Conclusive Evidence of Explosives, Petition to Re-Open 9/11 Investigation

pteridine Did the truthers not find the original plans for the construction of WTC7 by FIOA?

Column 79 and 44 had 32 shear studs connected to the concrete floor slabs and girders? This meant the building 7 could not have collapsed in the way NIST engineers said it did?

NIST study said there were no shear studs connections at Column 79 and 44? If NIST refuses to release their drawings you have to speculate are they lying to cover up?

originally posted by: Jesushere
pteridine Did the truthers not find the original plans for the construction of WTC7 by FIOA?

Column 79 and 44 had 32 shear studs connected to the concrete floor slabs and girders? This meant the building 7 could not have collapsed in the way NIST engineers said it did?

NIST study said there were no shear studs connections at Column 79 and 44? If NIST refuses to release their drawings you have to speculate are they lying to cover up?

And yet there are other studies than NIST that found fire induced buckling in a building lacking a traditional concrete core with floor structure angles not common in construction buckeled leading to collapse. Studies submitted as depositions and evidence in the court of law.

How is the WTC 7 study titled WTC 7 Evaluation coming along?

I can point to other evidence than NIST. An AE 9/11 Truth bought Evaluation has not proven any other theory as credible. An Evaluation proven to be biased and flawed.

a reply to: Jesushere

Then if it was not the landing gear, what made the hole?

Funny you never actually cited anything? Can you produce actual quotes. Actual sources?

You ever complete the calculations between magnetic north and directional north as asked of you to determine the actual flight path?

The contact damage at the Navey annex antenna, the clipped vegetation, the light poles, the low concrete wall clipped by the engine, damage in the construction yard, the wing damage to the fromt of the pentagon point to the flight path of the flight 77.

I suggest you read this and refute this work?

Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon
Frank Legge, (B.Sc.(Hons.), Ph.D.) and Warren Stutt, ( B.Sc.(Hons.) Comp. Sci.) January 2011

www.journalof911studies.com...

Believe you in that you cite or quote nothing? Or a paper that constructs a argument backed by citable evidence?

How many people attest to the actual flight path of flight 77 backed by physical contact damage vs the NE witnesses?

North approach?

www.scientistsfor911truth.org...

Category 3: The CIT group of witnesses (about 12) is those whose testimony appears to suggest a plane flight path north of the CITGO station. Such a path, if impact were to follow, could not reasonably create the observed damage trail and could not avoid creating damage inside the Pentagon in its direction of travel. Consequently, the proponents of this theory claim the plane flew over the Pentagon. Drawbacks to this theory include: (a) There is thus far only one questionable witness to a plane flying away. (b) The CIT witnesses appear in some instances to have been led by their interviewer (for example, the interview23 of Albert Hemphill by Craig Ranke). (c) Many CIT witnesses also testify to plane impact24. The theory also suffers from the difficulty in assessing the position of the plane by witnesses not immediately underneath, for example those at the cemetery, and the fact that flyover is inferred rather than observed. Legge and Chandler have further pointed out that the proposed deviation from the established approach path would require a strikingly large plane bank angle, which no witness reported.23

Again? Believe you listing random statements with no cited sources, no context, and totally ignoring the physical evidence.

As for the witnesses with the flight path backed by physical evidence.

www.scientistsfor911truth.org...

Category 1: Category 1 witnesses, those who saw the approach and/or impact of a large plane, are in the great majority. Those who claim to have seen actual plane impact range upwards from about 31,20 considered a reliable figure by some researchers, 21 to as high as around 89 to 100. Many of these witnesses have been interviewed more than once. As a group, these witnesses support the main theory of large plane impact. Because this great majority of witnesses are all actual eyewitnesses, as opposed to witnesses who inferred something, either from a perceived, apparent flight path of a plane, or by way of sound or odor, or other less direct means, category 1 witnesses are by far the most compelling group of witnesses. It is imperative, therefore, that the alternative theories (whose witness numbers are far less, and whose witnesses suffer the disadvantage of having to infer a conclusion) address and explain the existence of the category 1 witnesses rather than simply ignoring them, or suggesting without proof that they are part of a wider conspiracy to defraud.

neutronflux NIST described what happened you either believe this or you don't?

At Column 79, heating and expansion of the floor beams in the northeast corner caused the loss of connection between the column and the key girder. Additional factors that contributed to the failure of the critical north-south girder were (1) the absence of shear studs that would have provided lateral restraint and (2) the one-sided framing of the east floor beams that allowed the beams to push laterally on the girders, due to thermal expansion of the beams

With no Shear studs, their theory works for them. With shear studs, the theory is worthless.

a reply to: Jesushere

Gopher 6 took off from Reagan airport minutes before impact. The pilot of military cargo jet was asked to follow the plane and he said I see the plane sprawled out in NE direction.

You mean gofer 6?

www.oredigger61.org...

O’Brien: It’s spelled G O F E R.

Gofer 6 took off from Reagan airport?

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Reagan Airport controllers asked a passing Air National Guard Lockheed C-130 Hercules to identify and follow the aircraft.

www.oredigger61.org...

Kara: OK, And on the ground, and Colonel, we pulled your flight strips from Andrews Tower, and we’ve got two flight strips on you. And the first one is at 1330, 9:30 Eastern Daylight Time, and we believe that was your original takeoff scheduled that was entered into the flight data system. And, then later, we have a second flight strip which is 1333, and we believe that is the flight strip that was executed when you actually got wheels up. And that seems to correspond with your recollection that you were up at about 9:31?

O’Brien: Correct

Can you cite where Gofer 6 said “he said I see the plane sprawled out in NE direction”?

www.oredigger61.org...
Kara: That’s correct. It’s not, no one knows it’s that it’s seventy seven, so when Dulles first gives that point out there, they pick up a primary only coming in, and that’s how it’s announced over the air traffic network.

O’Brien: OK, no, I was not aware of that fast moving aircraft. And like I said earlier, I believe I had first picked the airplane up, and I’m guessing we were ah at 3,000 feet, maybe had just been cleared up to 4000 feet, when I noticed the airplane. He was up a little bit higher than us at that point and then when ATC asked us again if we had the airplane in sight he had continued his descent down, was in a fairly, like I said, steep bank turn to the right at about our 12 o’clock position and at about the same altitude, I would say was about 3500 feet or so.

www.archives.gov...

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD Event: Lt Colonel Steven O'Brien. USAF 133rd Air Lift Wing
~ ~ Type: Interview
od:

I'd be only guessing about what made the hole, no point speculating. The landing gear was found though inside the Pentagon I know that.

The magnetic compass was already calibrated 60 true north 70 magnetic.

A random guy speculation on the website does change the fact what people near the Pentagon witnessed. Are they all lying About the flight path for what reason? Gopher 6 pilot lied? FAA and FDR animation too wrong?

neutronflux What has this thread got to do with shear studs connections to floor slabs and girders?

a reply to: Jesushere

I didn’t refer to the NIST study, did I? Like how you ignore the other studies that found thermal stress induced buckling and failures lead to collapse.

If you are going to purposely state things wrong like Gofer 6 took off from Reagan and purposely misquote Goper 6, why should I waste my time?

Especially on a oversimplified argument by you on a subject that that went on for 4 pages at metabunk?

could-girder-a2001-possibly-have-got-past-the-side-plate-on-column-79.t9069/page-4
www.metabunk.org...

By: Mick West
AE911 are also very unlikely to back away from their case that the girder could not have walked off its seat. Again they exploit the lack up understanding of the average person, and make a compelling sounding case that failure of that connection is impossible. Prior work by @Tony Szamboti and @gerrycan does seem to show that when considered in abstract isolation as a local subsystem the girder is left an inch or two away from failure. They took that and then made a rather extreme leap to claim the entire collapse due to fire was impossible. Hulseys result was rather different and I think they have struggled to reconcile the two analyses. Did the girder not move quite enough (Tony/Gerry), or did the entire building expand like a balloon with no connection failures (Hulsey)?

www.youtube.com... 9/11 tapes 1 hour in you hear him say the plane descending NE bound.

neutronflux Thermal stress can only occur if there are no shear studs connections on column 79 and 44. That's what NIST stated. You posting links that have nothing to do with the topic.

a reply to: Jesushere

You keep arguing with things already debunked, and you get the simplest facts wrong. You cannot be believed in what you post is fact.

Only 12 people attest to the NE flight path. Part of that group claim flyover. A narrative with no context because it is not backed by physical evidence.

You cannot calibrate a magnetic compass. It is pushed by the esrth’s magnetic field, and will read how ever the magnetic lines lay. Is that false. You can program a digital compass to correct between the difference from magnetic north vs directional north. However, magnetic north is not uniform throughout the earth. The correction factory between directional north and magnetic north changes by region.

Magnetic declination
en.m.wikipedia.org...

Magnetic declination or variation is the angle on the horizontal plane between magnetic north (the direction the north end of a compass needle points, corresponding to the direction of the Earth's magnetic field lines) and true north (the direction along a meridian towards the geographic North Pole). This angle varies depending on position on the Earth's surface, and changes over time.

Magnetic declination varies both from place to place and with the passage of time. As a traveller cruises the east coast of the United States, for example, the declination varies from 16 degrees west in Maine, to 6 in Florida, to 0 degrees in Louisiana, to 4 degrees east (in Texas). The declination at London, UK is one degree 7 minutes west (2014), and as the country is quite small that figure is fairly good for the whole of the country. It is reducing, and scientists predict that in about 2050 it will be zero.[2]

a reply to: Jesushere

The magnetic compass was already calibrated 60 true north 70 magnetic.

Please cite what that even means?

originally posted by: Jesushere
neutronflux Thermal stress can only occur if there are no shear studs connections on column 79 and 44. That's what NIST stated. You posting links that have nothing to do with the topic.

What does thermal stress have to do with shear studs?

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Thermal stress is stress created by any change in temperature to a material. These stresses can lead to fracture or plastic deformation depending on the other variables of heating, which include material types and contraints.[1] Temperature gradients, thermal expansion or contraction and thermal shocks are things that can lead to thermal stress. This type of stress is highly dependent on the thermal expansion coefficient which varies from material to material. In general the larger the temperature change, the higher the level of stress that can occur.

Just one piece of metal with points at different temperatures causes thermal stress. Is that false.

a reply to: Jesushere

Why should I waste my time:

One, you cannot quote it from actual testimony?
Two, what is even the context? Was flight 77 in its turn before its final approach to the pentagon?

a reply to: Jesushere

Sorry, double post

a reply to: Jesushere

Whole thread and debate on your oversimplification of WTC 7 column 79

could-girder-a2001-possibly-have-got-past-the-side-plate-on-column-79.t9069/
www.metabunk.org...

By Mick West
AE911 are also very unlikely to back away from their case that the girder could not have walked off its seat. Again they exploit the lack up understanding of the average person, and make a compelling sounding case that failure of that connection is impossible. Prior work by @Tony Szamboti and @gerrycan does seem to show that when considered in abstract isolation as a local subsystem the girder is left an inch or two away from failure. They took that and then made a rather extreme leap to claim the entire collapse due to fire was impossible. Hulseys result was rather different and I think they have struggled to reconcile the two analyses. Did the girder not move quite enough (Tony/Gerry), or did the entire building expand like a balloon with no connection failures (Hulsey)?

Again, how is that bought AE 9/11 Truth WTC 7 Evaluation coming along?

neutronflux 757 plane was using a magnetic compass not a standard compass. It was calibrated for deviation. The compass dials would be showing an SW direction if that's where it was. Instead the compass was showing a NE path on 70 magnetic.

I just provided audio evidence Goper 6, saw the plane NE bound descending before it crashed. If it was descending after the turn the plane could not be on a SW position for the 5 lightpoles to be knocked over.

You ignoring 9/11 Pentagon eyewitnesses saw a plane NE. Like if you prefer to believe the 9/11 commission knew more than them ok

FDR returns and FAA all wrong?

neutronflux Shear studs provide support to stop the floors and girders from buckling from fire damage.

NIST removed the shear studs on Column 79 and 44 to explain the collapse. Fires were not hot enough to cause buckling with the shear studs connected.