Democracy Now! Debate: Loose Change vs. Popular Mechanic

And even that would have been very hard to do. If Bush had known about the attack, he sure didn't find out directly from the hijackers. Those information filters up from the ground level (field opts, mid-level intel people) and bubbles up to the highest level. Which means there are a lot of people would have known about this. I would think at least a couple of these people would have gone public with it.

 

Again I'm only able to skim these threads so pardon me if I'm missing something and since my time is limited I'm speaking from my own knowlede so sorry about the lack of links.

I'm aware of ASTM E119 certification but not any certification that would certify exposed steel to structurally withstand a fire for several hours. Not denying that may be so as I'm not a steels expert. What I do know is that uninsulated steel is not considered to have a very high fire resistive rating. I just finished working two weeks ago on a steel building and the building was considered a non-rated type V this means that the building has the least fire protection and consequently much of the building structure could have uninsulated steel structure.

Fire protection ratings are determined in hours such as 1 hour, 2 hour meaning how long the wall or structure will stand in a fire. Uninsulated steel is considered to be below a 1 hour rating and can be used but as in the case of the building I was working on stairwells, elevators shafts and exit corridors have to have a higher rating of 1 or 2 hour. To meet that they have to be insulated with gyp board enclosure or spray on insulation or surrounded by concrete.

The WTC steel was insulated with the central core having gyp board, the floor joists spray on insulation and the exterior with concrete. What happened though is that the explosion blew away the gyp board and spray on insulation causing exposing the steel. Sure enough the steel only held for about one hour.

Also steel it doesn't take steel to melt to collapse all it takes is for it to be come slightly elastic.

Disasters are chaotic events and cannot be fully predicted. At the Oakland hills fire in 1991 whole blocks were burned down yet you would see one house standing untouched on surrounded by nothing but foundations. In tsunami you could be standing in one bay that was devestated yet the next bay would be untouched. When I saw Ground Zero 3 weeks after I rember standing infront of a glass storefront about 5 blocks away that was intact yet behind it was full of dust. The force of the collapse apparently struck in such a way as to not break the glass but force dust through the seams of the storefront.

Its not unusual that Building 7 collapsed yet some closer buildings stood since there tons of variables involving the distribution of energy released by the collapse of the building, the orientation of the building foundations and even how well the insulation was applied to the steel. Anyway from a conspiracy theory standpoint wouldn't it have made sense that the closer buildings would've been dynamited too?

They didn't free fall and it would be impossible to make a building collapse in free fall even if it was deliberately imploded. Anyway if you look a the video in slow motion the floors do fall on top of each other for most the collapses. There were some differences as the damage was different. The South Tower collapsed centrally at first as the exposed steel was primarily on the central elevator core which then took out the joists. The North Tower was hit at a corner and the part above the strike sloughs off first as the joists in that area lost their tensile strength pulling away from the walls and weakening one corner.

Pardon my skepticism but I know for a fact that the ASCE examined the steel debris and further it would just take a trip to Fresh Kills to determine how much WTC debris has been shipped away. Perhaps one of our NYC based Clutchfans might be willing to take an investigative field trip.

 

Once again I've only skimmed this and will emphasize I'm not a steels ex pert but I find much of the information and conjecture to go against commonly accepted knowledge regarding the performance of uninsulated steel in a fire.

While there may be steel that can maintain its tensile strength in a fire, such as battleship plating, such steel would be very expensive and not used in construction and very unlikely to be widely used in a structure as large as a skyscraper. The costs of such material would be prohibitive.

The design award had to do with the unique design that allowed most of the space in the towers to be be empty and not a sea of columns. The WTC structure is essentially two tubes, a central core and outside sleave, tied together with a web of joists. This was a revolutionarly design whereby you could have huge amounts of leasable space on the floors while building a very tall building. Further the design allowed it to resist huge lateral loads like wind and impacts by planes. That's the tremendous reserve strength they are talking about. What they didn't count on was a situation where the steel would be unprotected in a fire. There the revolutionary design of the WTC was its undoing since the lack of intermediate columns meant that there was very little structural redundancy. Once you got a big failure at one part of the structural system there was no way the rest of it could compensate since it was all integral. The design performed admirably in regard to what it was designed for, a latteral impact, it collapsed due to a situation that wasn't foreseen, the loss off insulation on the steel.

The "official story" regarding how and why the building collapsed is very solid and makes perfect sense.

Not anti-science at all. Since observations were made of planes hitting the building, fires in both towers and how the buildings collapsed. From those observations the hypothesis of steel weakened in a sustained fire is logical based on the observations on day of 9/11.

I have little basis to comment on who was working who or who was profiting but regarding the below:

The ASCE investigation was very effective and had direct access for samples. As I said I myself had planned on volunteering for the ASCE damage assessment team working at fresh kills. They had blueprints, heck I've seen the plans (blueprints for laymen) of the WTC.

Though direct evidence showing scorching and heat caused deformation of the steel was very visible. When I went to the Ground Zero even I noted that there was scorched and heat deformed steel. Anyway as I mentioned earlier it wasn't the jet fuel that directly caused the steel to collapse. I've seen steel structures collapsed from fire, such as buring paper and wood in a warehouse of combustion of grain dusts in a grain elevator. It is very obvious to me that the vast amount of paper, plastics, furniture and other combustibles in large office could sustain an extremely hot fire to weaken steel. Further a fire 100's of feet in the air open to all sides allowing plenty of oxygen to get to it.

Once again the ASCE had teams investigating the steel and other debris as it was brought to Fresh Kills. It wasn't as though the steel was sent to some secret undisclosed location and smelted down.

It doesn't matter whether the columns buckled inward or outward either way once they buckled that indicated a major failure. Again it doesn't take steel to melt to weaken. As I mentioned above the number of columns failing might've been initially exagerated but given the lack of redundancy in the WTC its didn't take 2/3ds of the columns to collapse to cause a catastrophic failure.

I'm not familiar with this test but the one thing I don't see listed there is that the steel was uninsulated.

They tested the the steel with all of the required fireproofing on it while what happened on 9/11 was that insulation came off of the steel.

Its very easy to make steel 3 hours rated. Just wrap it in three 5/8" layers of type X gyp board. The thing is though is that gyp board is brittle. Just take a hammer to a sheet of drywall. Now imagine that drywall being hit by a 767 with almost a full gas tank at 600+ MPH and you can easily see how the insulation was blown off. That the exposed steel would collapse in 56 minutes almost exactly meets the standard that exposed steel is rated for less than an hour in a fire.

I don't have time to respond to all of the arguments presented here but skimming through them most of them seem about this level, full of half truths and partial reasoning or reasoning that goes against commonly accepted construction knowledge.

 

I'm currently in the process of moving overseas. Count me as one of the people you mentioned.

 

Thanks, I don't know anything about steel. You have expertise I lack and I know you to be honest.

I have no desire to become a conspiracy advocate, my whole deal is I don't trust politicians and so I find enjoyment in looking for reasons not to trust them. The reason I don't trust politicians is because the only one I know very well doesn't either and he has given me good reasons not to trust them- (at least he has told me things that has made him skeptical)

As to how the buildings collapsed. I have no idea. I am skeptical of all the scenarios because of the way the WTC7 came down. If that one image is not one of a demolition then it is the most unique building collapse by fire in all of history. If engineers believe that was due to fire alone I call that the emporer is naked. I am no engineer period, but I have watched many large building burning from missles and bombs in Lebanon, Iraq, buildings burning in hotel fires and industrial fires in chemical plants (I have been eye witness to it) here in Texas and I have never seen a perfect pancake occur like WTC7- except one engineered by highly trained personnel - every demo I have witnessed has been an engineering feat and the demo companies are usually pretty proud of their work. I just admit to being totally baffled by the fall of WTC7. I have watched the video footage of its collapsed many times.

As far as conspiracies. I don't in real life think of it at all. No need to I am too busy and focused on my family, the church and the Rockets. My own family has no gun stash, bomb shelters, or a years supply of food. We could care less about the conspiracy movement.

However I have the highest respect for my Congressman Ron Paul, I have spent hours with him and I have found him to be honest and of the highest ethical integrity. Dr. Paul was my wife's gyno. before he returned to Washington (he delivered my 15 year old son). His son and I are friends and have had more hours of discussion of what 'actually' goes on in Washington. The more I have learned about the behind the scenes government, the media and the bankers and industrialists that have the power money the more skeptical I have become of politicians.

Because of the corruption in government and I admit I again I am biased by my respect for Congressman Paul, I do not trust what is presented for public consumption.

The reason I was compelled reading Ruppert's book on 9-11 (there is no one piece organized timeline in the book) is because my Congressman knows Cheney personally and does not trust him at all. I don't want to say too much about it but I think he would rather trust a snake. I admit to being biased by my association with Congressman Ron Paul. I don't know about President Bush but I believe VP Cheney had every intention of an Iraq invasion back in the mid 1990's. That is the crux of the Ruppert book. I was aware of this long before 9-11, again through my Congressman.

I admit to posting stupid scenarios and conspiracy reactions. I enjoy posting in D&D because it is a venue for me to have fun with strange 'what ifs'. I really don't have any facts to back it up and I don't know if it is true. What I actually believe is that Congressman Paul has been honest with me and he has given me evidence that politics in Washington isn't as it is reported in the media.

I believe politicians lie and cover-up, there is corruption and much hidden from us within our govt.. You would think the govt. couldn't hide anything because of the media and the amount of people involved. But people are easily deceived. All you have to do is do the unthinkable and lie about it and even the highest people in the govt. will believe it.

Before 9-11 many Congressmen, media and govt. workers believed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Most believed we would find huge biological warfare caches if we infiltrated Iraq. I have a friend who is an officer in the Air Force, he told me that they were constantly told by military intelligence that this was true. He is in special forces. He has not been to Iraq but he receives intelligence reports. He still believes that there are huge caches of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (I'm talking about factory size stashes- this is what he believes). He is conditioned to believe that. Maybe there are and we will one day discover them and all the world will make sense.
Now this friend of mine graduated from the Air Force acadamy and has a genius IQ and he still believes 'intelligence' that there are bio weapon factories somewhere hidden in Iraq. I asked him recently why we haven't found them and he said we may have found them and don't want to make it public or eventually we will. He doesn't believe they were destroyed because that would make them easier to find.(unless we don't want to make it public news)

Now all of my own personal points of reference obviously point to distrust in politics. I again readily admit this bias.

So in D&D I stand on the side of those who question the govt's actions both Dem and Repub. If the official version is truth so be it. I guess history is written by the winners.

My own belief is America is moving close to the book '1984' type scenario and I think it is a tragedy.

If Congressman Paul is a wacko I have been fooled.

I would recommend his website link and I recommend sending him an email with any question you might have. He has a very different view of our govt. than what is droned on CNN and FOX each day.

 

The Sick Sad part about this is . ..
I suspect If they are there they will show up around September of 2008 . . .
around the same time we Capture Osama

It seems like these things happen at the most Politically Expedient times

Rocket River

 

Rhester;

I agree the US government, especially the current Admin., have done a lot of things to make people skeptical and I don't know enough about some of the stuff involving Cheney's possible involvement in a 9/11 conspiracy. I am commenting on things based on what I know first hand and from what I know first hand the "official story" from an engineering standpont seems very solid and the conspiracy theories seem riddled with half truths and conjecture not based on knowledge of commonly accept construction practices, such as that exposed structural steel can maintian its structural integrity for hours in a fire. Those things make me highly skeptical of the conspiracy theories.

Does that mean that there isn't a conspiracy theory? Not at all because certainly what we witnessed on 9/11 could've been caused in otherways but conjecture is infinite and there is no way to absolutely prove anything 100%.

The problem with the conspiracy theories is the lack of direct evidence of a primary cause. For instance with the "official story" we know that planes hit, we know there was a sustained fire, we know that exposed steel weakens in a sustained fire. If the conspiracy theories of a planned demolition are true what we need is direct evidence that bombs were planted, ie a credible eyewitness to a bomb being planted, photos / videos of bombs being planted, missile fragments of bombs and etc. If things like that were found then the conspiracy theories would have more validity. Absent those rational skepticism would say that the most likely explanation is the likely explanation.

 

I agree with you. I have no proof that validates anything other than the official story.

I have lost trust in the politicians. That is why I read alot of 'conspiracy' reports (plus it is fun to me). I am not saying I believe it all or even most of it. I believe I don't know the truth and that bugs me to no end.

I can't just accept that all is well in Camelot. I do believe some of the conspiracy stuff with regards to Central Banks and global politics. But it isn't worth worrying about. In my real (non BBS) life I just pastor a church, raise my kids and pay the bills.

Take care.

 

9-11 like the JFK assassination will keep people occupied for decades.

 

It will only occupy people with nothing better to do. Whenever something happens, the conspiracy theorists will come out.

Don't you know, the whole world is run by a secret group anyway....