WTC-7 Mysteries FINALLY Solved.

a reply to: Informer1958

No one has all the facts about 911 and we probably will never get them since most of the evident was destroyed and rushed away so no one could inspect the debris fields at the WTC.

Let's take a look here.

Photo 1: WTC Steel

Photo 2: WTC Steel

Photo 3: WTC Steel

Photo 4: WTC Steel

Photo 5: WTC Steel

Photo 6: WTC Steel

WTC Steel Data Collection

WTC steel data collection efforts were undertaken by the Building Performance Study (BPS) Team and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEAoNY) to identify significant steel pieces from WTC 1, 2, 5, and 7 for further study.

The methods used to identify and document steel pieces are presented, as well as a spreadsheet that documents the data for steel pieces inspected at various sites from October 2001 through March 2002.

As of March 15, 2002, a total of 131 engineer visits had been made to these yards on 57 separate days. An engineer visit typically ranged from a few hours to an entire day at a salvage yard. The duration of the visits, number of visits per yard, and the dates the yards were visited varied, depending on the volume of steel being processed, the potential significance of the steel pieces being found, salvage yard activities, weather, and other factors. Sixty-two engineer trips were made to Jersey City, 38 to Keasbey, 15 to Fresh Kills, and 16 to Newark. Three trips made in October included several ASCE engineers. Eleven engineer trips were made in November, 41 in December, 43 in January, 28 in February, and 5 through March 15, 2002.

D.3 Methods

Engineers identified steel members that would be considered for evaluation or tests relative to the fire and structural response of the WTC buildings. Pieces that were measured and determined to be significant were marked to be saved, and arrangements were made to have them moved to a safe location where they would not be processed (cut up and shipped). Some pieces were not saved, but samples, called coupons, were cut from them and saved for future studies.

D.3.1 Identifying and Saving Pieces

As shown in Figure D-4, the engineers searched through unsorted piles of steel for pieces from WTC 1 and WTC 2 impact areas and from WTC 5 and WTC 7. They also checked for pieces of steel exposed to fire. Specifically, the engineers looked for the following types of steel members:

* Exterior column trees and interior core columns from WTC 1 and WTC 2 that were exposed to fire and/or impacted by the aircraft.

* Exterior column trees and interior core columns from WTC 1 and WTC 2 that were above the impact zone. Badly burnt pieces from WTC 7.

* Connections from WTC 1, 2, and 7, such as seat connections, single shear plates, and column splices.

* Bolts from WTC 1, 2, and 7 that were exposed to fire, fractured, and/or that appeared undamaged.

* Floor trusses, including stiffeners, seats, and other components.

Any piece that, in the engineer's professional opinion, might be useful for evaluation. When there was any doubt about a particular piece, the piece was kept while more information was gathered. A conservative approach was taken to avoid having important pieces processed in salvage yard operations.

The engineers were able to identify many pieces by their markings. Each piece of steel was originally stenciled in white or yellow with information telling where it came from and where it was going. A sample of the markings can be seen in Figure D-5.

WTC Steel Data Collection

edit on 29-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

I guess you don't understand what your looking at...

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

a reply to: TrueAmerican So....the detonations were times to coincide with the impacts.....and yet not cause the buildings to collapse for a period of time? You really expect someone to believe that....wait, strike that.....people who believe in the demolition theory will believe anything. Or the detonations were timed to coincide with the collapses.....so, someone was watching the buildings and they were able to react in the nanoseconds necessary to trigger the explosions and mask them??? I think the hush a boom explosives were more believable.

When I asked for evidence of demo explosives, look what was presented to me on multiple occasions as proof that demo explosives took out WTC7.

a reply to: wildb No, I understand perfectly what I was watching... Another pathetic attempt at saying it was not a Boeing 757 that hit the Pentagon.

a reply to: skyeagle409

I asked you one question and you ran away from it so fast. My question was:

Go ahead and prove the real science www.ae911truth.org... is wrong? You cant.

As Trueamerican said:

READ The content on www.journalof911studies.com...

Skyeagale your "opinions" are not the facts in this matter. You are not a professional seismologist and you don't know what you are talking about.

It is now obvious that you are the one that has been hoodwink from OS disinformation and you are scared to death to READ credible material from websites that are not affiliated with government. org or 911 Myths websites.

Knock yourself out spamming all the 911 threads with the OS fallacies . You have no credibility what soever.

Now, let's take a look how truthers were duped by disinformation.

ERROR: 'Seismic Spikes Preceded the Towers' Collapses'

The leveling of the Twin Towers generated seismic disturbances that were recorded by a half-dozen seismic recording stations within a 20-mile radius of Manhattan.

Numerous websites have repeated an erroneous interpretation of the seismic recordings as evidence that bombs in the basements of the Towers severed the core columns at the onsets of the collapses.

One source of this error is an article by American Free Press reporter Christopher Bollyn, reprinted in Serendipity.li.

Where is your source???? Or is this another 911 myths disinformation propaganda to ridicule anyone asking question about 911.

I agree with Trueamerican that:

The OS to be exactly what so many of us have suspected: A case of perpetual diarrhea. One BIG FAT LIE.

a reply to: Informer1958

Go ahead and prove the real science www.ae911truth.org... is wrong? You cant.

Then why don't they publish a peer reviewed paper on their 'science' ?
They are the ones saying the official account is wrong.
It's up to them to prove to the experts at large that the OS is wrong.

But after 9 years all Gage does is give seminars and book signings on his beliefs.
You do realize that Gage can't afford 'solve' the 911 story.
No company will ever hire him again and his books and DVD's are the only thing that puts food on his table.
Just like to snake oil salesman would ever submit to a double blind study.
Neither will Gage.

a reply to: skyeagle409

All these photos mean absolutely nothing. Your source only gives "opinions" and the fact is no testing was done for demolition explosion residue.

a reply to: samkent

Go ahead and prove the real science www.ae911truth.org... is wrong? You cant.

Then why don't they publish a peer reviewed paper on their 'science' ?
They are the ones saying the official account is wrong.
It's up to them to prove to the experts at large that the OS is wrong.

A&E has proved that the OS of the WTC is a fat lie. A&E are not interested in anything else regarding 911, only the WTC's

You do realize that Gage can't afford 'solve' the 911 story.
No company will ever hire him again and his books and DVD's are the only thing that puts food on his table.
Just like to snake oil salesman would ever submit to a double blind study.
Neither will Gage.

Who cares? There are many snake oil salesmen in the OS selling their disinformation. The 911 OS is a BIG FAT LIE, nothing more than regurgitated monkey vomit.

a reply to: Informer1958

A&E has proved that the OS of the WTC is a fat lie.

They have never once published a paper for peer review regarding 911.
All they do is make DVD's based on Youtube videos.

It's like those 'In Search of" tv shows.
Lots of vids.
Lots of talk.
Zero verifiable proof.
And yet the suckers keep coming back episode after episode.

Hey why don't you ask Gage exactly where the explosives were placed ?
Ask him what type of explosives were used.
Ask him how they were installed.
Watch him clam up.

He has no proof of anything.
If he did he would publish the proof and become the Woodward and Bernstein of the engineering world.
He could write his own ticket afterwards.
But no! It's DVD's and seminars until he can collect SSI.

a reply to: Informer1958

Go ahead and prove the real science www.ae911truth.org... is wrong? You cant.

Simple. We can start here.

Since demo explosions can be heard many miles away, scientifically speaking, that debunks truther claims that demo explosives were used to bring down WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 since the videos were taken at close range from those buildings, which explains why demo explosions were not detected by seismic monitors.

Scientifically speaking, the molten flow from the corner of WTC2 was molten aluminum, which was identified by the silvery droplets as they cooled.

Scientifically speaking, the WTC buildings did not fall at free fall speed judging that debris are seen outpacing the collapse of those buildings.

Scientifically speaking, there was no way the 9/11 aircraft were flown under remote control, which was evident in the altitude profile data

Scientifically speaking, explosives could not have created the structural damage observed inside the Pentagon

Scientifically speaking, if explosives were attached to steel columns of the WTC buildings, which they must in order to facilitate the collapse, and detonated, the explosions would have generated the characteristic signals that would have been detected by seismic monitors, yet no such signals were detected.

Scientifically speaking, if explosives were planted inside the WTC buildings at the points of impact, secondary explosions would have been seen, yet no secondary explosions were observed when the WTC buildings were struck and no secondary explosions were observed as those buildings collapsed.

Scientifically speaking, radar data shows that each of the 9/11 aircraft were tracked to their impact points and no where else, which debunks truther claims the 9/11 aircraft were switched.

Scientifically speaking, B-757 wreckage recovered from inside and outside the Pentagon, proves that American 77 crashed at the Pentagon, which explains why American Airlines announced the loss of American 77 at the Pentagon.

Scientifically speaking, it was not possible for thermite to bring down the WTC buildings. After all, it took 1500 pounds of thermite just to melt two legs of a simple tower in order to bring it down.

Fact of the matter is, science doesn't need to explain many of the events of 9/11, just plain old common sense is all it takes. I am still waiting for you to point out those time lines in the videos I have posted.

a reply to: Informer1958

A&E has proved that the OS of the WTC is a fat lie. A&E are not interested in anything else regarding 911, only the WTC's

A&E has proven that it is in the habit of spewing disinformation. Do I need to post the facts on A&E?

a reply to: Informer1958

All these photos mean absolutely nothing. Your source only gives "opinions" and the fact is no testing was done for demolition explosion residue.

Why would they be testing for such residue when no one heard demo explosions as the \WTC buildings collapsed? Why would they be testing for explosive residue when seismic monitors failed to detect demo explosions?

Now let's go here.

Why did NIST not Consider a “Controlled Demolition

Why did NIST not consider a “controlled demolition” hypothesis with matching computer modeling and explanation as it did for the “pancake theory” hypothesis? A key critique of NIST’s work lies in the complete lack of analysis supporting a “progressive collapse” after the point of collapse initiation and the lack of consideration given to a controlled demolition hypothesis.

NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST’s dedicated Web site, wtc.nist.gov.... This included consideration of a number of hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because:

(1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors;

(2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.

www.webcitation.org...

a reply to: Informer1958

Where is your source???? Or is this another 911 myths disinformation propaganda to ridicule anyone asking question about 911.

Since I have posted references that had nothing to do with 9//Myth, proves that you have not been paying attention.

Let's try it again.

9/11 Seismic Recordings

Brent Blanchard devotes section 4 of his paper to the issue of seismic recordings on 9/11. Blanchard is Senior Editor of ImplosionWorld, a website which posts details of explosive demolitions, and also Director of Field Operations at Protec Documentation Services, Inc. Protec works in the field of vibration monitoring and structure inspection, a key service to both the construction and demolition industries.

Vibration monitoring performed by independent experts has long been considered crucial for companies carrying out explosive demolition, because owners of nearby buildings are keen to sue if any cracks or other structural damage appears.

The field seismographs used by Protec and others provide the key scientific evidence for disturbances that may have caused damage, and there were a number of such seismographs operated by Protec on 9/11 in the vicinity of Ground Zero, for monitoring construction sites. Blanchard tells us that data from these machines, and seismographs operated elsewhere, all confirm single vibration events recording the collapse.

None of them record the tell-tale 'spikes' that would indicate explosive detonations prior to collapse. In his words:

This evidence makes a compelling argument against explosive demolition. The laws of physics dictate that any detonation powerful enough to defeat steel columns would have transferred excess energy through those same columns into the ground, and would certainly have been detected by at least one of the monitors that were sensitive enough to record the structural collapses.

However, a detailed analysis of all available data reveals no presence of any unusual or abnormal vibration events.

www.jnani.org...

a reply to: Informer1958

A&E has proved that the OS of the WTC is a fat lie.

Let's take a look at the real picture.

ARCHITECT Magazine
The Magzine of the American Institute of Architects

All of Gage’s so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers, by the 9/11 Commission Report, and, perhaps most memorably, by the 110-year-old engineering journal Popular Mechanics.

Gage often seems to wield his AIA status in promoting his conspiracy theories. In making his case, he also regularly cites that more than 100 AIA members and at least six AIA Fellows have signed his petition calling for a new investigation. In total, Gage says that more than 1,700 of the petition’s roughly 16,000 signatures are from architects and engineers.

During the screening, Gage was at the very least intimating that his organization had been invited to AIA officially.

“I can’t tell you how grateful we were to have been accepted to be here in the boardroom at the national headquarters,” Gage said. “We hope this is the beginning of a very productive relationship.”

Aside from Gage, though, there was not a single other architect in the room, much less an official from AIA, or even another member. The 80-strong crowd was made up largely of members of the local 9/11 Truth movement and other political activists.

Gage was once warned by AIA not to spread the misimpression that there is a relationship between the two organizations, after he wrote a letter to Congress stating that more than 100 members of AIA who signed his petition were demanding a new investigation into 9/11.

breakfornews.com...

a reply to: samkent

They have never once published a paper for peer review regarding 911.
All they do is make DVD's based on Youtube videos.

Perhaps so, however where is your Peer revived science proving the OS? The fact is all you have is proven propaganda disinformation YouTube videos supporting your side, the OS.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Simple. We can start here.

Since demo explosions can be heard many miles away, scientifically speaking, that debunks truther claims that demo explosives were used to bring down WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 since the videos were taken at close range from those buildings, which explains why demo explosions were not detected by seismic monitors.

Scientifically speaking, the molten flow from the corner of WTC2 was molten aluminum, which was identified by the silvery droplets as they cooled.

Scientifically speaking, the WTC buildings did not fall at free fall speed judging that debris are seen outpacing the collapse of those buildings.

Scientifically speaking, there was no way the 9/11 aircraft were flown under remote control, which was evident in the altitude profile data

Scientifically speaking, explosives could not have created the structural damage observed inside the Pentagon

Scientifically speaking, if explosives were attached to steel columns of the WTC buildings, which they must in order to facilitate the collapse, and detonated, the explosions would have generated the characteristic signals that would have been detected by seismic monitors, yet no such signals were detected.

Scientifically speaking, if explosives were planted inside the WTC buildings at the points of impact, secondary explosions would have been seen, yet no secondary explosions were observed when the WTC buildings were struck and no secondary explosions were observed as those buildings collapsed.

Scientifically speaking, radar data shows that each of the 9/11 aircraft were tracked to their impact points and no where else, which debunks truther claims the 9/11 aircraft were switched.

Scientifically speaking, B-757 wreckage recovered from inside and outside the Pentagon, proves that American 77 crashed at the Pentagon, which explains why American Airlines announced the loss of American 77 at the Pentagon.

Scientifically speaking, it was not possible for thermite to bring down the WTC buildings. After all, it took 1500 pounds of thermite just to melt two legs of a simple tower in order to bring it down.

Fact of the matter is, science doesn't need to explain many of the events of 9/11, just plain old common sense is all it takes. I am still waiting for you to point out those time lines in the videos I have posted.

Thank you for your "opinion".

Now prove all the science is wrong from A&E?

a reply to: skyeagle409

Why would they be testing for such residue when no one heard demo explosions as the WTC buildings collapsed? Why would they be testing for explosive residue when seismic monitors failed to detect demo explosions?

Now let's go here.

Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall.

Your comment is a fallacy. There were over five hundred eyewitness that went on record all stating the saw, heard and some were in some of the explosions.

When are you going to stop posting fallacies.

Question: Are all five hundred eyewitness lairs? If so I want to see your evidence? I will stay on this question until you answer it.

a reply to: Informer1958

Thank you for your "opinion".

it is not a matter of an opinion, but a matter of fact, considering that I have heard explosions more than 25 miles away.

Now prove all the science is wrong from A&E?

Simple.

Some common types of steel lose 10% of their strength at 450 C (840 F), and 40% at 550 C (1022 F). At temperatures above 800 C ( 1475 F), it has lost 90% of its strength. Other types of steel are made to stand higher temperatures before losing 10% of their strength, but they are much more expensive (and are weaker at room temperature).

And there are types which actually get stronger, up to 450 F (but then get a lot weaker at higher temperatures. The temperatures within the WTC buildings were more than high enough to weaken the steel structure of the WTC buildings.

In case you need photo proof that ordinary fires can weaken steel, we can take a look here in case you missed it before.

Photo 1: Proof that ordinary fire can weaken steel

Photo 2: Proof that ordinary fire can weaken steel

a reply to: skyeagle409

Question: Are all five hundred eyewitness lairs? If so I want to see your evidence? I will stay on this question until you answer it.

a reply to: Informer1958

Question: Are all five hundred eyewitness lairs?

Let's just say that they were mistaken. Facts and evidence overrules conflicting eyewitnesses accounts. Case in point.

Craig Carlsen

Craig Carlsen said that he and other firefighters “heard explosions coming from . . . the south tower

...there were about ten explosions. At the time I didn't realize what it was. We realized later after talking and finding out that it was the floors collapsing to where the plane had hit.


Dominick Derubbio

t was weird how it started to come down. It looked like it was a timed explosion, but I guess it was just the floors starting to pancake one on top of the other. So this guys is guessing that the explosions were floors pancaking.


Jay Swithers

An ambulance pulled up which was very clean, S0 I assumed that the vehicle had not been in the what I thought was an explosion at the time, but was the first collapse.


The Elevator Man's Tale

We heard the explosion and within a matter of seconds after that impact, I heard – and as well as everybody else heard – this noise, this increasing sound of wind. And it was getting louder and louder. It was like a bomb, not quite the sound of a bomb coming down from a bomber. It was a sound of wind increasing, a whistling sound, increasing in sound.

What we heard was 6 and 7 car free-falling from the 107th floor and they impacted the basement at B-2 Level. And that’s the explosion that filled the lobby within a matter of two or three seconds, engulfed the lobby in dust, smoke.

As you can see, many people heard explosions, which were later attributed to things that had nothing to do with explosives.