Scholars for 9/11 Truth

[kid]

Its hard to beleive that people could be so evil to kill all these other people but it happened. People go to great lengths in order to fuel their ambitions. We aren't the people that we want to be, we are the person that we became. Everyone is capable to hide something from another in order to further their advancement and are willing to hurt one or many in order to reach that goal. There is supposedly one person in history that has not done this. Jesus. Look at the towers collapse again tell me that isn't strange. In fact I have it on my computer at home i'll post a link soon. I look at this stuff and can't beleive some people cant see its real.


Mark

 

[sgtmac_46]

I do not know why the scientist at MIT published a paper that directly reflected the NIST findings. I'm looking at the dates on the papers and it looks like it was published around the same time as the governmental report. As of now, I'm looking to see if he was involved in the NIST in any way. I suspect that he was part of the cadre that cranked out the NIST report...but we'll have to see what turns up.

'Cadre'?! Oh, I get it....anyone who disagrees with your conclusions is either A) Ignorant or B) Part of the conspiracy. That's stable.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Its hard to beleive that people could be so evil to kill all these other people but it happened. People go to great lengths in order to fuel their ambitions. We aren't the people that we want to be, we are the person that we became. Everyone is capable to hide something from another in order to further their advancement and are willing to hurt one or many in order to reach that goal. There is supposedly one person in history that has not done this. Jesus. Look at the towers collapse again tell me that isn't strange. In fact I have it on my computer at home i'll post a link soon. I look at this stuff and can't beleive some people cant see its real.


Mark

Yep, those hijackers were just government agents, who did it for money and personal gain. Funny thing is, they were smart enough to pull this off, but too stupid to realize that they can't spend money when they're dead.....:rofl:

So explain to me the motive of 'suicide bombing for profit'.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

Thing is, why go through the whole complicated show? As if just crashing planes into the towers wasnt enough? We have to go Jerry Bruckheimer and synchronize a demolition of the towers to. Requiring thousands of pounds of explosives and careful cutting of key support structures (that leave most buildings being imploded so weak that you cant go near them but somehow they stay open for business and planes crashing into them dont knock them down). But they are not smart enough to make them fall in a "realistic" (according to our physics whizes) way when they "know" its going to be seen on TV and replayed into history. If you are going to set up something like this then why not have them fall like trees into other buildings? Now that would have been a Bruckheimer moment. But at the same time we cant scan cell phone conversations from inside the NSA without someone leaking, Karl Rove gets leaked and so on....Its just way too "out there" sorry show all the equations you want Im not buying it.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

The simple answer is that an asymetrical collapse could have destroyed a heck of a lot more then just the towers and "rigging" the towers to fall in a more realistic way would have caused an asymetrical collapse.

Sorry, but that just sounds really-well-sorry-stupid. They are going to commit mass murder on a huge, dramatic, scale. Crashing loaded airplanes into occupied buildings but they are afraid of creating "too much damage" thats just wierd.

 

[Makalakumu]

Thing is, why go through the whole complicated show? As if just crashing planes into the towers wasnt enough? We have to go Jerry Bruckheimer and synchronize a demolition of the towers to. Requiring thousands of pounds of explosives and careful cutting of key support structures (that leave most buildings being imploded so weak that you cant go near them but somehow they stay open for business and planes crashing into them dont knock them down).

According to eyewitness accounts, the "explosions" that may have imploded the buildings happened after the airplanes hit. Also, according to the designers of the buildings, multiple civic engineers and fire specialists, the impact and the fire would not have brought the buildings down. In fact, the NIST's own scale model of the building would not fail when tested under every circumstance, even there most extreme scenarios. This is why they went to a computer simulation in order to get their data. This simulation only work when they changed a number of assumptions...information on those assumptions is not available in their report. Also, this computer simulation is unavailable for any public review. How can anyone verify their findings without that information?

But they are not smart enough to make them fall in a "realistic" (according to our physics whizzes) way when they "know" its going to be seen on TV and replayed into history. If you are going to set up something like this then why not have them fall like trees into other buildings? Now that would have been a Bruckheimer moment. But at the same time we cant scan cell phone conversations from inside the NSA without someone leaking, Karl Rove gets leaked and so on....Its just way too "out there" sorry show all the equations you want Im not buying it.

When the WTC complex was destroyed, the dust from the pulverized concrete had a ph of 12. This is equivelent to liquid drano. The EPA issued a warning that stated that this was a huge public health threat and that people should be removed from the areas affected ASAP. The White House covered this warning up and issued a statement that stated that everything was fine and that people should return to bussiness as usual.

Why did they do that? One of the reasons is because of the location of the financial district. It is not very far at all from the WTC complex. Shutting down the financial district for any amount of time, effectively cuts the head off of the american economy. Hundreds of billions of dollars exchange hands in a single day down there. If WTC 1 and 2 would have collapsed asymetrically, the financial district would not only have been shut down longer, it could have been destroyed also.

This theory about how the WTC was destroyed could be totally incorrect, but it is demonstratable that opening the Financial District at all costs was part of the White House's agenda. Right now, there are emergency workers who are dying because of the decision by the White House to cover up the EPA's findings. There are even more who are suffering from exposure to this dust. Imagine what would happen to your lungs if you breathed in a powdered form of liquid drano for any amount of time?

 

[Makalakumu]

'Cadre'?! Oh, I get it....anyone who disagrees with your conclusions is either A) Ignorant or B) Part of the conspiracy. That's stable.

I don't think there is a simple answer to this question. It certainly isn't black or white, A or B as you suggest. Human's are complex creatures and are driven to do the things that we do for many reasons. I think part of the answer comes down to overlapping paradigms. Some people trust the government and some do not. Some people have a large nationalistic streak and some do not. Some people were really afraid after the terrorists struck and some were not.

I'm going to perform a little experiment that may enlighten part of this question. I sent a copy of Dr. Jone's paper to two of my old physics professors. One of them was an unabashed liberal and the other a stout conservative. We'll see what happens...

 

[qizmoduis]

Personally, I'll take the word of experienced structural engineers. Physics professors are usually pretty smart, but their expertise is elsewhere.

Although I'd love to believe that Bush and his cronies had something to do with this, it just doesn't add up. Because of the way the towers were constructed, and the amount of burning jet fuel splashed around, the structural integrity of the towers was compromised, bringing them down.

The razor applies. It really was an act of terrorism that coincidentally played right into the hands of the mad, power-hungry neoconservative cabal we're currently suffering under.

The good folks at badastronomy have been discussing this for a while:

http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=35175

 

[Blotan Hunka]

Molten Steel Myth.

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

 

[kid]

Yep, those hijackers were just government agents, who did it for money and personal gain. Funny thing is, they were smart enough to pull this off, but too stupid to realize that they can't spend money when they're dead.....:rofl:

So explain to me the motive of 'suicide bombing for profit'.

For a number of reasons. Money for his family, so they have a chane in whatever hellhole he's from;family was threatened when cornered people can do some crazy things; or possibly a higher up in their organization got together with another from the U.S and colaborated this scheme together to further line their own pockets and friends pockets and decided to say its for religous reasons.

Anyways what was saying before people are capable of doing these deeds. To me it these scholars make more sense than the 911 commisions.

 

[Makalakumu]

Molten Steel Myth.

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

There are pictures of the hot spots and steel being removed from the rubble pile that are giving off a visible radiation consistent with the temps for molten steel. There are also pictures of the slag removed from the site that is also obviously once molten steel. This is unequivical proof of its existence and it meets a standard of proof above mere eyewitness testimony.

Look at the bottom of this hot item. The color of the radiation emitted from this item is indicative of its temperature. One can see the metal dripping from its ends. There is no way that this can be any other metal then steel because the temperature is just too hot.

 

[Makalakumu]

Personally, I'll take the word of experienced structural engineers. Physics professors are usually pretty smart, but their expertise is elsewhere.

Although I'd love to believe that Bush and his cronies had something to do with this, it just doesn't add up. Because of the way the towers were constructed, and the amount of burning jet fuel splashed around, the structural integrity of the towers was compromised, bringing them down.

The razor applies. It really was an act of terrorism that coincidentally played right into the hands of the mad, power-hungry neoconservative cabal we're currently suffering under.

The good folks at badastronomy have been discussing this for a while:

http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=35175

I've been following that thread. Alot of the same points have come up...although it did get nasty. I would like to point out that there are structural engineers and civil engineers that have sided with the findings of this group.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

There are pictures of the hot spots and steel being removed from the rubble pile that are giving off a visible radiation consistent with the temps for molten steel. There are also pictures of the slag removed from the site that is also obviously once molten steel. This is unequivical proof of its existence and it meets a standard of proof above mere eyewitness testimony.

Look at the bottom of this hot item. The color of the radiation emitted from this item is indicative of its temperature. One can see the metal dripping from its ends. There is no way that this can be any other metal then steel because the temperature is just too hot.

So what melted it? Explosives dont "melt metal" it cuts it as anybody in the military who went through demo school would know. If you are saying thermite did it then you havent been reading any of the links posted here. You obvoiusly didnt read the link that photo came from as even that refutes the "molten metal" myth. How do you know thats steel?

First, there’s no proof here other than the caption of when and where this was taken.

Second, whatever’s glowing red here clearly isn’t isn’t “molten” in the sense of “melted”.There may possibly be something dripping off one end, but we don’t know what that is.

Third, there’s no way to tell exactly what is glowing here. We can see that the excavator has picked up a considerable amount of nearby material that must have been very close to the same heat source, though, but isn’t glowing at all. And it looks like mangled metal, too. Perhaps this is the steel, and the glowing object is some other material that’s more susceptible to heat?

And fourth, the smoke suggests this was taken in an area that still had underground fires. This means there’s another heat source, and if someone’s picking at the embers then it’s not inconceivable that they might pull out something glowing red.

None of this proves anything, of course, but it is interesting. Especially because, if this is an accurate photo of what someone was describing as “molten steel” then it’s clearly different from the entirely “liquid steel” that some people imagine.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

I've been following that thread. Alot of the same points have come up...although it did get nasty. I would like to point out that there are structural engineers and civil engineers that have sided with the findings of this group.

"some"..the vast majority think its goofy conspiricy crap. Which seems to be the same here based on all the good reputation messages I have been getting.

 

[Makalakumu]

So what melted it? Explosives dont "melt metal" it cuts it as anybody in the military who went through demo school would know. If you are saying thermite did it then you havent been reading any of the links posted here. You obvoiusly didnt read the link that photo came from as even that refutes the "molten metal" myth. How do you know thats steel?

One of the things that has surprised me on this thread is the lack of basic physics knowledged by the majority of posters. The NIST report, simply cannot be right because it violates the laws of physics, as I have shown. The buildings could not have "pancaked" at near free fall speed and the buildings would not have fallen into the paths of most resistence according to the laws of thermodynamics.

The molten metal in that picture is emitting light like a black body and using Wein's Law, one can determine the temperature by analyzing the color of the metal. The person who wrote that website is obviously wrong, because the temperature of that metal is extremely hot. Way too hot to have been caused by jet fuel. Hot enough to melt it. There is no doubt from looking at that picture and looking at the pictures of the slag that came from the WTC complex that molten steel was present.

Your question of how did it melt is warrented. Nothing in the official story explains the presence of molten steel. In fact, its presence seems to present a difficulty for the official version because there is nothing in that explanation that could have gotten that hot in order to melt steel.

As far as Thermite goes, I have personally seen that reaction in the lab. I know how it works. When you use sulfur as an accellerant, this reaction quickly gets hot enough to melt steel. This is not an explosive reaction.

Here is professional analysis of the steel beams by one of the few peer reviewed papers out there.

"An Initial Microstructural Analysis of A36 Steel from WTC Building 7."

While the exact location of this beam could not be determined, the unexpected erosion of the steel found in this beam warranted a study of microstructural changes that occurred in this steel. Examination of other sections in this beam is underway.

ANALYSIS - Rapid deterioration of the steel was a result of heating with oxidation in combination with intergranular melting due to the presence of sulfur. The formation of the eutectic mixture of iron oxide and iron sulfide lowers the temperature at which liquid can form in this steel. This strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached ~1000°C by a process similar to making a “blacksmith’s weld” in a hand forge. (Barnett, 2001)

This observation is consistent with what one would see from a thermite reaction. At the very least, we need to get more WTC steel and repeat these tests. This may prove difficult because the US government immediately put the steel on ships to China to be recycled. This was done despite the objections given by fire scientists.

 

[Makalakumu]

More on Thermite

http://www.dodtechmatch.com/DOD/Patent/PatentDetail.aspx?type=description&id=6766744&HL=ON

Thermite, one of the most common pyrotechnic incendiary agents, is essentially a mixture of powdered ferric oxide and powdered or granular aluminum. When raised to its ignition temperature, an intense reaction occurs whereby the oxygen in the ferric oxide is transferred to the aluminum, producing molten iron, aluminum oxide, and releasing approximately 750 kilocalories per gram. The reaction proceeds as follows:

8Al+3Fe.sub.3 O.sub.4.fwdarw.4Al.sub.2 O.sub.3 +9Fe

This exothermic reaction may produce a temperature of about 4500.degree. F. under favorable conditions. The white-hot molten iron and slag can itself prolong and extend the heating and incendiary action.

Other types of thermites containing the oxides of other metals in place of iron oxide are known: manganese thermite (4Al+3MnO.sub.2), chromium thermite (2Al+Cr.sub.2 O.sub.3), and others. Iron thermite (8Al+3Fe.sub.3 O.sub.4) has proved to be the most effective in incendiary composition for destruction of steel targets because superheated liquid products are formed by the reaction. These molten products affect a high rate of conductive heat transfer to the steel target and, therefore, cause destruction of the target.

 

[Makalakumu]

More testimony by experts...

Engineers have been trying to figure out exactly what happened and whether they should be worried about other buildings like it around the country… Most of the other buildings in the [area] stood despite suffering damage of all kinds, including fire... ‘Fire and the structural damage …would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated’, Dr. [Jonathan] Barnett said. (Glanz, 2001; emphasis added.)

Molten steel is one thing. Evaporated steel is quite another. Jet fuel cannot melt steel and it cannot evaporate steel. What can evaporate steel? How did the steel evaporate in the WTC complex?

 

[Makalakumu]

I agree with this urgent yet reasoned assessment of expert fire-protection engineers, as boldly editorialized in the journal Fire Engineering:

Respected members of the fire protection engineering community are beginning to raise red flags, and a resonating [result] has emerged: The structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers.

Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the "official investigation" blessed by FEMA… is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure. Except for the marginal benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by ASCE investigation committee members- described by one close source as a "tourist trip"-no one's checking the evidence for anything.

Some citizens are taking to the streets to protest the investigation sellout. Sally Regenhard, for one, wants to know why and how the building fell as it did upon her unfortunate son Christian, an FDNY probationary firefighter.

And so do we.

Clearly, there are burning questions that need answers. Based on the incident's magnitude alone, a full-throttle, fully resourced, forensic investigation is imperative. More important, from a moral standpoint, [are considerations] for the… present and future generations… (Manning, 2002; emphasis added).

The editorial also rightfully objects to the rapid destruction of the structural steel which would provide crucial evidence from the crime scene:

For more than three months, structural steel from the World Trade Center has been and continues to be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that could answer many questions about high-rise building design practices and performance under fire conditions is on the slow boat to China, perhaps never to be seen again in America until you buy your next car.

Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history. I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall. (Manning, 2002; emphasis added).

 

[Makalakumu]

The occurrence of nearly symmetrical, straight-down and complete collapses of the WTC 7 and the Towers is particularly upsetting to the “official” theory that random fires plus damage caused all these collapses. Even with high-level cutting charges, achieving such results requires a great deal of pre-planning and expertise.

The main challenge in bringing a building down is controlling which way it falls. Ideally, a blasting crew will be able to tumble the building over on one side, into a parking lot or other open area. This sort of blast is the easiest to execute [favored by the Law of Increasing Entropy]. Tipping a building over is something like felling a tree. To topple the building to the north, the blasters detonate explosives on the north side of the building first…

Sometimes, though, a building is surrounded by structures that must be preserved. In this case, the blasters proceed with a true implosion, demolishing the building so that it collapses straight down into its own footprint (the total area at the base of the building). This feat requires such skill that only a handful of demolition companies in the world will attempt it.
Blasters approach each project a little differently... [A good] option is to detonate the columns at the center of the building before the other columns so that the building's sides fall inward.... Generally speaking, blasters will explode the major support columns on the lower floors first and then a few upper stories… [nb: The upper floors then fall as a tamper, resulting in “progressive collapse”-- this is common in controlled demolition.] (Harris, 2000; emphasis added.)

 

[Makalakumu]

An article in the journal New Civil Engineering (NCE) lends support to concerns about the NIST analysis of the WTC collapses. It states:

World Trade Center disaster investigators [at NIST] are refusing to show computer visualizations of the collapse of the Twin Towers despite calls from leading structural and fire engineers, NCE has learned. Visualisations of collapse mechanisms are routinely used to validate the type of finite element analysis model used by the [NIST] investigators. The collapse mechanism and the role played by the hat truss at the top of the tower has been the focus of debate since the US National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) published its findings….

University of Manchester [U.K.] professor of structural engineering Colin Bailey said there was a lot to be gained from visualising the structural response. “NIST should really show the visualisations; otherwise the opportunity to correlate them back to the video evidence and identify any errors in the modeling will be lost,” he said….

A leading US structural engineer said NIST had obviously devoted enormous resources to the development of the impact and fire models. “By comparison the global structural model is not as sophisticated,” he said. “The software used [by NIST] has been pushed to new limits, and there have been a lot of simplifications, extrapolations and judgment calls.” (Parker, 2005; emphasis added.)