New Released Pictures from a Police Helicopter

That sure is a heck of a lot of dust and Smoke from buildings "falling" down.

Shouldn't the buildings just have broken and collapsed into a pile?

You Decide. www.dailymail.co.uk...

reply to post by Sean48


I thought that is pretty much what they did?

This picture struck me first off, I thought it looked bad in there but on reflection, Could it have gotten as hot as they say to melt the steel inner columns..??

Originally posted by foxhoundone
This picture struck me first off, I thought it looked bad in there but on reflection, Could it have gotten as hot as they say to melt the steel inner columns..??

Looks hot in there for sure, compare that to this Vid of WTC5

It burned completely engulfed, no collapse.

Originally posted by foxhoundone
Could it have gotten as hot as they say to melt the steel inner columns..??

Who is "they"? What did "they" say?

Click here to learn more about this warning.

reply to post by TylerKing


I think he was referring to the melting of Steel.

The steel was just weakened , not melted

I've always wanted to know one thing.

The second last photo in the Daily Mail link, bottom left hand side, the ash almost seems fountain-like in the way it's being created then falling, how was that explained ?

Originally posted by Ulala
I've always wanted to know one thing.

The second last photo in the Daily Mail link, bottom left hand side, the ash almost seems fountain-like in the way it's being created then falling, how was that explained ?

A) it isn't ash. It's pulverized concrete from the floors mixed with pulverized drywall, plus a lot of pulverized everything else.

B) When the towers collapsed it compressed the air and forced it out along with the pulverized dust like a giant bellows. Further down along the structure you can see smaller plumes of dust being forced out of the building for the exact same reason.

Heres what i found on melting core structure..


Part of the problem is that people (including engineers) often confuse temperature and heat. While they are related, they are not the same. Thermodynamically, the heat contained in a material is related to the temperature through the heat capacity and the density (or mass). Temperature is defined as an intensive property, meaning that it does not vary with the quantity of material, while the heat is an extensive property, which does vary with the amount of material. "One way to distinguish the two is to note that if a second log is added to the fireplace, the temperature does not double" It stays roughly the same, but the size of the fire or the length of time the fire burns, or a combination of the two, doubles. Thus, the fact that there were 90,000 L of jet fuel on a few floors of the WTC does not mean that this was an unusually hot fire. The temperature of the fire at the WTC was not unusual, and it was most definitely not capable of melting steel.

How could the fires weaken these "approx" 48 vertical beams,
(apolz over sized photo cant resize)


:

Originally posted by foxhoundone
How could the fires weaken these "approx" 48 vertical beams,

If fire couldn't weaken them, why did they apply fireproofing to them?

I always wanted to know how its possible for new pictures to be released after almost a decade...with what right does anyone harbor these pictures?

From Breitbart: "ABC said the NIST gave the network 2,779 pictures on nine CDs, saying some of the photographs had never been released before."

Q#1: Why did it take farking YEARS for these to be released? How many are new?

Q#2: Did they do as good a job of pixel manipulation as NASA did on the moon pictures?

Q#3: Did Walgreens apologize for taking so long to develop the pictures?

I look forward to the discussions of this new data release.

Oh, the UK DailyMail says: "SO WHY ARE WE SEEING THEM NOW?

After 9/11 the U.S.'s National Institute of Standards and Technology collected images from amateur, professional and freelance photographer as part of its investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Centre. It completed its research in 2005. In the summer of last year, ABC saw that NIST was asking the photographers' permission to release the images and filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act to get access to them. The images seen here are ones taken by NYPD helicopters and come from the 2,779 pictures supplied on nine CDs to the news organisation."

I still say something's not right.

I still say "inside job".

reply to post by foxhoundone


It's not the beams that weakend. It's the connections from those beams to the outside walls that did. They did a fantastic job of holding up. And even as the building collapsed they tried to stand but finally could not.

reply to post by Sean48


Actually WTC 5 did collapse as result of fires

WTC 5 appeared to have typical combustible contents for an office building, including furnishings, paper, etc. No evidence of any other type of fire load was noted. There appeared to be local concentrations of heavier fire loads, such as file storage, in some areas of the floors that exceeded the average combustible fire load normally associated with office occupancies. A raised sub-floor was present in a portion of the 6th floor, indicative of a computer room or electronic equipment area.

WTC 5 was damaged by impact and subsequent fires. The impact damage areas in WTC 5 are shown in Figure 4-6. The debris damage caused localized collapses from the roof to the 3rd floor in most of the areas where exterior columns impacted the structure. Ensuing fires that burned unchecked in the building caused a localized collapse from the 9th floor to the 4th floor. Figure 4-7 diagrammatically shows the damaged and collapsed areas of WTC 5 due to impact and fire.

This is huge news!

ABC News filed a Freedom of Information Act request on August 14, 2009 to obtain the volumes of pictures and video that NIST had collected. After months of review and collection by NIST, ABC News was provided with 2,779 pictures on nine CDs.

www.911blogger.com...

2779 new 911 pictures, this should be on front page


How many pictures did NIST not release though?
wtc.nist.gov...

The scarcity of physical evidence that is typically available in place for reconstruction of a disaster led to the following approach: • Accumulation of copious photographic and video material. With the assistance of the media, public agencies and individual photographers, NIST acquired and organized nearly 7,000 segments of video footage, totaling in excess of 150 hours and nearly 7,000 photographs representing at least 185 photographers. This guided the Investigation Team’s efforts to determine the condition of the buildings following the aircraft impact, the evolution of the fires, and the subsequent deterioration of the structure.

ABC News has released 12 pictures of the 2779 pictures they got from NIST that has 7000 pictures

LA Times now writes that the 12 pictures are not new.

cover-up much?


[edit on 11-2-2010 by conar]

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

The tower's structure was severely damaged by the impact of the planes. Some of the damaged structural members load was transferred to the undamaged members increasing their loading. The heat generated by the fire was enough to reduce the Yield Strength of these members to their failure point. The steel DID NOT have to melt for this failure to occurr.

Originally posted by JIMC5499
I've said it before and I'll say it again.

The tower's structure was severely damaged by the impact of the planes. Some of the damaged structural members load was transferred to the undamaged members increasing their loading. The heat generated by the fire was enough to reduce the Yield Strength of these members to their failure point. The steel DID NOT have to melt for this failure to occurr.

Ya so..

That explains a partial collapse on the affected floors, don't explain a free fall

from every floor below..