It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
[...]MITRE and Ptech, it's rather hard to see the line between the Israeli influence and the US government. Considering AIPAC[...]
You do not seem to understand that YOU have been debunked.
Fire, Not Extra Explosives, Doomed Buildings, Expert Says
A New Mexico explosives expert says he now believes there were no explosives in the World Trade Center towers, contrary to comments he made the day of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack.
"Certainly the fire is what caused the building to fail," said Van Romero, a vice president at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology.
911research.wtc7.net...
Civil & Structural Engineers on WTC Collapse
"The aircraft moved through the building as if it were a hot and fast lava flow," Sozen says. "Consequently, much of the fireproofing insulation was ripped off the structure. Even if all of the columns and girders had survived the impact - an unlikely event - the structure would fail as the result of a buckling of the columns. The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."
There are 120,000 members of ASME(American Society of Mechanical Engineers) who do not question the NIST report. There are also 370,000 members of IEEE(Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) who do not question the NIST report. There are also 40,000 members of AIChE(American Institute of Chemical Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report. There are also 35,000 members of AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) who do not question the NIST report.
Towers Weakened by Planes; Brought Down by Fire
Only a handful of architects and engineers question the NIST Report, but they have never come up with an alternative. Although at first blush it may seem impressive that these people don't believe the NIST Report, remember that there are123,000 members of ASCE(American Society of Civil Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report. There are also 80,000 members of AIA(American Institute of Architects) who do not question the NIST Report.
Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief ’s Assessment
The jet collapsed the ceilings and scraped most of the spray-on fire retarding asbestos from the steel trusses. The steel truss floor supports probably started to fail quickly from the flames and thecenter steel supporting columns severed by plane parts heated by the flames began to buckle, sag, warp and fail. Then the top part of the tower crashed down on the lower portion of the structure. This pancake collapse triggered the entire cascading collapse of the 110-story structure.
vincentdunn.com...
Did experts on the scene think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition?
Whom should we ask to find out if WTC 7’s collapse resembled an explosive demolition? How about asking the explosive demolition experts who were on the scene on 9/11? Brent Blanchard of Protec:
"Several demolition teams had reached Ground Zero by 3:00 pm on 9/11, and these individuals witnessed the collapse of WTC 7 from within a few hundred feet of the event. We have spoken with several who possess extensive experience in explosive demolition, and all reported seeing or hearing nothing to indicate an explosive detonation precipitating the collapse.
As one eyewitness told us, "We were all standing around helpless...we knew full well it was going to collapse. Everyone there knew. You gotta remember there was a lot of confusion and we didn't know if another plane was coming...but I never heard explosions like demo charges.
WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory
Indications of the Imminent Collapse of the World Trade Center Buildings Disprove Explosives Theory
The World Trade Center's Steel Structure Was Buckling Before the Collapse
Police, Firemen and Civilians Saw Warning Signs of Collapse of the Twin Towers on September 11th 2001
The Structural Engineering Community Rejects the Controlled-Demolition Conspiracy Theory
The structural engineering community rejects the controlled-demolition conspiracy theory. Its consensus is that the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings was a fire-induced, gravity-driven collapse, an explanation that does not involve the use of explosives.
The American Society of Civil Engineers Structural Engineering Institute issued a statement calling for further discussion of NIST's recommendations, and Britain's Institution of Structural Engineers published a statement in May 2002 welcoming the FEMA report, noting
The structural engineering faculty at the university issued a statement which said that they "do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones". On September 22, 2005, Jones gave a seminar on his hypotheses to a group of his colleagues from the Department of Physics and Astronomy at BYU. According to Jones, all but one of his colleagues agreed after the seminar that an investigation was in order and the lone dissenter came to agreement with Jones' suggestions the next day.
Northwestern University Professor of Civil Engineering Zdeněk Bažant, who was the first to offer a published peer-reviewed theory of the collapses, wrote "a few outsiders claiming a conspiracy with planted explosives" as an exception. Bažant and Verdure trace such "strange ideas" to a "mistaken impression" that safety margins in design would make the collapses impossible. One of the effects of a more detailed modeling of the progressive collapse, they say, could be to "dispel the myth of planted explosives".
Thomas Eagar, a professor of materials science and engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, also dismissed the controlled-demolition conspiracy theory. Eagar remarked, "These people (in the 9/11 truth movement) use the 'reverse scientific method.' They determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit their conclusion, and then hail their findings as the only possible conclusion."
Civil & Structural Engineers on WTC Collapse
"The aircraft moved through the building as if it were a hot and fast lava flow," Sozen says. "Consequently, much of the fireproofing insulation was ripped off the structure. Even if all of the columns and girders had survived the impact - an unlikely event - the structure would fail as the result of a buckling of the columns. The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."
911-engineers.blogspot.com...
originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: Salander
Dov S. Zakheim was born in Brooklyn, wasn't he? He chose Israel as second nationality then?
[...]MITRE and Ptech, it's rather hard to see the line between the Israeli influence and the US government. Considering AIPAC[...]
I could equally state, that the neocon "transatlantic" network controls the west. And I think we would find more data to support that theory.
You yourself prove it, with just about every post you make here. The same tired old claims, repeated hundreds of times, prove that you have no knowledge at all of the many things learned in the 14 years that have transpired.
originally posted by: RoScoLaz4
originally posted by: pteridine
a reply to: FlySolo
This is based on the thermitic materials paper by Jones, et al. The paper was poorly written, technically flawed and inconclusive.
please feel free to write a 'better' one.
originally posted by: pteridine
originally posted by: RoScoLaz4
originally posted by: pteridine
a reply to: FlySolo
This is based on the thermitic materials paper by Jones, et al. The paper was poorly written, technically flawed and inconclusive.
please feel free to write a 'better' one.
Samples of the chips are not available and Jones won't release the ones he has, probably because he suspects that a real analysis would show that they were just paint. Jones' DSC was done in air, which cannot distinguish between combustion of the organics in the paint and a thermite reaction.
Please feel free to defend the data in Jones' paper.
originally posted by: Flatcoat
originally posted by: pteridine
originally posted by: RoScoLaz4
originally posted by: pteridine
a reply to: FlySolo
This is based on the thermitic materials paper by Jones, et al. The paper was poorly written, technically flawed and inconclusive.
please feel free to write a 'better' one.
Samples of the chips are not available and Jones won't release the ones he has, probably because he suspects that a real analysis would show that they were just paint. Jones' DSC was done in air, which cannot distinguish between combustion of the organics in the paint and a thermite reaction.
Please feel free to defend the data in Jones' paper.
Didn't LLNL perform their tests of nano-thermite in air? Which is why Jones tests were performed in air, so they could directly compare the results.
News Conference: No explosives in Van
BERNARD KERIK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER:
I just got a confirmation from the Chief of Detectives, he's reach out to the FBI. They have confirmed that someone has been stopped in New Jersey, three men in a van. However, there was no explosives in the van.
www.911myths.com...