Headsup: 9/11 - The Truth Behind The Third Tower

[Parrotman]

I'm sorry i must have.

i thought you were insinuating that the official video was odd or inconsistent with the facts as they are accepted. I thought by referring to the bombers as "alleged perpetrators" you were insinuating that there was something insubstantial with the evidence against them.

if this is not the case then please put me straight.

if i've missed the whole point then why are you not explaining it?

Nothing to explain if you read the posts.

 

[Benzowner]

I think the problem with 911, the London Bombings, Kennedy assination and even Princess Di's death, the authorities will not and cannot issue all the evidence they have, only bits as there are usually ongoing investigations. The snippets that come from our media are then used by the media to portray the "truth" leaving it wide open for the conspiracy thoerists. My only querie with 911 was how fast the buildings colpased, not time taken from impact to colapse but time from start of colapse to ground. If, there was no explosions to assist in the colapse, then the only conclusion is that the buildings may not have been structurally safe.

 

[Mr E]

I think the problem with 911, the London Bombings, Kennedy assination and even Princess Di's death, the authorities will not and cannot issue all the evidence they have, only bits as there are usually ongoing investigations. The snippets that come from our media are then used by the media to portray the "truth" leaving it wide open for the conspiracy thoerists. My only querie with 911 was how fast the buildings colpased, not time taken from impact to colapse but time from start of colapse to ground. If, there was no explosions to assist in the colapse, then the only conclusion is that the buildings may not have been structurally safe.

There was an explosion - and large fire - that caused the collapse

More seriously...there was a program a while back which discussed this with various structural engineers, including the (very distressed) guy who had designed it. Investigation seemed to indicate that the sprayed fire protection foam was blown off the steel by the explosion (or maybe wasn't there...but there was evidence that it was). When the floors finally gave way at the impact point, the accelerating load from the floors above broke the weakened (through heat damage) floors. This was like a vertical row of dominoes from that point onward...

Each of the engineers modeled the scenario separately and each arrived at the same conclusion.

The conclusion was that the building acted as it was "designed" to do (not implying that it was designed to fall straight down, but that this was the result of the design). The buildings coped with the load of being hit from the side by an aircraft (actually a larger aircraft at a higher speed than specified) and remained standing after a ferocious explosion long enough for a large number of person to escape. It couldn't withstand being weakened by intense fire when asked to cope with the collapse of the upper floors. Just imagine the carnage if the buildings had toppled, either on impact or during collapse.

Personally, I would want to shake the hand and congratulate the engineer who designed those buildings.

Conspiracy? Look long and hard enough and you'll find conspiracy everywhere. Just 'cos you're paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you...

Latest nonsense I heard the other day (on the conspiracy front) was that wind farms don;t generate electricity - rather the rotors are turned by motors to give everyone the impression that we are being green.....

 

[Howard]

I'm not really interested in 9/11 , have tried to put it from my mind and move on ...

But i read that the impact speed , coupled with the weight of the planes , was the equivalent to a million tons hitting the side of the buildings , how true this is i don't know , because i'm not an engineer , but they stood up pretty well .

 

[Biscuit]

Nothing to explain if you read the posts.

sorry one moment you post as if you really are going to tell me what you think and then the next you call me 'doh' for not getting it .

are you sure of your opinion on this .... or not?




predicting another superior/elusive post by the way...

 

[Roger Jones]

"It had'nt rained for some days and on the day of the bombings it was a bright sunny day....in Luton as in London."

I am five miles south of Luton. I keep daily weather records. My entry for 7 July 2005 is "Damp, rain".

 

[W210 Fan]

I'm not really interested in 9/11 , have tried to put it from my mind and move on ...

But i read that the impact speed , coupled with the weight of the planes , was the equivalent to a million tons hitting the side of the buildings , how true this is i don't know , because i'm not an engineer , but they stood up pretty well .

surely thats a point load as 1,000,000t flat side on would flatten anything,

I think I saw the program Mr E is referring to recently, I have always thought the whole thing is `dodgy` and watching the program has not changed that, I did like the government agent near the end who said do you really think your government is organised enough to do this???

 

[jeremytaylor]

Latest nonsense I heard the other day (on the conspiracy front) was that wind farms don;t generate electricity - rather the rotors are turned by motors to give everyone the impression that we are being green.....

What? You mean that's not true?!?!?

(Now, back to my list for Father Christmas ...)

 

[Biscuit]

"It had'nt rained for some days and on the day of the bombings it was a bright sunny day....in Luton as in London."

I am five miles south of Luton. I keep daily weather records. My entry for 7 July 2005 is "Damp, rain".

I've found one website that archives the old maps but its only in six hour increments, the rain is anotated on the map as light (>3mm) for the eastern parts of england and clearing over night to the North Sea between the 6th and the 7th. The 7th itself is still present (>1mm) and covers Luton, London.

its not hard - minutes on the internet and the chance of puddles in Luton early morning on the 7th July is not just possible but far, far from suspicious.

 

[Roger Jones]

And another site records the relative humidity at over 90% on 7 July:

http://tinyurl.com/5tqud6

 

[Biscuit]

And another site records the relative humidity at over 90% on 7 July:

http://tinyurl.com/5tqud6http://tinyurl.com/5tqud6

that was the site i was on for the rainfall...


but hang on the big question ... why on earth do you record the weather every day?

 

[Roger Jones]

"why on earth do you record the weather every day?"

A lifelong personal interest, a local weather station with full live and daily summary data (started August 2005), and something that occcasionally comes in handy, e.g. here and to settle arguments at the pub. It's worth more than the seconds it takes.

 

[Biscuit]

you ought to get out less... theres some fantastic stuff on the tv, Wii, internet etc etc

fairplay on the weather station.

 

[Satch]

Most of the conspiracy theory is based on selective interpretation and this is no different. Simple facts are that if you heat a steel framed building up beyond a critical point (and this varies hugely depending on the construction method, integrity of insulation, fire intensity, duration, wind direction, structural damage etc etc) and it will go.

Photo attached is a case in point. Was this the work of evil doers, large amounts of aviation fuel being flashed off after violent impact, diesel tanks burning? No, it was a bog roll factory on the Enigma Business Park near Malvern that went up in 2006.

The yield strength of steel is reduced by 50% at 550 ºC. At 1000 ºC yield strength is 10 percent or less. High thermal conductivity means that the temperature of unprotected steelwork will come close that of the fire so structural steelwork is usually insulated. Damage to the insulation and the steelwork itself (as you would expect from an aircraft impact) cannot bode well.

The one documentary about all this which really gets to me is 9/11 by Jules & Gedeon Naudet for the simple reason they were there on the day and just happened to be making a film about NY Firemen. And just to prove to you that the world is mad, in 2006 a number of CBS affiliates decided not to broadcast this award-winning documentary because "airing profanity, primarily by firefighters during the crisis" might have caused them to get some grief the Federal Communications Commission.

Make your own minds up

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=iqAwNm_-DnE

 

[Mr E]

I think I saw the program Mr E is referring to recently, I have always thought the whole thing is `dodgy` and watching the program has not changed that, I did like the government agent near the end who said do you really think your government is organised enough to do this???

I looked up a few sites that discuss this aspect (the structure side) and it was very enlightening...

Inspection pictures showing how the fire protection had come away from the steelwork, leaving large part uncovered (although many conspiracy theorists point to this as evidence of tampering, evidence from other buildings show that "sway" can and does cause the insulation to fail and fall off. The maintenance plan was for the trusses and columns to be inspected and reinsulated as floors became vacant);

Pictures from the event that show huge portions of floor trusses and columns with no protection on them at all;

Aftermath pictures that show how the outer perimeter columns have peeled away from the structure as the floors collapsed and eventually "pancaked";

Footage and picture that show the perimeter columns being pulled in under the stress caused by the sagging floor trusses. The collapse occurred when this caused so much lean in the structure that the core columns overloaded and failed.


For me, it's not a case of any government being organised enough to do it, it would be keeping the vast number of people involved in such a project silent for so long.

 

[W210 Fan]

For me, it's not a case of any government being organised enough to do it, it would be keeping the vast number of people involved in such a project silent for so long.

yep, that was the point was making,

 

[Parrotman]

sorry one moment you post as if you really are going to tell me what you think and then the next you call me 'doh' for not getting it .

are you sure of your opinion on this .... or not?




predicting another superior/elusive post by the way...

Thanks for giving me a good laugh.

To the contrary thought it was your goodself who was going to explain the facts.

Duh!

 

[Biscuit]

no probs - thought it was a crossed line TBH.

do you still think its odd about the puddles on the CCTV? - because thats where this all started.

just to recap Met Office records indicate at least some rain overnight in Luton on the 6th/7th July 2005 and our own MBC weather guru station chief (5 miles south of Luton) recorded 'damp, rain'.

 

[Parrotman]

no probs - thought it was a crossed line TBH.

do you still think its odd about the puddles on the CCTV? - because thats where this all started.

just to recap Met Office records indicate at least some rain overnight in Luton on the 6th/7th July 2005 and our own MBC weather guru station chief (5 miles south of Luton) recorded 'damp, rain'.

Indeed we do appear to have crossed lines. My reference was just trying to amplify/highlight the misinformation that can (purposely) mislead. I should have perhaps made that clearer so apologies for any misunderstanding.

Such events, particularly in the severely tragic cases of 911 and July , can raise what might be deemed anomalies ie alleged non commercial planes hitting the Towers and in the case of July, the carriage floor being blown upwards rather than downwards indicating a device planted beneath the carriage floor(?), that just do not satisfy even my occasionally cynical rationale.

 

[Biscuit]

Parrot,

I'm once again confused by your views on this.

it seems as though you remain unconvinced by the evidence about 7/7 - 'do not satisfy my cynical rationale', yet you also seem to claim that certain pieces of (mis)information can mislead (on purpose).

how can you tell the difference?

can i now conclude that you do not think the luton puddles to be odd yet do think something amiss with the pattern of bomb damage in the tube carriages?

Thanks in advance.