>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Disposition-Notification-To: TOP_VIEW <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 22:23:21 -0700 >From: TOP_VIEW <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >X-Accept-Language: en >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: WTC: Steel melts at 2800F, jet fuel burns at 800F > >Those interested in bringing the truth to light, forward this as far and wide >as possible > > > >11.01.01 >Steel melts at 2800F, jet fuel burns at 800F: Government 'explanation' >of WTC atrocity defies physics > > > >And that's that. The jet crashes, as TOP_VIEW has reported from day one, >COULD NOT possibly -- and DID NOT -- cause the total structural failure >and collapse of the WTC towers. > >Why? Well, it's simple. Jet fuel burns at EIGHT HUNDRED degrees >Fahrenheit, and steel melts at TWENTY-EIGHT HUNDRED degrees Fahrenheit. >No matter HOW MUCH jet fuel there is, it STILL burns at EIGHT HUNDRED >degrees. No matter HOW MUCH jet fuel there is, steel -- last time >reputable scientists CHECKED -- STILL melts at TWENTY-EIGHT HUNDRED >degrees. > >No matter how many times the White House resident tells us Osama bin >Laden "did it" and is the "evil one", the burning fuel from the jet >crashes was TWO THOUSAND degrees TOO COOL, to melt the MASSIVE, behemoth >steel beams of the World Trade Center towers. > >Again: the fires in the Trade Center towers caused by the crashes of two >hijacked jets could not possibly have caused the total structural >failure of the towers. > >SO: If you want to keep on willfully and INTENTIONALLY believing an >UTTER and PROVABLE idiotic LIE -- certainly one of the biggest lies EVER >ever told -- then go right ahead. > >Try to explain to your children and your grandchildren why you >compromised and jeopardized their very existence, by deliberately >ignoring the most simple, PROVABLE scientific truth -- which UTTERLY and >completely invalidates and lays waste to the gigantic tower of lies the >U.S. government has spewed to the ends of the Earth about the >"attack" upon America. > >Considering these scientifically irrefutable FACTS, along with the >thoroughly substantiated and heavily verified report in the European >press that "evil one number one" bin Laden actually met with our CIA a >mere TWO MONTHS before (was he maybe LESS "evil" in July?) he supposedly >masterminded the WTC attack, it's safe to say: Case closed. There is >absolutely no doubt that inconceivably deranged and demonic FedGov >elements were INEXTRICABLY INVOLVED in just about every single stage of >the planning and implementation of the "attack (from within) upon >America" on September 11. > >Clearly, our own government attacked us, and NO ONE ELSE. > >Round up the BushMob. >- - - - - - - - >- - - - - - - - >911: THE TERRORISTS SUSPEND LAWS OF PHYSICS!! >DID THE BUILDINGS FALL... >OR WERE THEY PUSHED? > >I TRIED TO BE PATRIOTIC > >By J. McMichael >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >I tried to believe. I watched those quarter mile high buildings fall >through their jaw-dropping catastrophes over and over again. I listened >to the announcer and the experts explain what had happened. And I worked >at my pitiful lack of faith, pounding my skull with the remote control >and staring on the flickering images on the TV screen. > >But poor mental peasant that I am, I could not escape the teachings of >my forefathers. I fear I am trapped in my time, walled off from further >scientific understanding by my inability to abandon the Second >Millennium mindset. > >But enough of myself. Let us move on to the Science and Technology of >the 21st Century. Those of you who cannot believe should learn the >official truth by rote and perhaps you will be able to hide your ignorance. > >Here are the bare bones of the WTC incident: North tower struck 8:45, >collapsed 10:29; South tower struck 9:03, collapsed 9:50 > > >Time Line of Terror >8:45 a.m. >American Airlines Flight 11, Boston to Los Angeles with 92 people >onboard, crashes into the north tower of the World Trade Center in New >York City. > >9:03 a.m. >United Airlines Flight 175, Boston to Los Angeles with 65 people >onboard, flies into the south tower of the World Trade Center. > >9:31 a.m. >Speaking from Florida, President George Bush pledges the United States >will hunt down the guilty parties. > >9:40 a.m. >American Flight 77, en route from Dulles Airport, Washington DC, to Los >Angeles with 64 people onboard, crashes into the Pentagon. > >9:48 a.m. >The U.S. Capitol and the West Wing of the White House are evacuated. > >9:49 a.m. >The Federal Aviation Administration bans all aircraft takeoffs in the >United States. > >9:50 a.m. >South tower of the World Trade Center collapses. > >9:58 a.m. >Emergency operator in Pennsylvania receives a call from a passenger on >United Flight 93, Newark to San Francisco with 45 people onboard, >stating the plane was being hijacked. > >10:00 a.m. >United Flight 93 crashes about 80 miles southeast of Pittsburgh. > >10:29 a.m. >North tower of the World Trade Center collapses. > >11:00 a.m. >New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani orders lower Manhattan evacuated. > >11:40 a.m. >With U.S. military on nuclear alert, Bush taken to Barksdale Air Force >Base in Louisiana. > >1:20 p.m. >Bush boards Air Force One for Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska, >headquarters of the U.S. Strategic Air Command. > >2:51 p.m. >U.S. military deploys missile destroyers and other equipment in New York >and Washington. > >5:20 p.m. >Another World Trade Center building "collapses." > >7:00 p.m. >Bush arrives in Washington. > >8:31 p.m. >Bush addresses the nation, vowing to punish "evil acts." > >source >http://www.infoplease.com/spot/sept112001.html > > > >Using jet fuel to melt steel is an amazing discovery, really. It is also >amazing that until now, no one had been able to get it to work, and that >proves the terrorists were not stupid people. Ironworkers fool with >acetylene torches, bottled oxygen, electric arcs from generators, >electric furnaces, and other elaborate tricks, but what did these >brilliant terrorists use? Jet fuel, costing maybe 80 cents a gallon on >the open market. > >Let us consider: One plane full of jet fuel hit the north tower at 8:45 >AM, and the fuel fire burned for a while with bright flames and black >smoke. We can see pictures of the smoke and flames shooting from the windows. > >Then by 9:03 (which time was marked by the second plane's collision with >the south tower), the flame was mostly gone and only black smoke >continued to pour from the building. To my simple mind, that would >indicate that the first fire had died down, but something was still >burning inefficiently, leaving soot (carbon) in the smoke. A fire with >sooty smoke is either low temperature or starved for oxygen -- or both. > >But by 10:29 AM, the fire in north tower had accomplished the feat that >I find so amazing: It melted the steel supports in the building, causing >a chain reaction within the structure that brought the building to the ground. > >And with less fuel to feed the fire, the south tower collapsed only 47 >minutes after the plane collision, again with complete destruction. This >is only half the time it took to destroy the north tower. > >I try not to think about that. I try not to think about a petroleum fire >burning for 104 minutes, just getting hotter and hotter until it reached >1538 degrees Celsius (2800 Fahrenheit) and melted the steel (steel is >about 99% iron; for melting point of iron, see below > >Iron 26 Fe 55.845(2) >Thermal Properties and temperatures >Melting point [/K]: 1811 [or 1538 C (2800 F)] Boiling point [/K]: 3134 >[or 2861 C (5182 F)] (liquid range: 1323 K) > >source: >http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Fe/heat.html > > >I try not to wonder how the fire reached temperatures that only bottled >oxygen or forced air can produce. > >And I try not to think about all the steel that was in that building -- >200,000 tons of it (see World Trade Center information for stats). . > >I try to forget that heating steel is like pouring syrup onto a plate: >you can't get it to stack up. The heat just flows out to the colder >parts of the steel, cooling off the part you are trying to warm up. If >you pour it on hard enough and fast enough, you can get the syrup to >stack up a little bit. And with very high heat brought on very fast, you >can heat up the one part of the object, but the heat will quickly spread >out and the part will cool off the moment you stop. > >When the heat source warms the last cold part of the object, the heat >stops escaping and the point of attention can be warmed. If the north >tower collapse was due to heated steel, why did it take 104 minutes to >reach the critical temperature? (See Time Line of Terror). > >Am I to believe that the fire burned all that time, getting constantly >hotter until it reached melting temperature? Or did it burn hot and >steady throughout until 200,000 tons of steel were heated molten - on >one plane load of jet fuel? (Quantity of steel in WTC) > >Thankfully, I found this note on the BBC web page > >( How the World Trade Center fell ): > >"Fire reaches 800 [degrees] C - hot enough to melt steel floor >supports." That is one of the things I warned you about: In the 20th >Century, steel melted at 1538 degrees Celsius (2800 F) > > >Basic Information > >Name: Iron >Symbol: Fe >Atomic Number: 26 >Atomic Mass: 55.845 amu >Melting Point: 1535.0 C (1808.15 K, 2795.0 F) Boiling Point: 2750.0 C >(3023.15 K, 4982.0 F) Number of Protons/Electrons: 26 >Number of Neutrons: 30 >Classification: Transition Metal >Crystal Structure: Cubic >Density @ 293 K: 7.86 g/cm3 >Color: Silvery > >table source: >http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/fe.html), > >but in the 21st Century, it melts at 800 degrees C (1472 F). > >This might be explained as a reporter's mistake -- 800 to 900 C is the >temperature for forging wrought iron. As soft as wrought iron is, of >course, it would never be used for structural steel in a landmark >skyscraper. (Descriptions of cast iron, wrought iron, and steel and >relevant temperatures discussed at Metrum. > >But then lower down, the BBC page repeats the 800 C number in bold, and >the article emphasizes that the information comes from Chris Wise, >"Structural Engineer." Would this professional individual permit himself >to be misquoted in a global publication? > >I feel it coming on again -- that horrible cynicism that causes me to >doubt the word of the major anchor-persons. Please just think of this >essay as a plea for help, and do NOT let it interfere with your own >righteous faith. The collapse of America's faith in its leaders must not >become another casualty on America's skyline. > >In my diseased mind, I think of the floors of each tower like a stack of >LP (33 1/3 RPM) records, only they were square instead of circular. They >were stacked around a central spindle that consisted of multiple steel >columns stationed in a square around the 103 elevator shafts.(See >Skyscraper Report and University of Sydney Report) > >With this core bearing the weight of the building, the platters were >tied together and stabilized by another set of steel columns at the >outside rim, closely spaced and completely surrounding the structure. >This resulting structure was so stable that the top of the towers swayed >only three feet in a high wind. The architects called it a >"tube-within-a-tube design." > >The TV experts told us that the joints between the floors and central >columns melted (or the floor trusses, or the central columns, or the >exterior columns, depending on the expert) and this caused the floor to >collapse and fall onto the one below. This overloaded the joints for the >lower floor, and the two of them fell onto the floor below, and so on. >Like dominos (see Washington University Professor Harmon). > >Back in the early 1970s when the World Trade Towers were built, the WTC >was the tallest building that had ever been built in the history of the >world. If we consider the architectural engineers, suppliers, builders, >and city inspectors in the job, we can imagine they would be very >careful to over-build every aspect of the building. If one bolt was >calculated to serve, you can bet that three or four were used. If there >was any doubt about the quality of a girder or steel beam, you can be >sure it was rejected. After all, any failures would attract the >attention of half the civilized world, and no corporation wants a >reputation for that kind of stupidity -- particularly if there are casualties. > >I do not know the exact specifications for the WTC, but I know in many >trades (and some I've worked), a structural member must be physically >capable of three times the maximum load that will ever be required of it >(BreakingStrength = 3 x WorkingStrength). Given that none of those >floors was holding a grand piano sale or an elephant convention that >day, it is unlikely that any of them were loaded to the maximum. Thus, >any of the floors should have been capable of supporting more than its >own weight plus the two floors above it. I suspect the WTC was >engineered for safer margins than the average railroad bridge, and the >actual load on each floor was less than 1/6 the BreakingStrength. The >platters were constructed of webs of steel trusses. Radial trusses ran >from the perimeter of the floor to the central columns, and concentric >rings of trusses connected the radial trusses, forming a pattern like a >spider web. > >Where the radial trusses connected with the central columns, I imagine >the joints looked like the big bolted flanges where girders meet on a >bridge -- inches thick bolts tying the beams into the columns. > >The experts tell us that the heat of the fire melted the steel, causing >the joints to fail. In order to weaken those joints, a fire would have >to heat the bolts or the flanges to the point where the bolts fell apart >or tore through the steel. But here is another thing that gives me >problems -- all the joints between the platter and the central columns >would have to be heated at the same rate in order to collapse at the >same time -- and at the same rate as the joints with the outer rim >columns on all sides -- else one side of the platter would fall, >damaging the floor below and making obvious distortions in the skin of >the building, or throwing the top of tower off balance and to one side. > >But there were no irregularities in the fall of the main structure of >those buildings. They fell almost as perfectly as a deck of cards in the >hands of a magician doing an aerial shuffle. > >This is particularly worrisome since the first plane struck one side of >the north tower, causing (you would think) a weakening on that side >where the exterior columns were struck, and a more intense fire on that >side than on the other side. And the second plane struck near the corner >of the south tower at an angle that caused much of the fuel to spew out >the windows on the adjacent side. > >Yet the south tower also collapsed in perfect symmetry, spewing dust in >all directions like a Fourth of July sparkler burning to the ground. Oh, >wait. Here is a picture showing the top 25 floors of one tower (probably >south) toppling over sideways. > >Why are there no reports of this cube of concrete and steel (measuring >200 ft. wide, 200 ft. deep, and 200 ft high), falling from a 1000 feet >into the street below? > >But implosion expert Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition >Inc. in Phoenix, MD is of the opinion that it happened: > >Observing the collapses on television news, Loizeaux says the >1,362-ft-tall south tower, which was hit at about the 60th floor, failed >much as one would like (sic) fell a tree. (University of Sydney Report 2 > >I have seen a videotaped rerun of the south tower falling. In that take, >the upper floors descend as a complete unit. All the way, the >upper-floor unit was canted over as shown on the BBC page, sliding down >behind the intervening buildings like a piece of stage scenery. > >That scene is the most puzzling of all. Since the upper floors were not >collapsed (the connection between the center columns and the platters >were intact), this assembly would present itself to the lower floors as >a platter WITHOUT a central hole. How then would a platter without a >hole slide down the spindle with the other platters? Where would the >central columns go if they could not penetrate the upper floors as they fell? > >The only model I can find for the situation would be this: If the fire >melted the floor joints so that the collapse began from the 60th floor >downward, the upper floors would be left hanging in the air, supported >only by the central columns. This situation would soon become unstable >and the top 40 floors would topple over (to use Loizeaux's image) much >like felling the top 600 ft. from a 1300 ft. tree. > >This model would also hold for the north tower. According to Chris >Wise's "domino" doctrine, the collapse began only at the floor with the >fire, not at the penthouse. How was it that the upper floor simply >disappeared instead of crashing to the earth as a block of thousands of >tons of concrete and steel? > >The amazing thing is that no one (but Loizeaux) even mentions this >phenomenon, much less describing the seismic event it must have caused. > >Where is the ruin where the 200ft x 200ft x 50 story- object struck? >Forty floors should have caused a ray of devastation 500 ft. into the >surrounding cityscape. > >In trying to reconstruct and understand this event, we have to know >whether the scenes we are watching are edited or simply shown raw as >they were recorded. > >But let us return to the fire. Liquid fuel does not burn hot for long. >Liquid fuel evaporates (or boils) as it burns, and the vapor burns as it >boils off. If the ambient temperature passes the flash point of the fuel >and oxygen is plentiful, the process builds to an explosion that >consumes the fuel. > >Jet fuel boils at temperatures above 176 degrees Celsius (350 F) and the >vapor flashes into flame at 250 degrees Celsius (482 F). In an >environment of 1500 degrees, jet fuel spread thinly on walls, floor, and >ceiling would boil off very quickly. And then it would either burn, or >run out of oxygen and smother itself. Or it would simply disperse out >the open windows (some New Yorkers claimed they could smelled the >spilled fuel). > >In no case would an office building full of spilled jet fuel sustain a >fire at 815 degrees C (1500 F) for 104 minutes -- unless it was fed >bottled oxygen, forced air, or something else atypical of a fire in a >high-rise office building. Certainly, the carpets, wallpaper, occasional >desks -- nothing else in that office would produce that temperature. >What was burning? > >OK, since it was mentioned, I am also upset with the quantity of >concrete dust (see University of Sydney Report 1). > >No concrete that I have ever known pulverizes like that. It is >unnerving. My experience with concrete has shown that it will crumble >under stress, but rarely does it just give up the ghost and turn to >powder. But look at the pictures -- it is truly a fine dust in great >billowing clouds spewing a hundred feet from the collapsing tower. And >the people on the ground see little more than an opaque wall of dust -- >with inches of dust filling the streets and the lungs afterward. > >What has happened here? > >I need a faith booster shot here. I would like to find a pictures of all >those platters piled up on each other on the ground, just as they fell >-- has anyone seen a picture like that? I am told it was cumulative >weight of those platters falling on each other that caused the collapse, >but I don't see the platters pilled up liked flapjacks on the ground floor. > >Instead, the satellite pictures show the WTC ruins like an ash pit. > >I am told by a friend that a Dr. Robert Schuller was on television >telling about his trip to the ruins. He announced in the interview that >there was not a single block of concrete in that rubble. From the >original 425,000 cubic yards of concrete that went into the building, >all was dust. How did that happen? > >I have just one other point I need help with -- the steel columns in the >center. When the platters fell, those quarter-mile high central steel >columns (at least from the ground to the fire) should have been left >standing naked and unsupported in the air, and then they should have >fallen intact or in sections to the ground below, clobbering buildings >hundreds of feet from the WTC site like giant trees falling in the >forest. But I haven't seen any pictures showing those columns standing, >falling, or lying on the ground. Nor have I heard of damage caused by them. > >Now I know those terrorist must have been much better at these things >than I am. I would take one look at their kamikaze plans with commercial >jets and I would reject it as -- spectacular maybe, but not >significantly damaging. The WTC was not even a strategic military target. > >But if I were a kamikaze terrorist, I would try to hit the towers low in >the supports to knock the towers down, maybe trapping the workers with >the fire and burning the towers from the ground up, just as the people >in last 20 stories were trapped. Even the Japanese kamikaze pilots aimed >for the water line. > >But you see, those terrorists were so sure the building would magically >collapse that way, the pilot who hit the north tower chose a spot just >20 floors from the top. > >And the kamikaze for south tower was only slightly lower -- despite a >relatively open skyline down to 25 or 30 stories. > >The terrorists apparently predicted the whole scenario -- the fuel fire, >the slow weakening of the structure, and the horrific collapse of the >building - phenomena that the architects and the NY civil engineering >approval committees never dreamed of. > >Even as you righteously hate those men, you have to admire them for >their genius. > >Few officials or engineers have been surprised by this turn of events -- >apparently everyone certified it for airplane collisions, but almost no >one was surprised when both collisions caused utter catastrophes in both >towers. In fact, their stutters and mumbles and circumlocutions would >make a politician blush: > >"Eventually, the loss of strength and stiffness of the materials >resulting from the fire, combined with the initial impact damage, would >have caused a failure of the truss system supporting a floor, or the >remaining perimeter columns, or even the internal core, or some combination." > >( University of Sydney Report 1) > >In a hundred years of tall city buildings, this kind of collapse has >never happened before. Never. It was not predicted by any of the experts >involved when the WTC towers were built. But now that it has happened, >everybody understands it perfectly and nobody is surprised. > >Is this civil engineering in the Third Millennium -- a galloping case of >perfect hindsight? > >Only one I have found candidly admitted his surprise: > >Observing the collapses on television news, Loizeaux says the >1,362-ft-tall south tower, which was hit at about the 60th floor, failed >much as one would like (sic) fell a tree. That is what was expected, >says Loizeaux. But the 1,368-ft-tall north tower, similarly hit but at >about the 90th floor, "telescoped," says Loizeaux. It failed vertically, >he adds, rather than falling over. "I don't have a clue," says Loizeaux, >regarding the cause of the telescoping. > >(University of Sydney Report 2) > >There was one highly qualified engineer in New Mexico who thought the >collapse could only happen with the help of demolition explosives, and >he was foolish enough to make the statement publicly. But then he >recanted ten days later and admitted the whole thing was perfectly >natural and unsurprising. I wonder what happened in those ten days to >make him so smart on the subject so quickly. > >>From the Albuquerque Journal: > >Van Romero, vice president for research at New Mexico Institute of >Mining and Technology says the collapse of the twin towers resembled >those of controlled implosions used in planned demolition. > >"My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit >the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the >buildings that caused the towers to collapse," Romero said. > >A demolition expert, Romero is a former director of the Energetic >Materials Research and Testing Center at Tech, which studies explosive >materials and the effects of explosions on buildings, aircraft and other structures. > >He said he and Denny Peterson, vice president for administration and >finance, were en route to an office building near the Pentagon to >discuss defense-funded research programs at Tech. Romero told the >Albequerque Journal that he based his opinion on video aired on national >television broadcasts. > >The detonations could have been caused by a small amount of explosive >put in more than two points in each of the towers, he said. "It could >have been a relatively small amount of explosives placed in strategic >points," Romero said. > > >And then, as though demonstrating how normal this "building collapsing" >phenomenon is, WTC buildings Six and Seven "collapsed," too: > >"Other buildings - including the 47-story Salomon Brothers building [WTC >7] - caved in later, weakened by the earlier collapses, and more nearby >buildings may still fall, say engineers." > >It seems no building in the area, regardless of design, is immune to >galloping WTC collapse-itis. It never happened in the 20th Century, but >welcome to the physical universe laws of the Third Millennium. > >Pardon me, but this recitation has not given me the relief I hoped for. >I must get back to work. > >I believe in the president, the flag, and the Statue of Liberty. I >believe in the honesty of the FBI and the humility of military men. I >believe in the network news anchor-persons, who strive to learn the >truth, to know the truth, and to tell the truth to the audience. > >And I believe all of America is so well educated in the basic physics >discussed above, they would rise up in fury if anyone tried to pull a >cheap Hollywood trick on them. > >Hand me that remote, will you? I believe [clonk]. I believe [clonk]. I >believe ... > >J. McMichael > >
