Saturday, March 30, 2013

A Citizen's 20 Points to Drive Home the Truth About 9/11

By James Madison

Here are the basic facts demonstrating why the official story is impossible.  More than ten years later, an enormous number of people have woken up to these facts.
  • Most of the steel from the Twin Towers was found far outside the bases of the towers in straight pieces cut cleanly at the ends.  Core beams and perimeter assemblies weighing up to twenty tons were hurled laterally for hundreds of yards at speeds of up to 80MPH.   This is conclusive evidence of explosives demolition rather than gravitational collapse.
  • Jet fuel is only kerosene.  Spilled jet fuel burns no hotter or longer on an open surface than ordinary lighter fluid.  The National institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) found no evidence of fires over 480F in tested steel samples.  This  is the temperature of normal office fires.  High-rise furniture and upholstery is fire retardant by law.
  • Most of this kerosene blew out in the fireballs on impact.

  • The tower which was hit last, and damaged the least, was the first to disappear.  The plane which struck the South Tower came in at a diagonal and struck a corner of the building, just grazing the core columns.  Almost all the kerosene was lost in the fireball.
  • The towers were specifically designed to absorb multiple hits by jetliners approximately the same size and weight of 767s.  Chief structural engineer John Skilling said in 1993:
"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed, ... The building structure would still be there."

Frank Demartini, the construction manager for the World Trade Center, said in an interview on January 25, 2001:
"I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting."
  • The jetliner impacts did no significant damage to the steel frames of the towers.  Jetliners are essentially hollow aluminum tubes.  A 767 is approximately 1/2500 of weight of one tower.  The kinetic energy of the planes was absorbed by the much greater mass of the towers.  Aluminum is only one-third of the density of steel.  The photo below shows that the planes were shredded on impact.

  • The fires resulting from the plane hits were small and isolated, not "raging infernos."  Just 7 minutes before the collapse of the South Tower, Battalion Chief Oreo Palmer said in a radio transmission from the 78th floor: "Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines." Two lines refers to two fire hoses.
  • No high rise of any kind of construction has ever disappeared from the skyline within seconds as a result of fires, or indeed, as a result of anything but controlled demolition.  In the case of the Windsor fire in Madrid in 2005, in a high-rise of weaker construction than the Towers, the fire burned for 20 hours throughout all floors.  From a standpoint of chemistry and physics, the fuel required to generate the amount of heat-energy needed to raise the temperature of the structural steel to the point of failure was not present. 

    Windsor fire: Burned for 20 Hours
     
    9/11: South Tower burned for 52 minutes before destructionBlack smoke is indicator of oxygen-starved fires going out.




  • The amount of kinetic energy generated by the possible collapse of a few floors is not remotely enough to crush 90 stronger floors beneath that collapse.  The difference in these energies is many orders of magnitude.
     
  • If the official story is true, then it revolutionizes the steel foundry business.  This industry spends lots of money on blast furnaces which burns lots of expensive coal or coke (refined coal) in an enclosed ceramic chamber.  Pre-heated air is "blasted" through the fuel to raise steel to 5,000F to melt, and nearly that high to become malleable.


    Twin Tower core backbone under construction



    Illustration of main support columns
  • There have been partial collapses in small sections of steel-framed high-rises, but complete and catastrophic failure in a matter of seconds is impossible except for in controlled demolitions.

  • Falling mass does not accelerate as it accumulates.  The official story relies on a purely imaginary "domino effect" whereby each collapsing floor adds to the overall weight, and drives a "chain reaction."  But this ignores the enormous upward static force of the supporting steel columns, both in the core and in the perimeter, which is much greater than the initial kinetic energy downward.  Accumulating mass could not drive the downward fall faster, because all objects fall through air at the same speed, per Galileo.  Floors which collapse on one another do not go "faster and faster."  They go slower as energy is absorbed.

  • Even if somehow the towers collapsed as a result of fatal weakening, even if the steel got "soft like clay," clay is still is much denser than air. The upper floors could not "fall' at the speed as they would have fallen through thin air.  Study this illustration and word problem:

    A 9/11 Story Problem: Which 15 story building hits the ground first?


    Answer: On 9/11 both upper blocks hit the ground at virtually the same time, suspending the laws of physics!

    -If the 15 story section is falling at free fall speed ...

    -All of its gravitational potential energy is converted to Kinetic Energy (movement)

    - It is not available to do the work of "crushing" the building below!

    - It would have to slow down in order to do any other work, i.e., "crushing 80,000 tons of structural steel below.

  • Then there is WTC7.  No plane hit it which would have "weakened the structure" as the official story maintains for WTCs 1 and 2.  There was heavier debris damage and larger fires in many adjoining Trade Center Complex buildings, yet WTC 7 alone fell down dead-level, at virtually free-fall speed, into a neat heap inside its own footprint.


  • Houses of cards and of building blocks have no solid joints, and therefore offer no resistance as they fall.  The towers and WTC 7 had enormous resistance to stresses and failure at all points in the structures, yet fell as if they were houses of cards.  This illusion cannot be sustained upon even cursory examination.


  • The upward static resistance of the vertical steel backbone running up the center of the towers could not have been overcome by a partial collapse of floors.  The towers' "backbone" of 47 steel beams, running continuously up the entire height of the towers, were heavily cross-braced and reinforced so that load would be redistributed in the event of the failure of any single member or members.  This is in accordance with standard design principles.  All modern skyscrapers have a built in "safety factor" of three to five, the ability to withstand three to five times the maximum possible stresses, under extreme conditions, in any direction.  The Towers were most probably even stronger than this.  At the base, the 47 core beams were nearly five feet wide.



  • The "domino"-like collapse mechanism, sometimes described as a "pile driver" effect of collapsing floors, is impossible when one recalls that there was nothing actually on top of the 47 core columns, which ran continuously from the ground to the ceiling of the highest floor.  Thinking of the core backbone as  a record player spindle, the stacked vinyl records would represent the floors.  Excessive downward stress on the floors would strip them from the core, like records falling down along the spindle.  There was no compressive force directly atop the core columns.

  • There is one scenario under which the countless inconsistencies, puzzles, and anomalies of 9/11 fall into place: that of standard demolition cutter and kicker charges, one of which "cuts" a beam a split second before another one "kicks" it out, as in the following demolition in China.


In the video the Chinese demolition is compared to 9/11, showing startling similarities. Demolition expert Tom Sullivan, formerly of the industry leader Controlled Demolition Inc., has said that the demolitions would have been "no problem."    Sullivan said:
“looking at the building it wouldn’t be a problem — once you gain access to the elevator shafts…then a team of expert loaders would have hidden access to the core columns and beams. The rest can be accomplished with just the right kind of explosives for the job. Thermite can be used as well.”
  • The molten steel which flowed in the basements of the towers like a "Dante's Inferno" would be perfectly explained by the use of thermite, an incendiary which melts steel rather than cuts it, in a violent exothermic reaction which can reach 5,000F and could release enough heat-energy to raise the temperature of molten steel to a point which would keep it molten for weeks, even months.  This is similar to the way in which a pot of water which is brought to near boiling stays hot much longer than one heated to just a few degrees above room temperature.  Substances absorb heat, and the more that is absorbed, the longer it takes to cool off.
  • The fact that high-grade thermitic compounds, which can only be made in a laboratory, were found, without triggering an investigation of the source, is almost inconceivable.
None of this touches on the "who and why" of 9/11, since that is putting the cart before the horse.  To ask the motive or motives behind a crime, before it has been established that the crime has been committed, is premature.  In this case the crime is a false flag attack blamed on a terrorist network known as Al Qaeda.  Suffice it to say that all wars have beneficiaries.

- JM

Sunday, March 3, 2013

Aerial Photo Shows 9/11 Towers Exploded Out, Did Not Collapse Down

Aerial view of WTC complex taken on September 23, 2001, before clean-up operations had begun.  For larger photo with clickable areas of detail go to: Image at: http://busharchives.org/911/wtc.html

Close up of steel debris


One of the first things Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who coordinated the destruction of the steel evidence at Ground Zero, did after the attack was prohibit almost all photography at the site. Police and FBI agents were ordered to confiscate cameras on the spot, although inevitably, there were simply too many people swarming the crime scene for such a stricture to be successfully enforced.

One key piece of photographic evidence that did survive the government's attempts to keep the public in the dark about what happened that day was an aerial photo taken on Sept. 23, 2001, long before major clean-up operations had begun. Rescue workers and firefighters were still primarily concerned with searching for human remains and even long-shot survivors. The clash between police and firefighters which took place as Giuliani hastened to the "scoop and dump" phase of the operation was Nov. 2.

The aerial photo shows what no other photo could in such clear and convincing detail: that the towers did not collapse down through the line of gravity, but were blown outwards in all directions for two or three times as far as the towers were wide, leaving a carpet of cleanly-cut steel beams and perimeter wall sections across the entire WTC complex. No force imaginable in a downward gravitational collapse can explain the lateral ejection of steel sections with the weight of bulldozers for up to two football fields, at clocked speeds of up to 70 MPH.

As can be seen in the aerial photo, the steel beam pieces are mostly straight as arrows, un-deformed by heat, and cut neatly at the ends. The steel beams do not wind up in a mound, as one would expect, with the center of the tower's bases as the high point, but rather scattered uniformly across the entire World Trade Center complex, which consisted of seven buildings. Perimeter sections, which consisted of 15-inch wide beam assemblies covered with aluminum cladding, can be seen lying thickly across WTC 6, nearly two football fields away. Each one of these pieces weighed up to 20 or more tons.

The official NIST report explained dust ejections (what are obviously demolition squibs) by saying "compressed air" forced the dust out of breaking windows. But no amount of compressed air can lift 20-ton steel assemblies and hurl them laterally for 400 feet, at 50 to 70 MPH.

Hence the reason for Giuliani's ban on photography at Ground Zero. No amount of instruction in physics or fire temperature calculations would be as dangerous to the official "collapse" theory as plain visual evidence of demolition.  One need only to believe what your eyes are telling you . Steel falls down, not outward for 200 feet and more, at speeds of up to 80 MPH.

The below video narrated by David Chandler gives one of the best views of cut steel beam shooting upwards and outwards, not falling down through the line of gravity. Keeping in mind the massive scale of the towers (nearly a football field wide,) it must be remembered that what seem like tiny sticks are 10 foot long pieces of two-foot wide steel beam and larger, of which even the smallest would weigh nearly one ton.



Here is another view of multi-ton pieces of cut steel beams spinning away from the building as if they were toothpicks.




Circled sections of steel beam are approximately 10 feet long, the height of one story




This rarely seen photo shows the width of the debris field and lateral ejections of steel and pulverized concrete debris, which can be explained only by high explosives.






click below image to go to full-size clickable map, click on circles



From lower right-hand corner of above aerial map, leaning against outer edge of WTC 4




From roof of WTC 4, massive perimeter wall sections, see 60-foot flatbed trucks at bottom for idea of scale.


Perimeter wall sections under construction

9/11 Science Club: Mass Does Not Accelerate as it Accumulates

The central, reasonable intuition that the official 9/11 story uses to seem plausible is that as mass accumulates, it accelerates. The official NIST report describes the suggested collapse mechanism no further than the initial stages. This avoids having to address this basic contradiction in the laws of physics. But shills for 9/11 promote the idea that as floors collapsed, the mass of concrete and debris accumulated and therefore went faster and faster, that is, accelerated. Greater speed would impart greater kinetic energy, therefore crushing the structure beneath it. There is only one problem with this hypothesis. It is absurd.

Up until Galileo, it was assumed that a 100 pound cannon ball would fall faster to the ground than a 10 pound cannon ball. Galileo said no. Dropped from the same height at the same time, they would fall at exactly the same acceleration. Minus negligible differences in air resistance for the two objects of different size, Galileo was right.

So great a thinker was Galileo that NASA named an interplanetary spaceship after him.

In fact, Galileo said that, in a vacuum with no air resistance, even a feather would drop at the same acceleration as a 100 pound cannon ball. Experiments in vacuum tubes have proven him right.

Similarly, different masses of concrete would accelerate toward Earth at exactly the same speed. As floors collapsed, it would not go faster and faster, whether the steel was "soft" or not. The idea that the steel was heated to the point of malleability is itself absurd, but even this premise can be granted and it would make no difference to the argument. The resistance of 80 floors of steel and concrete, then, could only slow any falling mass, not make it go faster.

This is not to say that it is not reasonable to assume it would. Opponents of Galileo in the European academies argued this vigorously. But in the end Galileo was right. All objects of any weight, falling through thin air, fall at an acceleration of approximately 10 meters per second, per second. This means that for every second an object falls, another 10 meters per second is added to its speed. So if an object falls for 3 seconds, at that point it is going 30 meters per second.

The demolition line of the Twin Towers accelerated downward. The explanation of defenders of the official story is that mass was accumulating, thereby going faster, thereby gathering kinetic energy to break structural supports. But Galileo showed it would not have gone faster. Therefore kinetic energy would not have been gained, but lost as the mass met resistance. Given any significant resistance, the mass of concrete would have decelerated and stopped, as work was performed in crushing each successive floor, thus subtracting from the total amount of kinetic energy, not adding to it. The official story requires the overturning of Galileo.

Galileo Falling Bodies Demonstration

Galileo Falling Bodies Demonstration II: Ball and feather Drop in Vacuum

Which 15-story block will hit the ground first?  On 9/11, they both hit at the same time!
 If the 15 story section is falling at free fall speed ...
  •  All of its gravitational potential energy is converted to Kinetic Energy (movement)
  • It is not available to do the work of "crushing" the building below!
  • It would have to slow down in order to do any other work, i.e., "crushing 80,000 tons of structural steel below. (Source: NaderLibrary.com)


David Chandler's  Brilliant Explanation of Impossibility of Official Narrative

Twin Towers Demolition and Similar China Demolition Side-by-Side