conspiracy theory

[KEND]

From 911 Review

The Twin Towers exploded outwards as far as 70 m.

The tremendous force exploded the walls and entire structure out horizontally.
The buildings came down in about the same time as a free fall - there was no friction of a collapse.
The buildings were exploded into fine dust, not collapsed pieces. "Where does the energy come from to turn all this reinforced concrete into dust?" asks Jeff King.

[roger hao]

Spanish American War
Pearl Harbor
JFK
MLK
RFK
911

What more do you need to know?

[Bill]

The top stories, above where the planes hit, weighed hundreds of thousands of tons and it acted as a pile driver downward. That's where the energy came from.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

The top stories, above where the planes hit, weighed hundreds of thousands of tons and it acted as a pile driver downward. That's where the energy came from.

Or so popular mechanics and Nist says.
Nevertheless, no one was allowed to examine anything other than Nist.

So, all we have to go on is the Official story which is consistently being shown to have gaping errors.

Just saying.

I personally believe that there were bombs planted inside the buildings and especially on the core beams and in the elevator shafts BEFORE the event took place. the free fall of the three buildings is very curious to every architect and engineer outside of NIST and the number of engineers and architects that are piping in their skepticism grows daily.

I think the Bush Admin was not forthcoming with all the information and I do not know why. But having studied applied physics even at a high school level tells me that something is not right about a steel frame building collapsing into it's own footprint at near free fall speed. It has NEVER ever happened before in the history of architecture and steel frame buildings have burnt for hours under similar conditions of heat and stress and have not fallen.

So, I take exactly zero comfort from the OS and in fact, I don't buy it as the whole story.

[Bill]

the free fall of the three buildings is very curious to every architect and engineer outside of NIST and the number of engineers and architects that are piping in their skepticism grows daily.

My brother is a structural engineer and he calls the 911 truthers crackpots and fools.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

I work with engineers on a daily basis. More than a few of them are the "crackpots" your brother hates.

[KEND]

According to the conspiracy theorists there were other aspects which are suspect. They say that iron filings and other components suggesting thermite was present during the fire that produced temperatures in excess of 4000 degF. The straight down freefall is another puzzling aspect. The plane, if it was the cause of the structural collapse occupied a central area, the core would extend beyond that, I understand the perimeter steel took up maybe 40% of the load, this would create an asymmetric collapse, this collapse was more like a controlled one as used in demolition.
I hope there will be a new investigation by a group who have no agenda with regard to the outcome.
Incidentally I'm a Mechanical Engineer, I do not agree with many of the extreme conspiracy theorists, like the planes being remotely controlled etc but I do feel there are questions to be answered since the collapse doesnt make any sense.

[Chris Fleming]

the free fall of the three buildings is very curious to every architect and engineer outside of NIST and the number of engineers and architects that are piping in their skepticism grows daily.

My brother is a structural engineer and he calls the 911 truthers crackpots and fools.

So I guess that plane that hit building 7 must have generated that energy too. Oh wait. I guess he'll just have to go back to childish name calling for your, oh I mean, his, arguments.

[Steve James]

Fwiw, having been near ground zero less that 12 hours after the event, I can assure you that the enire structure did not, in any way, turn to dust. There were body parts recovered too. And, no other steel structure was built like it. Anyway, just from some architect-engineer point of view.

Why the World Trade Center Towers Fell on September 11
Engineers tell why the World Trade Center twin towers collapsed

By Jackie Craven, About.com Guide

In the years since September 11, 2001 terrorist attack in New York City, engineers and other experts have been studying the collapse of the World Trade Center towers. By examining the collapse step-by-step, experts are learning how buildings fail, and discovering ways we can build stronger structures.

What Caused the Twin Towers to Fall?
1. Impact from the Terrorist Planes
When Boeing jets piloted by terrorists struck the Twin Towers, some 10,000 gallons (38 kiloliters) of jet fuel fed an enormous fireball. But, the impact of the planes and the burst of flames did not make the Towers collapse right away. Like most buildings, the Twin Towers had redundant design. The term redundant design means that when one system fails, another carries the load. Each of the Twin Towers had 244 columns around a central core that housed the elevators, stairwells, mechanical systems, and utilities. When some columns were damaged, others could still support the building.

2. Heat from the Fires
The sprinkler system was damaged by the impact of the planes. But even if the sprinklers had been working, they could not have maintained enough pressure to stop the fire. Fed by the remaining jet fuel, the heat became intense.

Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F. This is not hot enough to melt structural steel. However, engineers say that for the World Trade Center towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength. Steel will lose about half its strength at 1,200 degrees F. The steel will also become distorted when heat is not a uniform temperature.

3. Collapsing Floors
Most fires start in one area and then spread. The fire from the terrorist planes covered the area of an entire floor almost instantly. As the weakened floors began to collapse, they pancaked. This means that floors crashed down on floors with increasing weight and momentum, crushing each successive floor below. With the weight of the plunging floors building force, the exterior walls buckled.

Why did the collapsed towers look so flat?
Before the terrorist attack, the twin towers were 110 stories tall. Constructed of lightweight steel around a central core, the World Trade Center towers were about 95% air. After they collapsed, the hollow core was gone. The remaining rubble was only a few stories high.

http://architecture.about.com/od/disast ... erfall.htm

[Darth Rock&Roll]

None of this precludes it being terrorists originating from the middle east

These are the big questions in my eyes.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/ ... ranscript/

[bustr]

Remote control is not that far-fetched considering the technology is decades old and that alot of air-traffic software is developed in israel. IDF operatives, believing they were part of a drill could have handed over control to someone on the ground who flew the planes into buildings. I'm not asserting that is what happened but it is possible to do.

According to the conspiracy theorists there were other aspects which are suspect. They say that iron filings and other components suggesting thermite was present during the fire that produced temperatures in excess of 4000 degF. The straight down freefall is another puzzling aspect. The plane, if it was the cause of the structural collapse occupied a central area, the core would extend beyond that, I understand the perimeter steel took up maybe 40% of the load, this would create an asymmetric collapse, this collapse was more like a controlled one as used in demolition.
I hope there will be a new investigation by a group who have no agenda with regard to the outcome.
Incidentally I'm a Mechanical Engineer, I do not agree with many of the extreme conspiracy theorists, like the planes being remotely controlled etc but I do feel there are questions to be answered since the collapse doesnt make any sense.

[Steve James]

There's no doubt there was a conspiracy. 9/11 was not an imaginary event. The question might be "who" did it. It is generally "accepted" that the conspirators were Saudi Arabs. However, it's certainly "possible" that it was the US gov't or the Israelis, SPECTRE or SMERSH or even someone we haven't even considered. The questions of "how" the buildings fell is a completely different issue. It's true that no one has ever seen anything like it anywhere. To me, this makes the contention that the conspirators "knew" the Towers would fall is far fetched. It wouldn't have been necessary to topple the Towers altogether in order to generate a similar response. The toppling was, imo, for the conspirators a happy accident.

[bustr]

Bringing the towers down was part of larry silverstein's insurance fraud.

[Steve James]

Bringing the towers down was part of larry silverstein's insurance fraud.

Ah, very precise. "Follow the money"

[everything]

the free fall of the three buildings is very curious to every architect and engineer outside of NIST and the number of engineers and architects that are piping in their skepticism grows daily.

My brother is a structural engineer and he calls the 911 truthers crackpots and fools.

um ok my father in law is a structural engineer as well and after reviewing the crackpots' videos, he had to agree with them.

and since we're using this stupid reasoning, my grandma can kick your grandma's ass, too.