How Will You Remember Nine-Eleven?

[skonopa]

You/we have been lied to about many things.

So you are just going to keep perpetuating more lies? What next? You are going to try to tell us the moon landings are a hoax? The symbols on the back of a dollar bill is some indication of a new world order coming? That somebody blew up the dikes during hurricane Katrina?

I think I am going to apply Occam's Razor here and go with the official reports and not what some tin-foil wearing crack-pot is saying on some website of dubious authenticity.

[BigStewMan]

You/we have been lied to about many things.

So you are just going to keep perpetuating more lies? What next? You are going to try to tell us the moon landings are a hoax? The symbols on the back of a dollar bill is some indication of a new world order coming? That somebody blew up the dikes during hurricane Katrina?

I think I am going to apply Occam's Razor here and go with the official reports and not what some tin-foil wearing crack-pot is saying on some website of dubious authenticity.

Well Said my friend. I agree.

[dtel]

I know this does not change anything, but it was in the news today.

http://news.yahoo.com/twin-tower-collapse-model-could-squash-9-11-201204097.html?cache=clear

Many 9/11 conspiracy theories revolve around explosions that were seen and heard in the World Trade Center's Twin Towers prior to their collapse. Despite scientific investigations that have explained the processes that brought down the skyscrapers, some conspiracy theorists suggest the plane impacts were just red herrings, to distract from the fact that 9/11 was an "inside job" — that explosives had been implanted earlier in the World Trade Center buildings and were what really brought them down.

Now a materials scientist has come up with a more scientific explanation for the mystery booms, and says his model of the Twin Towers collapse leaves no room for conspiracies. "My model explains all the observed features on 11th September: the explosions, molten metal coming out of the window, the time passing between the crash and the collapse, the fact that the explosions took place in a floor below the place it was burning, and the rapid collapse," Christen Simensen of SINTEF, a research organization in Norway, told Life's Little Mysteries.

As detailed in the new issue of Aluminum International Today, Simensen argues that molten aluminum from the airplane bodies chemically reacted with water in the buildings' sprinkler systems, setting off the explosions that felled the Twin Towers. [Did Nostradamus Really Predict the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks?]

Chain of events

When each jet cut its way into a building, it took with it parts of walls and ceilings, Simensen said. Steel bars in those walls would have gashed its fuel tanks, which would have caught fire. With the plane positioned somewhere in the middle of the building, blanketed in debris and with no route for heat to escape, the temperature would have rapidly escalated, reaching 660 degrees Celsius (1,220 degrees Fahrenheit), the melting point of aluminum — of which there was 30 tons in each plane fuselage — within an hour. The molten aluminum would then have heated up further to between 800 and 850 C (1,470 and 1,560 F).

"Then molten aluminum becomes [as liquid as] water and has so much heat that it will flow through cracks in the floor and down to the next floor," Simensen explained in an email. There was an automatic sprinkler system installed in each ceiling, and it was filled with water. "When huge amount of molten aluminum gets in contact with water, a fierce exothermic reaction will take place, enormous amount of hydrogen is formed and the temperature is locally raised to 1,200 to 1,500 C," or 2,200 to 2,700 F.

Chaos rapidly ensues: "A series of explosions will take place and a whole floor will be blown to pieces," he wrote. "Then the top part of the building will fall on the bottom part, and the tower will collapse within seconds." This is what Simensen believes happened in the two World Trade Center towers.

This isn't obscure chemistry, Simensen says; the U.S. Aluminum Association has recorded 250 accidental molten aluminum/water explosions worldwide since 1980. "Alcoa in Pittsburgh [the worldwide leader in aluminum production] has done a series of such explosions in special laboratory in order to understand what can prevent such explosions and what are the most dangerous situations," he wrote. "For instance they let 30 kilograms [66 pounds] of aluminum react with 20 liters [5.3 gallons] of water, which resulted in a large hole 30 meters [98 feet] in diameter, and nothing left of the laboratory."

The third tower

A third building, World Trade Center 7, fell eight hours after the others. Scientists explained that this happened because of fires that ignited in the building upon the collapse of WTC 1, but some conspiracy theorists take it as further proof that the impacts of the hijacked airplanes weren't what brought any of the buildings down.

Simensen says his theory does not challenge the accepted scientific explanation of the collapse of WTC7.

"The official governmental report said the collapse [of World Trade Center 1 and 2] was due to overheating steel bars in the buildings and did not mention anything about explosions. Their theory … can be used to explain why WTC7 … collapsed. This collapse took place after eight hours of fire and was much slower than the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2," Simensen wrote. [10 Ways 9/11 Impacted Science]

Fiery reaction

Simensen's new collapse model has not gained immediate acceptance by proponents of earlier models.

"Occam's Razor says that the simplest explanation is usually the best," said Thomas Eagar, a materials scientist at MIT who has also studied the fall of the towers. "I do not see any merit to this new, more-complex explanation. Any firefighter trying to extinguish a fire without having the water or the electricity shut off will tell you that there will be periodic explosions from inside the building. I don't need to invoke some water/molten aluminum theory to explain this."

Eagar also objects to the notion that the aluminum, if it did melt, would definitely have reacted with the water it encountered. Most of the time when water is sprayed on molten aluminum, "there is no explosion because the water turns to steam and excludes the oxygen, preventing the growth of the combustion," he said.

Along similar lines, Zdenek Bazant, a professor of mechanical engineering at Northwestern University who was first to model how fires could have caused steel columns in the towers to buckle (leading to the buildings' collapses), thinks that the official explanation suffices. "I've explained it in six papers in leading journals," Bazant said. In his opinion, all factors related to the collapse have been accounted for.

But not everyone in the industry agrees with the simpler, official explanation. Roughly 1,600 architects and structural engineers across the country, who have banded together in a group called "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth," say it does not fully account for the buildings' collapses. With so many people looking for answers, Simensen's alternative theory is likely to receive further attention and study.

[djk]

You people aren't interested in the truth.

It's out there, if you care to find it.

Again, building 7 is the key.

[Invidiosulus]

They lied about the WMD's and the Anthrax attacks, why should we think they are perfectly transparent about the WTC.

[flannj]

[Jay481985]

"Actually the first plane hit dead center and survived longer than the second tower which was hit on the corner which fell first but was hit second. "

The floors are (were) suspended on a central column structure, not the outer walls or the corners.

Do you know more about this than the certified achitects and engineers that are calling for a new probe into the truth?

The key is to look at building 7 which collapsed even though it was not hit by a plane and had only a few minor fires.

There is a huge lie in play here.

The Twin Towers were not a conventional strcture. The outerwall was the super structure that supported the building. The floor was linked between outerwall to inner structure.

[Jay481985]

At least Buzz has the balls to put naysayers in their place

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU

[Jay481985]

Jay, get off of Youtube, and go order yourself a copy of the "WTC Building Performance Study", any edition; then read it. In particular, what happens to super heated columns carrying a heavy load. Then brush-up on your Euler buckling load theory (though, not required reading to understand the simple problem) and review the effects of mass and impact. It's not rocket science, and I'm reasonably sure Osama Ben Ladden thought the same.

If afterwards, if you still want to discuss this subject futher, I'll be more than happy to address your genuine concerns. The book is free, and you can get a copy through FEMA.

First it was wikipedia, now it is youtube (I actually never use youtube except when absolutely necesary)

Second the articles I mentioned and referred to used the building studies you mentioned. I only posted the youtube link because it was the quickest way to reference them. I watched the whole documentary plus the second one they broadcasted. They outlined exactly what you stated with super heated colums and girders. Clearly you dismissed the video because "it was on youtube" even though it was created by PBS.

Lastly it was on tape that Osama Bin Laden mentions that he too was surprised the towers fell.

[LarryC]

... The key is to look at building 7 which collapsed even though it was not hit by a plane and had only a few minor fires.

There is a huge lie in play here.

The Twin Towers were not a conventional strcture. The outerwall was the super structure that supported the building. The floor was linked between outerwall to inner structure.

The conspiracy claim about building 7 also seems to be mistaken. The Wikipedia discussion makes plenty of sense to me:

The debris also ignited fires, which continued to burn

throughout the afternoon

on lower floors of the building. The building's

internal fire suppression system lacked water pressure to fight the fires

, and the building collapsed completely at 5:21:10 pm. The collapse began when a critical column on the 13th floor buckled and triggered structural failure throughout, which was first visible from the exterior with the crumbling of the east mechanical penthouse at 5:20:33 pm.

The insulation sprayed on the steel girders had only a 3-hour or so rating. The prolonged, non-stop fires, with no ability to fight them because of the lack of an internal water supply, seems like plenty of explanation to me.

Again, controlled demolition requires weeks and weeks of preparation, massive arrays of computers and wires, extensively calculated drilling and implantation of explosives, ending with computer-controlled detonation sequences. How anyone can imagine that someone could arrange all that in exact coordination with Saudi terrorists hijacking planes, is just breathtakingly ridiculous IMO.

What could the "lies" possibly be?

[BigStewMan]

You people aren't interested in the truth.

It's out there, if you care to find it.

Again, building 7 is the key.

Didn't realize I was in such distinguished company. Of all the people in the world YOU'RE the one that figured everything out. And you only had to use the internet--very impressive. You should run for King of the World with that skill set.

[RRFL]

The floors are (were) suspended on a central column structure, not the outer walls or the corners.

I'm anything but a structural engineer, but my understanding is the floors were suspended by multiple 18m steel girders between the central column and the steel box column outer walls:

This summary made sense to me (FWIW), saying the prolonged heat and distortion of the girders led to failure of enough angle clips to lead to the domino-like collapse as angle clips on the floors below could not stand the weight of the floors piling on from above.

The upper floors hit the ground in 10 seconds at 200 km/hr.

I saw a TV documentary on this and the truss joists as shown above together with other structural areas were coated in a fire retardant coating. The explosion from the plane impact dislodged the coatings and exposed the steel to heat, the heat was also intensified by the jet fuel and eventually heating the steel reduced it's strength. The additional debris weight on the damage floors together with the heat deformation eventually lead to the clips failing and as the floors dropped onto the floor below the clips failed from overloading and the cascade failure was the result.

[djk]

At 21:54 GMT on 9/11/2001 the BBC announced that WTC 7 had collapsed.

There was just one problem with this news:

WTC 7 did not collapse until 22:20 GMT.

[dtel]

One thing to remember, when/if they want to pull off something off like what you saying, and more than just a couple of people know it never stays hidden for long at all with news companies paying big money for stories like that with proof. And to get to that point alot of people would have to be in on it and not everyone would keep there mouth's shut.

Just another oponion..........not that I trust the government at all, but even if they wanted to create a reason to move on a plan it wouldn't need to be on that scale, they do what they want anyway.

IMO

[djk]

"even if they wanted to create a reason to move on a plan it wouldn't need to be on that scale, they do what they want anyway. "

Which they did in the first WTC bombing in 1993.

The only problem with that was the guy they were trying to set up as the fall guy made tape recordings of all of his dealings with the various US agencies, and the recordings were entered as evidence in his trial.

We have the best government money can buy!

[skonopa]

"even if they wanted to create a reason to move on a plan it wouldn't need to be on that scale, they do what they want anyway. "

Which they did in the first WTC bombing in 1993.

The only problem with that was the guy they were trying to set up as the fall guy made tape recordings of all of his dealings with the various US agencies, and the recordings were entered as evidence in his trial.

We have the best government money can buy!

You want to start that with "Once upon a time"? and end it with "And happily ever after?". Because all that is is one big f'ing fairytale!

Really, if you want to keep playing make-believe, be my guest, but I sure the hell am not playing along. Maybe it is time to put those X-File DVDs away for once! But, I guess if you have to see a conspiracy in everything.....

Somehow, I cannot help but thinking of this album when reading this tripe...

Dionysus - Fairytales and Reality

[sputnik]

Seems like discussions involving airplanes lead to long debates here. Just like in the plane taking off from the conveyor belt thread, some people will never get passed preconceptions or personal bias.

In this case though, I think Gilbert is right. []

[djk]

"Really, if you want to keep playing make-believe"

The facts surrounding the WTC 1993 bombing are quite clear.

There has always been a problem with false-flag attacks on people by their rulers since the dawn of time.

"Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. "

[skonopa]

"Really, if you want to keep playing make-believe"

The facts surrounding the WTC 1993 bombing are quite clear.

What "facts" are we talking about here? Provide me links from some CREDIBLE source with these "facts"; Not just from some crack-pot conspiracy theory website!

I've yet to see a SINGLE PIECE OF CREDIBLE EVIDENCE from a CREDIBLE SOURCE to support any of this non-sense you keep spouting off on here.

Until I can see actual, real, CREDIBLE evidence coming from a CREDIBLE source supporting this, I am just going to continue to see it as make-believe.

EDIT! Actually, after doing some research on my own (while waiting for a huge build to finish up here at work) - I found this article in the New York Times. However, it was an effort to THWART the bombing, which for some reason the FBI changed thier plans, not an effort to setup the guy as a fallguy as you and your conpiracy theory seems to purport. The informant thought this was going to be a sting operation and had the FBI stuck with thier original plans, it may have worked in thwarting the attack. Hardly a conspiracy theory here, although one can argue why FBI decided to change thier plans - but now this is just getting into Monday Morning Quarterbacking. Hey, nobody says our government or law enforcement is perfect, but hardly the evil conspirators that you tin-foil crackpot types seem to constantly make out.

[Johnlw7]

I will remember also what we should have done.Dropped all the debris from the WTC on top of these cowards then a couple of A Bombs for good measure.