific data as regards the collapse of W.T.C building 7 is they know that it will not stand up to independent scientific scrutiny.
The 2008 final collapse report did not gave a satisfactory answer to how and why W.T.C building 7 collapsed on September the 11th 2001.
Mainstream Media Coverage of W.T.C 7 / Prior Knowledge of a Collapse
Media coverage throughout the day of 9/11 / Prior Knowledge of a Collapse
As the reporting of the debris damage and subsequent fires in W.T.C building 7 progressed through the day, the media companies made continue references to building 7 collapsing hours before it did. Part of the official reason for the fire service calling a halt to fighting the fires in building 7 was the instability of the building, yet N.I.S.T in their 2008 final report stated that the debris impacts had no barring on the collapse.
The N.I.S.T report concluded that the collapse was due to fires ignited by the debris impacts … fires fueled by office contents. Their conclusion of a progressive collapse through thermal expansion of the floor beams of floor 13 causing one single horizontal girder to move off its seat attaching it to the 79th supporting column is the start of the progressive collapse process.
The reasoning behind N.I.S.T collapse theory is that thermal expansion on one single floor of one single structural element began a chain of events which lead to the complete global collapse of the building.
The N.I.S.T collapse hypothesis does not contain any overall weakening of the structure of building 7, it depend upon a consistent build up of heat on the 12th floor to heat up the floor beams of the floor above.
N.I.S.T stated that the collapse of building 7 was an unprecedented first time event in history ‘ a world first '
N.I.S.T stated that a progressive building collapse through the heat of fire had never happened before.
So why were there so many media reports before the collapse referencing to a possible collapse ?
A statement made by MSNBC’s Ashleigh Banfield during her coverage of 9/11, in particular Ashleigh’s coverage of building 7’s collapse and statements made during and after the collapse, illustrate how the authorities seem to have prior knowledge of W.T.C 7’s collapse and how the media networks and their representatives at the W.T.C complex also seem to have a certain information regarding a possible collapse of W.T.C building 7.
MSNBC Film Crew
Ashleigh Banfield’s coverage before building 7’s collapse … just before 5.20 pm:
Ashleigh … “ The brown building, the tall one is number 7 World Trade Centre, heard several reports from several different officers now, the that is the building to go down next. “
Ashleigh Banfield’s coverage at the moment of collapse 800 meters north of W.T.C 7 at 5.20 pm;
Ashleigh … ‘ Oh my God, look behind us, pan this way … please be careful with your baby … this is it !’
Background male voice … ‘ that’s the building coming down ‘
The words used to describe the moment that building 7 began to collapse by both Ashleigh and the male background voice, presumably the camera man describe something they were waiting to see happen.
Ashleigh Banfield’s coverage after building 7’s collapse … after 5.20 pm;
“ Those people ( Tenants of building 7 ) had all been cleared out of those buildings as soon as the first plane hit the W.T.C this morning. They were just waiting for that building to go down. “
In this statement Ashleigh actually says that ‘They’ meaning the authorities were waiting for the collapse of W.T.C building 7.
MSNBC News Anchor
News anchor Brian Williams back in the studio seem to have foreknowledge and an explanation for the building's collapse.
“ What we’ve been fearing all afternoon, has apparently happened. We were watching number 7 World Trade which was the ancillary damage of the explosion and collapse of the other two. “
CNN Film Crew
The CNN crew and reporter Rose Arce were filming 250 metres north of W.T.C 7 just before 5.20 pm;
The CNN crew were filming W.T.C 7 when what appeared to be a small number of construction workers walked away from building 7 … Why were construction workings coming away from a building that the authorities had halted the fire service from working in due to instability ? … What possible reason is there for construction workings to be working in or around in W.T.C 7 minutes before the collapse ?
Loud Explosion … Camera man … ‘ Did you hear that ? ‘
Construction worker walking past … ‘ Keep an eye on that building its coming down ‘
Different construction worker … ‘ The building is about to blow up, move back ‘
Camera man as he’s walking back … ‘ Here we are walking back, there’s a building about to blow up ‘
The language used by the construction workers describing what’s about to happen to the building … ‘it’s coming down ‘ as opposed to ‘ it’s about to collapse, could be suggestive of demolition of a building rather than a imminent collapse of a building.
There is nothing suggestive about the use of the words ‘ about to blow up ‘, it’s hard to imagine how a building that has been abandoned due to fire could be described as ‘ about to blow up ‘ … especially as the official report into the collapse has categorically ruled out explosions occurring in the building.
The police and security personnel were keeping members of the public away from building 7 … so these construction workers must have had permission from the authorities … so what were they doing there ?
How does construction workers working in or around a building that the authorities claim spontaneously collapsed fit into N.I.S.T final 2008 report ? … No mention of construction workers
CNN News Anchor
Aaron Brown, CNN anchor man announced live on air that W.T.C building 7 had collapsed or was collapsing;
“ We are getting information now that one of the other buildings, building 7, in the World Trade Centre complex is on fire and has either collapsed or is collapsing … building number 7 one of the other buildings in this very large complex of buildings that is the Trade Centre … and now we are told there is a fire there and that building may collapse as well. “
This was broadcasted at 4.15 pm New York eastern time … just over an hour before the collapse.
C.B.S News Crew
Byron Pitts … “ An hour ago, World Trade Centre building number 7 collapsed …it was the one calamity that was not a surprise. Police had evacuated the area hours ago fearing building number 7 would indeed fall. “
Kansas Star Correspondent
David Hayes … “ About 4.30 pm, word went out to evacuate the area. Officials were worried that building 7 of World Trade would collapse.”
Fox News … News Anchor Harris Faulkner
“ I want to tell you we’re getting word from New York right now that another building has collapsed, I understand it was the 47 story. “
The transmission switched to a live feed from New York … showing W.T.C building 7 still standing;
“ Do we have pictures of it, I guess that smoke now, is that smoke coming form that third collapse … ok, that’s what we’re understanding. Hopefully at this point, that building was empty but I have no way of knowing that, so perhaps it wasn’t as full as it might be at this time 5.30 on a Tuesday. “
As this sentence is spoken the live feed showed W.T.C building 7 collapsing.
Photographer / Journalist
Tom Franklin … “ It was about 4.00pm and they were anticipating seven World Trade Centre collapsing. The firemen were leaving en masse … It was 4.45 pm and all the firemen and rescue workers were evacuating ground zero after word came that a third building … W.T.C 7 … was ready to fall. “
A.B.C News Anchor … “ I gather you saw building 7 come down “
A.B.C News correspondent … Bill Blackmore … “ Associate producer, Lucy Carradine, had been over near that building, just a little bit early and the policeman told her that they feared the was building going to come down, that they were evacuating people from around it.”
Washington Post reporter …Christine Haughney … “ Then a policeman directed me north. The Solomon Smith Barney building … Building 7 was about to collapse. “
Reporting The Collapse Before The Collapse
BBC News Anchor … Phil Hayton
“ Now more on the latest building collapse in New York, you might have heard a few moments ago, us talking about Solomon Brothers building collapsing and indeed it has, apparently that’s only a few 100s yards away from where the World Trade Centre towers were. And it seems this was not the result of a new attack, it was because the building had been weakened during this morning attacks. We’ll probability find out more about that from are correspondent Jane Standley … Jane what more can you tell us about the Solomon Brothers building and it’s collapse ? “
‘Well, only really what you’ … ‘the two twin towers of the World’ … ‘As you can see behind me '
W.T.C building 7 obscured by Jane Standley’s head … partially obscured … W.T.C building 7 in full view
BBC News Correspondent … Jane Standley
“ Well, only really what you already know, details are very, very sketchy, there’s almost a sense downtown in New York behind me, down by the World Trade Centres just an area completely closed off as the rescue workers try to do their jobs. But this isn’t the only building that has suffered as a result we know that part of the Marriott Hotel next to the Trade Centre also collapsed as a result of this huge amount of falling debris from 110 floors of the two twin towers of the World Trade Centre. As you can see behind me, the Trade Centre seems to be still burning, we see these huge clouds of smoke and ash and we know that behind that there’s an empty piece of what was a very familiar New York skyline. “
Both Phil Hayton and Jane Standley seem unaware that W.T.C 7 is still erect and standing … both BBC news anchor and BBC news correspondent are confirming that building 7 has collapsed … yet it can clearly be seen in the live feed, through the window behind Jane Standley. The interview continued until the live feed was abruptly broken off.
Jane Standley was inexperienced but Philip Hayton was an experienced, veteran news anchor with a background in international journalism and was for several years B.B.C Washington correspondent.
Why didn’t he correct the Jane Standley and point out that W.T.C building 7 was in fact still standing ?
The BBC report on the collapse of W.T.C building 7 was aired live at 9.54 pm GMT / 4.54 pm EST
W.T.C Building 7 collapsed at 10.20 pm GMT / 5.20 pm EST … 26 minutes later
Youtube Search Engine … BBC reported WTC 7 collapse 26 mins before it fell ...00:7:15
In a filmed interview in 2010 / 2011 … Uploaded on Youtube 9th Jan 2011
Retired BBC News Anchor Phil Hayton was asked about his news anchor coverage of the collapse of W.T.C building 7. The interviewer asks Phil Hayton whether he remembered his coverage of W.T.C 7’s collapse and the timing of his report, his response was vague. Claiming there was so much happening on the day he couldn’t remember the moment building 7 collapsed.
When asked if he’s heard of World Trade Centre Building 7 … Philip Hayton shook his head and replied NO.
Philip Hayton became a reporter for the BBC in 1974 covering a wide range of domestic and international stories. In his distinguished career of 37 years, Philip reported from Tehran, Iran on the 1979 revolution, other countries and assignments range from Northern Ireland, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Eritrea, Ethiopia and Beirut.
At one point Philip Hayton was the BBC correspondent in Washington DC reporting on American political and financial news … How is it possible for this man not to have heard of World Trade Centre building 7 also known as the Solomon Brothers Building ?
One of the most important buildings in the heart of America’s financial capital …The World Trade Centre complex in New York City … How could he not know ?
As the interview progresses the interviewer explains to Philip Hayton the controversy surrounding his and Jane Standley’s coverage of W.T.C building 7 … the building Philip had never heard of before …explaining the time discrepancy between their broadcaster and the actual event occurring.
Philip Hayton … with a puzzled, confused look on his face responded with … “ But I wasn’t in the studio that day, I didn’t go in … The interviewer ‘ Not on 9/11 ? ‘ … Philip … No, as I said I was in the theatre in the afternoon, we drove straight home and I came back for my shift the next day, that’s my recollection.”
Philip Hayton … ‘ I was in the theatre in the afternoon, We drove straight home and I came back for my shift the next day, that’s my recollection’
Philip Hayton in the BBC studio in London at 9.54 pm on September the 11th 2001 … Announcing the collapse of W.T.C building 7 and interviewing Jane Standley by live feed from New York City.
Where were you on September the 11th 2001 ? … How can this man not recalled going into the BBC studio and being evening anchor broadcaster on that unforgettable day ?
As the interview continues it was explained to Philip that footage had appeared on the internet showing him and Jane Standley reporting the collapse of building 7 with the building still standing in the background … 26 mins before it actually collapsed.
Philip’s response … “ This is all news to me, I’m really, I’m surprised “ … Interviewer … “ It would’ve been later, I guess it would’ve been later for English time.”
Philip … “ Oh, yeah now, its coming back to me, of course, because at that stage I wasn’t doing the morning, I was doing the evenings on the world, so yes, I went to the theatre with my son, heard it on the radio and then went into the studio, you’re quite right and I was on that night.
The interviewer than explains more of the controversy surrounding W.T.C building 7 and the BBC live broadcast that Philip Hayton anchored.
Philip’s reaction … “ This sounds so significant, that I’m amazed I didn’t know about this … I’m sorry I can’t enlighten you, this is news to me, I don’t know how its passed me by but it has.”
As historical world changing events go … the September the 11th 2001 attacks were as big as they get. That day changed the world and has effected all our lives … it has led to the war on terror that has destabilized several countries in a region of the world which already had a history of instability. Human rights groups estimate over 1.3 million civilians have died due to the U.S led counter terrorism wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan … As Philip Hayton didn’t retired until 2006, Philip has reported for the BBC news the consequences of 9/11.
Yet Philip Hayton cannot remember broadcasting the report of the collapse of W.T.C building 7 or even remember hearing of the existence of this important financial building in a 37 year distinguished career reporting and broadcasting world current affairs for one of the world premier broadcasting corporations.
Where were you on September the 11th 2001 ? … Did you work that day or did you have the day off ?
Do you remember watching Philip Hayton reporting the collapse of building 7 at five to ten on Tuesday evening on the 11th of September 2001 ?
Apparently Philip Hayton, the very man reading the news that night can’t remember whether he was working, let alone what news he reported.
Youtube Search Engine ... Philip Hayton interview ... 00:9:01
Previous to the Philip Hayton interview as part of the conspiracy files in 2008 the BBC aired a 50 minutes documentary called ‘ The Third Tower ‘. In this documentary Richard Porter Head of BBC World News states that the BBC investigation into the timing of the report of W.T.C 7’s collapse was due to them receiving incorrect information from Reuters News Agency.
Richard Porter Jane Standley Philip Hayton
After the BBC investigation into the broadcast of the building 7 collapse … Reuters News Agency released a statement … ‘ On September the 11th 2001 Reuters incorrectly reported that one of the buildings at the New York World Trade Centre, 7 W.T.C had collapsed before it actually did, the report was picked up from a local news story and was withdrawn as soon as it emerged that the building had not fallen. ‘
Reuters is an international news agency located in London, England … Reuters have established a reputation around the world for breaking some of the most important new stories in recent years. Reuters stated that they received the story from a local news company and without any conformation or proof that the story was true they circulated this completely unsubstantiated news report of the collapse of a third building in the W.T.C complex to all the mainstream media news networks.
CNN reported the collapse and than the possible collapse of W.T.C 7 as early as 4.15 pm … an hour and 5 minutes before the collapse … both CNN and BBC broadcasts showed building 7 standing in the background live on air as the reports of a collapse were being read out live on air by both anchor and correspondent.
Why did Reuters, the world’s premier news gathering agency release a report on an important world news event without confirming whether the event had actually happened ?
CNN and BBC news teams reporting in New York … Why didn’t they correct the report before they broadcasted live ? … Jane Standley and everyone in the BBC live feed crew in New York had time as Philip Hayton initially announced the W.T.C 7 collapse before going to the live feed, to confirm whether the story was true, that the collapse had actually happened … By simply looking out the window.
Jane Standley claimed in the documentary ‘ The Third Tower ‘ that the timing of the report of the collapse of W.T.C 7 was a simple mistake.
Philip Hayton claimed he had no idea of the existence of W.T.C 7 and couldn’t remember being in the studio on September the 11th 2001.
The BBC first claimed to have lost the original tapes of the W.T.C 7 broadcast due to a cock up not a conspiracy … then found them again on the wrong shelf in their archives.
Not one person in the room where the BBC was filming their New York live feed noticed that W.T.C building 7 was still standing ... Didn’t anyone look out the window ?
Youtube Search Engine … BBC documentary: The Third Tower ... 00:58:56
Richard Porter reading rueters statement ... 00:3:37
Jane Standley breaks her silence ... 00:2:37
Both CNN and the BBC claimed to have received the information of building 7’s collapse through Reuters … who in turn claimed they received their information from an unspecified local news story … Reuters stated that as soon as they realised their mistake, they withdrew the statement.
CNN reported the collapse of building 7 at 4.15 pm … the BBC at 4.54 pm, 40 minutes after the CNN broadcast … so either Reuters realised their mistake and rectified it but didn’t inform the BBC or it took them over 45 minutes to realize W.T.C building 7 was still standing.
CNN Anchor … Aaron Brown … “ We are getting information that one of the other buildings, building 7, in the World Trade Centre complex is on fire and has either collapsed or is collapsing. “ … 4.15 pm
BBC Anchor … Philip Hayton … “ We’ve got some news, just coming in actually, that the Solomon Brothers building, in New York, right in the heart of Manhattan has also collapsed. “ … 4.54 pm
Why are both CNN and the BBC claiming to have just received the same information, about the same event, from the same source, Reuters News Agency … 40 minutes apart ?
How do Reuters distribute their news stories to media outlets ? … surely CNN and the BBC would’ve received the information at roughly the same time, so therefore would’ve broadcast the news story at roughly the same time … So why were the broadcasts 40 minutes apart ?
Why did Reuters distribute an important news story to all the main media corporations without verifying it’s authenticity .. How difficult could that have been to confirm, whether the building had actually collapsed or not ?
An unspecified local news story … There is no more information as regards Reuters’s source for the story of W.T.C 7’s collapse, which story or which local news company, television or radio, has not been disclosed.
Apart from the statement read by BBC World News Producer, Richard Porter, in the documentary ‘ The Third Tower ‘, there is no proof of a release or withdrawal of any news report by Reuters on the collapse of W.T.C 7.
Assuming Reuters’s claim of acquiring the story from a local news source is genuine … where would a local news agency received it’s information about a possible collapse of building 7 ?
The reporters on the ground in New York would’ve got their information from eyewitnesses, police and others authorities including the firemen working in and around ground zero and of course their own observations.
There are numerous New York Fire Department personnel statements regarding the possible collapse of W.T.C 7 through instability, part of the officially reason given by the NYFD for halting the fighting of the fires in W.T.C 7 was instability.
Yet in the 2008 Final W.T.C 7 Progressive Collapse Report, N.I.S.T ruled out the three possible causes of any gradual structural weakening to the building integrity throughout the course of the day.
Debris impact damage … Overall structural fire activity … Explosive detonations
Building 7 Instability
NYFD personnel testimony of a possible W.T.C building 7 collapse due to structural instability;
Witnesses on the ground around W.T.C 7 were warned to move back from the building … the authorities even went as far as setting up a collapse zone around the building indicating that at less some of the authorities had prior knowledge of a collapse.
Minutes after the collapse, MSNBC News broadcast an interview with New York Fire Department Lt. David Rastuccio;
News Anchor … Brian Williams … “ Lieutenant where are you right now “ … David Rastuccio … “ I’m at the corner of North moor St and Greenwich ST “
Williams … “ Can you confirm it was number 7 that just went in “ … Rastuccio … “ Yes Sir “
Williams … “ You guys new this was coming all day “ … Rastuccio … “ We had heard reports that the building was unstable and eventually it would come down on its own, or it would be taken down. “
Why does David Rastuccio use the words “ or it would be taken down. “ … This implies that if the building had not collapse by a natural occurrence, that there was an alternative option proposed to bring down the building by controlled demolition.
The admission that there was a controlled demolition option available and being considered gives greater significance to the CNN film crew and audio recording minutes prior to collapse and any other evidence of explosive detonations occurring in building 7.
CNN Film Crew … WTC 7 … 5.20 pm
Loud explosion … Construction workers …“ Keep your eye on that building its coming down “ … “ The building is about to blow up, move back “
Fire Chief Frank Fellini … “ The major concern at that time at that particular location was number 7 …we were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel, would result in the building collapsing. So for the next five to six hours, we kept firefighters from working anywhere near that building. “
In this interview 12/03/2001 … Fellini ... states that the firefighters stopped fighting the fires in W.T.C 7 five to six hours before the collapse at roughly midday. All the observational evidence confirms that the fires in building 7 didn’t engulf the entire structure even though they were allowed to burn unimpeded of hours.
The area of the building which needed to be on fire up to the point of collapse for the progressive collapse hypothesis to be correct was the 12th floor, north east corner … observational evidence shows the fires on the 12th floor were burnt out by 4.00 pm, an hour and 20 minutes before the collapse.
Fire Chief Frank Cruthers … “ Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Centre might have been impacted by both the collapsing towers and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse.
So we instructed that a collapse area be set up and maintained so when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn’t have people in it. “
Second account … Frank Cruthers … “ Of primary importance early on in the operation was the structural condition of 7 World Trade Centre. Assistant Chief Frank Fellini had been approached by several chiefs who were concerned about stability … We all agreed that it was not too conservative of a decision to establish a collapse zone for that building, move the firefighters out of the collapse area, and maintain that strategy. “
The decision to halt fighting the fires in building 7 around midday due to instability corresponds with Barry Jennings testimony of explosions in the building before and after the tower collapses, this would have produced signs of instability in W.T.C 7 … raising concerns about a possible collapse.
The reaction on the ground to the buildings instability, the concern regarding the buildings integrity and the setting up of a collapse zone doesn’t correspond with the conclusion reached by N.I.S.T in 2008.
Firefighter Thomas Smith … “ They backed me off the rig because no 7 was in dead jeopardy, so they backed everybody off and moved us to the rear end of Vesey Street. We stood there for a half hour, 40 minutes, because 7 was in imminent collapse and finally did come down. “
Firefighter James Wallace … “ They were saying building 7 was going to collapse, so we regrouped and went back to our rig,. We went to building 4 or 3, I don’t know. We were going to set up our tower ladders there. They said no good because building 7 is coming down.”
Firefighter Maureen McArdle-Schulman … “ At that point, 7 World Trade had 12 stories on fire in it. They were afraid it was going to collapse on us, so they pulled everyone out, we couldn’t do anything.” Firefighter Peter Castellano … “ We were ordered down from the tower ladder because of a possible collapse of tower 7. “
Firefighter Brian Fitzpatrick … “ We were then positioned on Vesey St between the north end and the west side highway because there was an imminent collapse on 7 World Trade, and it did collapse. “ Firefighter Christopher Murray … “ Probably about 4 or 5 pm, our radios went dead, because we reports all day of 7 World Trade coming down.”
Firefighter George Holzman … “ We stayed there for quite sometime when I don’t even know who, I think it was someone, Lieutenant Lowney spoke, asked us to leave the area, they were concerned about World Trade Centre 7 collapsing. “
Deputy Fire Chief Nick Visconti … “ Now, World Trade Centre 7 is still burning and I’m thinking to myself, how come they not trying to put this fire out ? … Frank Fellini said to me, Nick, you’ve got to get those people out of there … I thought to myself, out of where, Frank … He said, 7 W.T.C imminent collapse, we’ve got to get those people out of there.
I was whistling, Captain, bring your guy’s this way, I was getting resistance … I explained to them we were worried about 7, that it was going to come down … One comment was … ‘ Oh, that building is never coming down, that didn’t get hit by a plane, why isn’t somebody in there putting the fire out ?’ … a lot of comments, a bit of resistance, understandable resistance. “
Paramedics / First Responders / Emergency Workers
Paramedic Joseph Cahill … “ The reason we were given for why we were moving was that 7 World Trade Centre was going to collapse or was at risk of collapsing.”
Paramedic Louis Cooke … “ We got to Chambers and Greenwich, and the chief turns us around and says, 7 W.T.C is starting to collapse. We heard on the fire portable … ‘ Everyone evacuate the site, it’s going to collapse."
EMT Joseph Fortis …“ When the third building came down, we were on that corner in front of the school and everyone just stood back. They pulled us all back at the time, almost about an hour before. “
EMT Indira Singh … “ What happened with that particular triage site is that pretty soon after noon, after midday on 9/11, we had to evacuate that because they told us that building 7 was coming down … I do believe they brought it down because I heard they were going to bring it down because it was unstable, because of the collateral damage … By noon or one o’ clock they told us we had to move from that triage site up to Pace University, a little further away, because building 7 was gonna come down or being brought down. “
EMT Mercedes Rivera … “ At that point, they said that 7 World Trade had no face and was ready to collapse. “
EMT Jason Charles … “ So we started heading over to where building 7 was at and they were like, building 7 is going to collapse, you can’t go over there. “
EMT Decosta Wright … “ We were like, aren’t you guy’s going to put that fire out ? They said they were going to let it burn down and it collapsed.
“ FDNY chiefs officers surveyed 7 W.T.C and determined it was in danger of collapse. Chief Frank Cruthers, now the incident commander, and Chief Frank Fellini, the operations commander, both agreed a collapse zone had to be established.
That meant firefighters in the area of the north tower had to be evacuated. This took sometime to accomplish because of the terrain, communications and the fierce determination with which the firefighters were searching. At 5.30 pm, about 20 minutes after the last firefighters evacuated the collapse zone, 7 W.T.C collapsed.
It was the third steel framed high rise in history to collapse from fire …the other two had collapsed earlier that day. “
Google Search Engine ... New York Times ... 9/11 witness testimony
After reviewing the eyewitness testimonies, it’s obvious that the unspecified news story of a collapse or impending collapse of W.T.C building 7 originated from the activities of the authorities on the ground in the surrounding area of building 7.
The midday decision to call a halt to fighting the fires in W.T.C 7 due to the instability of the building’s structure and the establishment a collapse zone so earlier on in the day indicates that the authorities had hours of foreknowledge of a collapse.
At approximately 12.30 pm. Richard Rotanz, Deputy Director of the Office of Emergency Management made a damage assessment of W.T.C building 7 … he observed columns missing and heard creaking and groaning sounds coming from the columns and beams above in the upper sections of the building.
This is when the decision was made in consultation with the NYFD to halt fighting the fires in W.T.C 7, although there are contradictory reports of firefighters evacuating the building and surrounding area hours after that decision was made.
So how does the 2008 Final N.I.S.T … Progressive Collapse Report account for the instability in the building leading to the decision to stop fighting the fires, resulting in media speculation and reporting of a collapse or impending collapse of W.T.C building 7 ? … It doesn’t
The N.I.S.T Final W.T.C 7 Collapse Report of 2008 cannot account for any structural instability occurring in W.T.C 7 before the start of the progressive collapse process at 5.20 pm.
W.T.C Building 7 … Debris Damage
In the first of three articles published in Popular Mechanics in 2004 … N.I.S.T made an assumption as to the severity of the debris impact damage, this was disregarded for their final W.T.C 7 report
The N.I.S.T progressive collapse report of 2008 stated that the debris impacts from the towers had no barring on the collapse. This corresponds with the observational evidence which shows that the majority of the building’s structure was untouched by the tower collapses.
The observational evidence confirms N.I.S.T conclusion of no loss of building 7’s structural integrity due to the debris impacts.
W.T.C building 7’s design was, in the second article in Popular Mechanics in 2004 called into question by N.I.S.T but in their 2008 final report stated that the building’s design had no barring on the collapse.
When reviewing the design of the building and 200 million dollar reinforcing of the supporting columns and floors, it’s very probable that the design of the building and especially the 1989 refurbishment would have prevented a complete collapse rather than encouraged one.
W.T.C Building 7 … Overall Fire Activity
In the third article to appear in Popular Mechanics in 2004 … N.I.S.T made assumptions regarding the diesel fuel tanks installed in the building, presuming they had fed the fires, therefore allowing them to burn longer and at a higher temperature than a fire fueled solely by office contents.
This again, was proved to be a false assumption as N.I.S.T themselves concluded in the 2008 Final Report that the fires in building 7 were fueled by everyday office contents and not diesel fuel.
The observational evidence of the W.T.C 7 fires confirm that the building was never engulfed in flames, the fires were located on isolated floors not widespread over the entire structure … leading to the obvious and correct conclusion that the fires in W.T.C building 7 were never strong or widespread enough to effect the structural integrity and cannot be responsible for the instability reported in the building.
W.T.C building 7 … Sept 2001 … 7 hours … Reinforced supporting columns … Complete Collapse
Guangzhou … Dec 2013 … 11 hours … Non-reinforced supporting columns … No Collapse
Madrid Windsor Hotel … Feb 2005 … 20 hours … Non-reinforced supporting columns … No collapse
In the 2008 Final W.T.C 7 Collapse Report …N.I.S.T conclusion of a localized concentration of heat rather than a widespread heat reaction leading to a structural compromise was the only fire induced collapse hypothesis left open to them, since the observational evidence is overwhelmingly against any structural failure due to debris impact or overall fire activity.
The only other possible explanation for the structural compromise of the building’s integrity gradually through the course of the day is explosive detonations.
W.T.C Building 7 … Explosive Detonations
Shyam Sunder … Director of Building and Fire Research Lab … N.I.S.T
“ The explosive charge needed to sever building 7’s supporting columns would have to have been an incredibly loud sound and that sound was not picked up by any of the video’s and witnesses we have talked to. “
N.I.S.T investigation into explosive force being presence in W.T.C 7 was narrow, limited and fundamentally flawed but nevertheless N.I.S.T did rule out explosive detonations occurring in the building throughout the day and at the point of collapse.
N.I.S.T themselves have ruled out, in their own report of 2008, the only three possible causes for any structural weakening of the building’s integrity before the moment of collapse.
This means that there should not have been any signs of instability or any foreknowledge … No prediction of a collapse.
Yet the official reason for not fighting the fires in building 7 was lass of water pressure and building instability … this decision was made due to an inspection that reported instability in W.T.C 7.
The authorities did have foreknowledge and they did predict a building collapse which was picked up and reported on by the media.
When examining the observational and witness evidence for the only three possible reasons for instability in W.T.C building 7, the debris damage and overall fire activity can be eliminated …The hypothesis of explosive detonations causing instability leading to structural failure before the point of collapse and during the collapse is the only one of the three options which corresponds with all the evidence.
The evidence that N.I.S.T ignored in their final report heavily supports explosive detonations in W.T.C building 7 throughout the day and during the collapse.
As with the twin tower collapse examination ... apply Occam’s Razor to the collapse of W.T.C Building 7 and the simplest and most obvious answer to how and why W.T.C 7 collapsed in the very precise way that it did is ... Controlled demolition
Controlled Thermite / C4 Demolition Hypothesis
Does controlled demolition correspond with the observable and scientific evidence ?
What are the elements the correct collapse hypothesis would have to contain ?
1. The hypothesis must account for a progression of instability in the building throughout the day … leading
up to the point of collapse.
2. The start point of the process must begin with the collapse of the Penthouse Suite in the north east corner
of the building and the giving way of the 79th column.
3. The collapse process must account for a kink at the top, centre of the building, near the 76th column
4. The hypothesis must result in the building’s descent being vertical and remaining symmetric to the ground
5. The building descent speed must reach free fall acceleration
1. The hypothesis must account for a progression of instability in the building throughout the day
leading up to the point of collapse.
With the observational evidence eliminating debris impact damage and overall fire activity, the only option left open to account for the structural compromise of the building integrity before the point of collapse is explosive detonations.
How would a controlled demolition crew bring down a high rise building ? … How would they achieved the demolition W.T.C building 7 ?
The aim of a controlled demolition of a building is collapse the structure with minimal debris damage to the surrounding area this is achieved by demolishing the building in a way that allows it to descent vertically. To achieve this, explosive charges must to placed strategically throughout the building’s structure, where they are positioned and how powerful the explosive charges are depends on the individual building design.
Most high rise buildings will go through a progressive weakening process before the final implosion that brings down the structure. The design and construction of the building determine where the weakening of the structure takes place, explosives are strategically positioned and timed to detonate and weaken the structure while remaining upright and safe for the explosive loaders to work in the building … depending on the building, this process can takes hours to complete.
W.T.C Building 7 with reinforced supporting columns would require multiple explosive detonations positioned precisely around the building to weaken the structure before the final collapse … this process would take hours.
Precise knowledge of the building design … unlimited access to the entire building and of course expert knowledge of controlled demolition would be essential in the demolition of W.T.C building 7.
The earliest witness testimonies to explosive detonations in W.T.C 7 are Barry Jennings and Michael Hess, both men reported explosions in the building before the tower collapses … before 10.00 am.
Barry Jennings / Michael Hess * Jules and Geodeon Naudet * Steven Spak * Richard Perkins
Barry Jennings stated that he and Hess had to signal for help from the 8th floor as a explosion had collapse the 6th floor … both Jennings and Hess testified that this occurred before the south tower collapse at 9.59 am.
French film makers Jules and Geodeon Naudet were filming on Vesey ST, close at W.T.C 7 and recorded two explosions coming from building 7 at 10.45 am.
Videomaker Steven Spak recorded an explosion in W.T.C 7 at roughly 11.00 am while filming outside St Paul’s Chapel a few 100 metres away.
Richard Perkins in an apartment located in Harrison St recorded explosions coming from building 7 throughout the day beginning at 11.00 am to the building collapse at 5.20 pm.
These independent accounts of explosions occurring in W.T.C 7 are collaborated by mainstream media reports of explosions occurring in the twin towers from the moment of aircraft impacts to collapse and also explosive detonations coming from W.T.C building 7 … both CNN and MSNBC film crews recorded and reported these explosions.
A controlled demolition of W.T.C building 7 would have a progression of structural weakness leading up to the final moment of collapse as explosive charges would be detonated in precise positions to weaken but not collapse the building … with debris impact damage and overall fire activity eliminated as causes of instability through the overwhelming observational evidence, the only explanation for the instability in the building in explosive detonations.
That’s actually what the witness statements testify to have happened to W.T.C building 7.
New York Fire Department Lt David Rastuccio’s interview with MSNBC in which he admits to a plan by the authorities to ‘ take down the building ‘ with the words ... “ eventually it would come down on its own, or it would be taken down. “
The reports of explosions in W.T.C 7 as early as 10.00 am … 10.45 am … 11.00 am and continuing reports of explosions occurring throughout the rest of the day up to the moment of collapse means that decision to take W.T.C building 7 down was made … before the instability assessment at 12.30 pm … even before the tower collapses.
2. The start point of the process must begin with the collapse of the Penthouse Suite in the north
east corner of the building and the giving way of the 79th column.
In the N.I.S.T report of 2008, the progressive collapse process started with the failure of the 79th column underneath the Penthouse Suite in the north east corner of W.T.C 7 … this corresponds with the observational evidence as the Penthouse Suite was the first visible sign of the collapse as it is the highest point of the building.
The 79th column is part of the central core of the building … in a controlled demolition, these central core columns would be the first, to be blown, in a precisely timed sequence of detonations that would severed the buildings central supporting columns.
The Penthouse Suite being the highest point of the building means that if the supporting columns of the building were severed, it would be the first visual sign of collapse. The penthouse suite was directly supported by the 79th column so were that column to give way independent of the others or were it to be severed collectively with the rest of the supporting core columns, the collapse of the Penthouse Suite would be the first visual indication of the building’s collapse.
The Columns are severed … the 79th column starts its descent … taking away the support for the Penthouse Suite … the Penthouse sinks into the building … the entire building’s structure begins it’s vertical, symmetric free fall descent.
Youtube Search Engine ... WTC Building 7's collapse - 23 Angles ... 00:14:10
3. The collapse process must account for a kink at the top, centre of the building near the 76th column.
When a controlled demolition of a high rise building such as W.T.C 7 is preformed, it is the central core columns that are blown first. The explosive charges are detonated within milliseconds of each other so the structure gives way and collapses simultaneously … producing a vertical, free fall descent.
As the collapse starts with the central columns, this process produces a kink at the top of the structure.
W.T.C building 7 showing a distinct kink as the central core columns fail
Youtube Search Engine … WTC 7 Penthouse collapse close up ... 00:3:31
Compare an illegitimate controlled demolition of a steel framed high rise building with the collapse of W.T.C building 7 on September the 11th 2001.
Youtube Search Engine … WTC 7 collapse comparison to controlled demolition ... 00:00:17
Examples of controlled demolition exhibiting the characteristic kink at the top of the buildings
Youtube Search Engine ... Ocean Tower-Controlled demolition ... 00:4:26
Implosionworld explosive demolition compilation.Inc ... 00:17:16
Three North Park East Building-Controlled demoltion.Inc ... 00:1:35
Top 30 best implosion/explosion compilation ... 00:14:01
4. The hypothesis must result in the building's descent being vertical and remaining symmetric
to the ground
W.T.C building 7 descended almost completely vertical, keeping its shape until impact with the ground … it’s descent was almost completely symmetric. For a building to collapse in a symmetric, vertical descent by a naturally occurring collapse process is extremely rare due to the number of variables involved … the taller the building the more variables involved in the collapse process.
W.T.C building’s symmetric, vertical descent
For a building to collapse straight down, it must descent through its centre of mass … the path of greatest resistance. The only way to achieved this, is to eliminate the support below the descending mass of the collapsing structure … the best way to achieve this is controlled explosive detonations to cut the supporting columns and collapse the floors of the building simultaneously to produce a vertical symmetric descent.
5. The building's descent speed must reach free fall acceleration
Free fall speed is achieved by a falling object when the only resistance to its descent is the air its falling through. In the case of W.T.C building 7, free fall acceleration was achieved as the top of building 7 reached the level of the 29th floor in 3.9 seconds ... this is free fall acceleration.
The top section of building 7 reaching free fall acceleration … 3.9 seconds to reach the 29th floor
As with a symmetric descent and a free fall descent through a natural occurring collapse is extremely rare due to the number of variables involved … everything would have to give way almost simultaneously to allow a free fall speed descent.
The most effective way to achieve this is controlled explosive detonations to sever the supporting columns and collapse the entire structure simultaneously … producing free fall acceleration.
The most effective way of ensuring a vertical, symmetric free fall descent is the placing and detonating of explosive charges, there is audio recording and witness testimonies to the sound of explosions occurring in W.T.C 7 … Is there any visual evidence in support of the audio evidence ?
Detonation flashes visual as building 7 descent:
These photographs appear to show multiple explosive detonations occurring in W.T.C building 7 as it collapses … due to the high probability against a naturally occurring global or complete vertical, symmetric free fall descent … it’s a logical and reasonable assumption to make that these photographs do indeed shows multiple explosive detonations occurring in W.T.C 7 as it collapses … this corresponds with the witness testimony and audio evidence.
In a controlled demolition the strongest and most powerful explosions are at the base of the building, to essentially cut the legs from underneath the building … witness testimony and audio recording confirm two loud explosions, then a series of softer detonations. This corresponds with the observational evidence of smoke and dust rising from the base of W.T.C building 7 as it collapsed.
The observational evidence combined with the audio recording and witness testimony to hearing multiple detonations as the building collapsed, heavily supports the controlled demolition hypothesis … add to that the witnesses and audio evidence for explosions occurring in the building throughout the day, the precise and distinct method of descent and W.T.C building 7’s collapse has all the hallmark characteristics of a controlled demolition.
This view is shared by many architects, engineers, explosive experts and controlled demolition experts.
Youtube Search Engine … AE911TRUTH-Tom Sullivan- Expolsive Technician For CDI ... 00:9:20
9/11:Explosive evidence-The experts speak out ... 00:1:37
9/11 Richard Humenn P.E-WTC Chief Electrical engineer ... 00:13:34
W.T.C Building 7 Collapse Conclusion
After examining all the observational, audio evidence and witness testimony … The N.I.S.T 2008 Final W.T.C Building 7 Collapse Report … Progressive Collapse through Thermal Expansion cannot account for many aspects of not only the moment of collapse but also the 7 hours leading to the collapse.
The collapse direction, speed and symmetry are not consistent with the collapse process proposed by N.I.S.T ... but are consistent with the controlled demolition hypothesis.
Applying Occam’s Razor to the evidence ... leads to the conclusion that the most obvious, simplest and only explanation for all of the evidence is Controlled Thermite/C4 Demolition.
The Controlled Demolition Hypothesis can account for ;
The witness accounts of explosions occurring in the building throughout the day
The reports of instability in the building
The initial collapse of the Penthouse Suite
The kink at top, centre of the building just before the descent
The appearance of explosive detonations as the building collapsed
The smoke raising from the base of the building at the moment of collapse
The vertical Symmetry of the descent
The free fall acceleration of the descent
The descent into its footprint / near pile of debris
Given that the controlled demolition hypothesis is the only hypothesis that can account for all of the evidence it’s easy to accept this as the answer to how and why W.T.C Building 7 collapsed on September the 11th 2001.
Controlled Thermite/C4 Demolition is the only explanation for all of the evidence
W.T.C Building 7 ... Sources of Information
( 9/11 Building Collapse Conclusion Below Building 7 Sources )
Mainstream media .. Reuters News Agency … BBC … CNN …Fox News … ABC News … MSNBC News
Footage and photographs of W.T.C building 7 … Eyewitness accounts
News reports on the day/months and years after the day
F.E.M.A 403: World Trade Center Building Study ... W.T.C Building 7
Scientific data provided by N.I.S.T
Endorsed by the Department of Commerce
N.I.S.T / W.T.C 7 Preliminary Statement Releases ... 2004
Scientific data provided by N.I.S.T
Endorsed by the Department of Commerce
Published by Popular Mechcanics
N.I.S.T Final W.T.C building 7 Investation Report ( 2008 )
Scientific data provided by N.I.S.T
Endorsed by the Department of Commerce
Remember Building 7
Architects & Engineers For 9/11 Truth ( A&E )
Dan Barnum … Bachelor degree of Architecture
Richard Gage … Architect
Kelly David … Bachelor of Science Degree
9/11 New York Building Collapse Conclusion
Progression of Official status of 9/11 Building Collapses
2002 ... F.E.M.A : World Trade Center Building Study ( Government Paper )
South Twin Tower ( Tower 2 )
9.59 am ….. First steel framed high rise building in history to completely collapse directly due to fire
Process ….. Melted and weaken steel due to jet fueled fires
North Twin Tower ( Tower 1 )
10.28 am … Second steel framed high rise building in history to completely collapse directly due to fire
Process …. Melted and weaken steel due to jet fueled fires
W.T.C Building 7 ( The Solomon Brothers Building )
5.20 pm …. Third steel framed high rise building in history to completely collapse directly due to fire
Process …. Structural collapse due to intense fire activity
2004 … 9/11 Commission Report ( Public Enquiry )
South Twin Tower
9.59 am ….. First steel framed high rise building in history to completely collapse directly due to fire
Process ….. Melted and weaken steel due to jet fueled fires resulting in a pancake collapse
North Twin Tower
10.28 am … Second steel framed high rise building in history to completely collapse directly due to fire
Process …. Melted and weaken steel due to jet fueled fires resulting in a pancake collapse
W.T.C Building 7 … Omitted from the report
2008 … W.T.C Building 7 Final Report ( Public Enquiry )
5.20 pm …. Third steel framed high rise building in history to completely collapse directly due fire
Process …. Progressive collapse due to thermal expansion ( First Time World Occurrence )
Twin Tower Collapses … Not Applicable
2011 … Aluminium/Water Explosion Hypothesis Report( Independent Scientific Paper / Endorsed By N.I.S.T )
South Twin Tower
9.59 am ….. First steel framed high rise building in history to completely collapse indirectly due to fire
Process …. Aluminium/water explosion hypothesis ( First Time World Occurrence )
North Twin Tower
10.59 am … Second steel framed high rise building to completely collapse indirectly due to fire
Process …. Aluminium/water explosion hypothesis ( Second Time world Occurrence )
W.T.C 7 Status amended … First steel framed high rise building to completely collapse directly due to fire
Process …. Progressive collapse due to thermal expansion ( First Time world Occurrence )
Balance of Probability
The probability of an event occurring is how likely something is to happen ... the analysis of events governed by probability is called statistics.
From a point of view of probability the statistics are extremely complex due to the extremely high number of varibles involved in the equation to calculate the probable odds of the three high rise building collapses.
A detailed anaylsis would have to consider all varibles that could have influenced the events ... from the design and construction of the buildings ... to the fire activity ... to the amount of aluminium in the towers ... to the probable collapse speed and direction of all three buildings.
A way to simplify the probability equation is to reduce down the number of varibles ... although this simplifies the equation, it also lowers the accuracy of the equation ... this method gives a rough estimation of the probability of an event occurring.
The method of statisticial calculation used when predicting the probability of multiple related events ocurring is called non-independent probability ... this is the method used to calculate the probability of three high rise buildings collapsing on the same day.
Shuffle a pack of cards ... then each day for 52 days select four cards
What is the probability of selecting one ace on the 11th day ?
Four aces in the pack of cards ... 52 cards to select an ace
The probability of the selection of one ace on any given day is 4 in 52 ... 1 in 13 ... 1/13
If the first ace is not replaced back into the pack then the odds chance as regards a random selection of a second ace on the same day ... as both varibles have changed.
Shuffle the pack of cards again ... same day selection ... 51 cards and 3 aces
What is the probability of selecting a second ace on the 11th day ?
Three aces in the pack of cards ... 51 cards to select a second ace
The probability of a second ace being selected on any given day other than the 11th ... 3 in 51 ... 1/17
The probability of the second ace being selected on the same day as the first ... means that their separate probabilities become related to each other ... the equation becomes an non-independent probability.
If the probabilities were independent ... not related ( e.g on different days ) then the calculation is addition.
If the probabilities are non-independent ... related ( e.g on the same day ) then the calculation is multiplication.
The probability of selecting two aces with two selections on the 11th day ... 1/13 x 1/17 = 1/221 ... 1 in 221
Shuffle the pack of cards again ... same day selection ... 50 cards ... 2 aces
What is the probability of selecting a third ace on the 11th day ?
The probability of a third ace being selected on any given day other than the 11th ... 2 in 50 ... 1/25
Apply the non-independent probability rule;
The probability of selecting three aces with three selections on the 11th day ... 1/221 x 1/25 = 1/5525 ... 1 in 5525
Shuffle the pack of cards again ... same day selection ... 49 cards ... 1 ace
What is the probability of selecting a fourth ace on the 11th day ?
The probability of a fourth ace being selected on any given day other than the 11th ... 1/49
Apply the non-independent probability rule;
The probability of selecting four aces with four selections on the 11th day ... 1/5525 x 1/49 = 1 in 270,725
The example above refers to playing cards and selecting the four ace cards on one single selection ... but it illstrates the non-independent probability rule which also applies to three building collapses that occur on the same day.
To achieve even a close approximate of the probability of even one of the 9/11 New York building collapses occurring on that particule day would require technical knowledge of all aspects of the building designs, construction and the condition of the structures at the point of collapse. Many varibles needed to make even a accurate estimation are simply unknown ... so cannot be calculated into the probability equation..
There is very little information regarding the probability of the 9/11 New York building collapses online ... this may well be because it is simply impossible with so many known varibles as well as plenty of unknown varibles to even aproximately calculate of the probability of the building collapses.
The card scenario can provide a very loose parallel to the 9/11 building collapses as the probability of even one of these three extremely well designed and built buildings completely collapsing as a result of the 9/11 terror attack is very high against it occurring.
The non-independent probability rule means that the second collapse probability would be multiplied by the first and the third by the second ... pushing the balance of probability up incrediblity high against the official 9/11 building collapse narrative being the true explanation for the three buildings collapsing.
There are other varibles in calculating the probability of the collapses, such as the collapse cause, the direction and speed of all three building's descents.
The 9/11 New York building collapses provided four world first occurrences and two of those world first's occurred a second time in the same day.
First Time World Occurences
First steel framed high rise/skyscraper to completely collapse indirectly due to fire ... South tower ... 9:59 am
First steel framed high rise/skyscraper to completely collapse directly due to fire ... W.T.C building 7 ... 5:20 pm
First time the molten aluminuin/water explosion hypothesis had occurred ... South tower ... 9:59 am
First time a progressive collapse through thermal expansion had occurred ... W.T.C building 7 ... 5:20 pm
Second Time World Occurences
Second steel framed high rise/skyscraper to completely collapse indirectly due to fire ... North tower ... 10:28 am
Second time the molten aluminium/water hypothesis had occurred ... North tower ... 10:28 am
Four world first's ... two world second's ... All on the same day
All three buildings collapsed through their centre's of mass
All three buildings collapsed into their own footprints
All three buildings collapsed at near free fall speed
All three building collapses exhibit the hallmark charateristics of controlled demolition
All three building leases and one freehold ( W.T.C 7 ) owned by the same man ( Larry Siverstein )
All three insurance payouts paid to the same man ( Larry Silverstein )
The probability against of all this occurring on the same day is astronomically high
The science of the building collapses and the laws of physics rule out the official narrative but even without the scientific anomalies ... the improbabilites also rule out the official narrative ... push the balance of probability up high enough and improbability becomes impossiblity.
The official 9/11 building collapse narrative is scientificially impossible when the laws of physics are applied and a statisticial impossiblility when the laws of probability are applied ... the official narrative cannot be true.
|The three 9/11 building collapses|
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle ... Sherlock Holmes
" Eliminate the impossible and whatever remains, how ever improbable, must be the truth "
The only hypothesis which explains all of the scientific and observational evidence is the same for all three 9/11 New York building collapses ... Controlled Thermite/C4 Demolition
Youtube Search Engine ... 9/11 Exposed 2nd Edition ... 1:50:00
Architects & Engineers on 9/11 ... 1:03:02
9/11: Explosive Evidence-experts speak out ... 1:37:47
Firefighters/Arctitects & Engineers Expose 9/11 Myths ... 1:35:49