Official Government Reports on the WTC.

14 Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the
World Trade Center Destruction.

Reports by FEMA and NIST lay out the official account of the destruction of the World Trade Center on
9/11/2001. In this Letter, we wish to set a foundation for productive discussion and understanding by focusing on those
areas where we find common ground with FEMA and NIST, while at the same time countering several popular myths
about the WTC collapses.


I found this journal at Bentham Open,a Open Access online journal,which publishes research articles,reviews,and letters in all areas of civil engineering.

I would say that this is a must read for all those interested on what happened on that fateful day.Below is some selected quotes from the journal.

FEMA analyzed the remarkable collapse of WTC building 7,the 47-story skyscraper that,even though it was not hit
by a plane,collapsed about seven hours after the second
Tower collapse.We certainly agree that FEMA’s best firebased
hypothesis “has only a low probability of occurrence.”
NIST’s final report on WTC 7 has been long delayed and is
eagerly awaited.Apparently it is difficult to fully explain the complete and rapid collapse of WTC 7 with a fire-based hypothesis alone..

FEMA: “The WTC towers had been designed to withstand the accidental impact of a Boeing 707 seeking to land
at a nearby airport…”
NIST: “Both WTC 1 and WTC 2 were stable after the
aircraft impact, standing for 102 min and 56 min, respectively.
The global analyses with structural impact damage
showed that both towers had considerable reserve capacity”
Yes, we agree, as do previously published reports: “The 110-story towers of the World Trade Center were designed to withstand as a whole the forces caused by a horizontal impact of a large commercial aircraft. So why did a total collapse occur?”

NIST:[Question:] “How could the WTC towers collapse
in only 11 seconds (WTC 1) and 9 seconds (WTC 2)—
speeds that approximate that of a ball dropped from similar
height in a vacuum (with no air resistance)?”
....NIST evidently neglects a fundamental law
of physics in glibly treating the remarkable “free fall” collapse
of each Tower, namely, the Law of Conservation of
Momentum. This law of physics means that the hundreds of
thousands of tons of material in the way must slow the upper
part of the building because of its mass, independent of deformation
which can only slow the fall even more. (Energy
and Momentum must both be conserved.)
....Published papers have argued that this negligence by
NIST (leaving the near-free-fall speeds unexplained) is a
major flaw in their analysis [13, 14]. NIST ignores the possibility
of controlled demolitions, which achieve complete
building collapses in near free-fall times by moving the material
out of the way using explosives. So, there is an alternative
explanation that fits the data without violating basic
laws of physics. We should be able to agree from observing the near-free-fall destruction that this is characteristic of controlled
demolitions and, therefore, that controlled demolition
is one way to achieve complete collapse at near free-fall
speed. Then we are keen to look at NIST’s calculations of
how they explain near-free-fall collapse rates without explosives.

The fire is the most misunderstood part of the WTC collapse. Even today, the media report (and many scientists believe) that the steel melted. It is
argued that the jet fuel burns very hot, especially
with so much fuel present.This is not true....The temperature of the fire at the WTC was not unusual,and it was most definitely not capable of
melting steel..

Traces of thermite in residues (solidified slag, dust, etc.)
would tell us a great deal about the crime and the cause of
thousands of injuries and deaths. This is standard procedure
for fire and explosion investigations. Perhaps NIST will explain
why they have not looked for these residues?

Must apologize for not being able to get a direct link,i have tried but no success,think its because its a pdf file.

Anyways,follow this link,scroll down to references,and its 22nd on the list.(Jones SE (2006) Why indeed did the WTC buildings completely collapse? J 9/11 studies.)








[edit on 13-8-2008 by jakyll]

[edit on 13-8-2008 by jakyll]

wow i cant believe i read the whole thing

it creates a very compelling case, as to why there needs to be an independant analysis as to the cause of the WTC collapse, and the use of images to back the evidence was great , those steele beams certainly look like cutter charges had been applied.

ive been looking for someting like this document for a while it appears very credible to me and very well presented S&F

Hmmm. Don't really post here often. But this one struck. I knew about the questionably of WTC 7, and the 9.8 m/s fall speed (terminal velocity). But I have not see it this well put out....

Good Work