An Architect Reflects on 9-11
68
I guess that September 11, 2001, will be one of those days you will remember exactly where you were and what you were doing. Not unlike when the Challenger blew up, when President Kennedy was shot, or when Pearl Harbor was attacked. I think that all these dates had such a profound affect on American history that anyone of a knowing age will never forget just exactly how they felt when they heard the news.
My wife and I had been married only a year and a half, and our oldest daughter was only 8 months old. I had been granted my Registration as an Architect a few months before, on July 2nd. I was in the middle of teaching a structural preparatory course for the Architectural Registration Exam (ARE), a course that I had developed and had been teaching for a number of years. At that time our classes were held on Saturdays, and the Saturday class before was quite normal and uneventful. Tuesday, the 11th was an election day for the City of Phoenix, and I was planning to go to an election night party for several of our Council Members. So I got up at 6:00 AM as I did every work morning and turned on the local news for my morning briefing of the events of the last day. Very shortly after it started, BAM!!!! One of the towers at the World Trade Center in New York was on fire. The reports were so sketchy and contradictory; it was hard to figure out just what had happened. I stopped getting ready for work and watched in astonishment and amazement. Not long after tuning in, flying in from the left side of the screen, a commercial plane hit the second tower. WOW!!! I could not believe my eyes. Then we were informed the Pentagon had been attacked. Was this the beginning of World War III? Shortly after that news, I sat there watching as the south tower collapsed, 56 minutes after it had been hit. The north tower followed suit shortly there after. Then a report of Flight 93, that had been hi-jacked and missing crashes into a field in Pennsylvania. I left for work, numb, fearful, would I see my wife and baby girl at the end of the day? What the hell would happen next?
When I arrived at work, a small TV had been tuned into the news and this was the topic being talked about both on TV and in the office. The immediate reports feared tens of thousand had been killed in the collapse of these two towers. Sensory overload. It was impossible to process all the information coming out at that time. By the end of the day, numbness gave way to the surreal. The FAA grounded all flights. There was an eerie quietness to the skies for 3 days as air traffic had been completely grounded. Even in a large City, like Phoenix, the quiet skies were noticeable and disconcerting. The election night gathering was somber, and in the background on most every TV around was continuing coverage of the day's events. We spent Saturday's class talking about the towers collapse, never did cover what we were supposed to that week. One of the things we discussed was why the buildings fell on themselves and not toppled over the side when they were hit. Since I essentially grew up as an Architect, that question at first sounded strange to me. Knowing how buildings are designed, we never want the building to topple over in a catastrophic event. That would make a single collapse even a larger catastrophic event. Now hundreds of thousands of lives would now be imperil as a building tips over. Imagine what the kill radius of a building almost 1,400 feet would be. The standards of localized and controlled collapse go back to standards that I studied in 1983 as I first prepared to take my ARE. These were standards that buildings were supposed to be designed under for at least several years earlier, at the very least. A week after that later, Phoenix sent their FEMA team to ground zero, and on it was a Structural Engineer I knew, Tom Wandrie, a plan reviewer with the City of Phoenix. Tom has been the building official for the City of Phoenix the last few years. He spent a week there during the clean up of ground zero.
Weeks later, as the casualty numbers and other information were becoming clearer, it became possible to do some analysis. Based on what had been said, I did some math to find out that on any given workday hour, those two towers housed around 50,000 people. Some 2,700 people lost their lives when the buildings collapsed. About 500 of those were EMS workers that went into the building after the catastrophic event began. The death toll for those OCCUPIED buildings was only about 4%. I do not want to devalue any of the lives lost that day, but it is amazing to me, that 30-year-old technology had been so efficient that it was able to evacuate like 96% of the buildings' occupants before catastrophic collapse. That is why the initial news reports were projected tens of thousands of deaths. Subsequent studies and reports have shown that the majority of deaths occurred to those trapped above the impact floors, as the two large jets had severed their means of escape.
In the week leading up to this anniversary, I watched many programs on the History Channel, Discovery Channel, and others. Since these events, my wife will tell you, I have gotten very bent out of shape when I heard people like Rosie O'Donnell claim that the collapse of these towers was "an inside job" because they fell on themselves. Are you S#%!*$#@ me! What the hell training is she making this judgment off of? She is nothing more than an entertainer. Where is her engineering background? I got even more inflamed as I watched some of these "conspiracy theory" programs that was aired in the week leading to this anniversary. One of them had an "Architect" on, Mr. Richard Gage spouting off. Far be it from me to call out another "Professional", but after hearing him, my first question is WHO IS PAYING YOUR BILLS? He sounds like one of those "hired guns" prostituting his profession for monetary gain. One of the first things taught in our training (and tested, at least when I took the test) was the knowledge and understanding that steel loses strength, and will deform, when exposed to heat. That is why the building code requires structural steel to be thermally insulated. Steel does NOT have to be exposed to melting temperatures to deform and fail. There are countless test from Underwriters Laboratories, Factory Mutual, and Ohio State University that proves this. These are all agencies that have completed fire testing on assemblies. So where does Mr. Gage get off with contradicting science? Does he know something that the rest of the world does not know? Is he trying to tell us that he is an Einstein? Bless my britches and kiss my grits.
I know this is a very emotional issue. If I had a loved one perish in these events, I sure would not want their memory dishonored. Let us not dishonor these lost lives by perpetuating lies for our own benefit. As I said in a previous hub just because someone is Registered, that does not necessarily mean that they are correct. Check other opinions, if this one stands alone, opposite other professionals, then maybe this is not the most accurate. What we need to take away from the events of September 11, 2001, is that American technology is still superior, even at 30 years old. That is the only reason that the initial reports of tens of thousands dead fail to come to pass. That is the true legacy of the American spirit.
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
Dan, I worked as an apprentice blacksmith for a year and a half right out of high school. Steel goes through a series of molecular changes as it is exposed to higher and higher heat. Tiny imperfections in the steel (in all steel) become pronounced and can cause the steel to crack, bend, or shatter depending on stresses, heat, and pressure. Hmmm, like the weight of a building on steel girders being heated by burning jet fuel. When these goofballs like Charlie Sheen and Rosie O'donnel speak, they bring out their own predjudices and ignorance. They aren't interested in the truth - they are interested in hating George Bush.
From my thermal knowledge working in a cement plant with akiln running at 2600 deg.f. I do not know how beams would be thermally insulated in a big fire. My knowledge is that the heat would have to be dissipated off. I do not see this in a big fire from jet fuel. The beans would heat up with the fire. And the concrete reinforcement would lost from the re-bar being heated up also. The heat would not be dissipated off.
Keep on hubbing!
Great Hub! I too remember and it had a profound impact on this old soldier, Good work on dispelling the conspiricy concept. Soon to be your fan..
The molten steel in footage and photographs is not being accounted for in your digression. Also you are forgetting building 7 which completely eludes planecrash-fuel-fire rationale.
Moreover, the scientific article with thermitic evidence in the rubble composition is also very incriminating.
You also have no leverage or authority whatsoever for being an architect, an enraged on at that.
The whole world suffered the aftermath of war and tyranny and thus some profited at the expense of those 2700 lives plus many in the wars that followed. Halliburton, CACI, Blackwater, and others made a living out of 9-11.
Roger,
Molten steel? What pictures have you seen? I have not seen anything like that in the photos I have studied. I personally know a Structural Engineer that was at ground zero working for a week (part of the Phoenix FEMA team) about a week after 9-11. Steel melts at 2500 degrees F, yet exposure to as little as 800 degrees F for as little as 15 minutes will cause the steel to deform and fail to support the intended loads. So steel does not have to melt to fail. It will fail long before reaching the melting point.
As for Tower 7, it was damaged and caught fire when the north tower collapsed at 10:28 AM. With no water available to fight that fire it burned unchecked until collapsing at 5:20 PM. That was almost 8 hours of fire. The building was designed to resist 1 hour of fire before beginning failure, by building code requirements, what’s your point? I think it performed beyond expectations as a building. How long do you think your house would burn, without fire suppression, before it would collapse?
Now the BIG question, what “thermitic evidence”? I have seen nothing scientifically proven to be thermite on the site. Oh yea, that all burned away, I forgot that! For the first time in 30 years a building was imploded here in Phoenix just a couple weeks ago. I have seen many programs on Discovery and other channels on how this occurs. There are ALWAYS traces of the detonation devices. That was true for the Oklahoma City bombing and all other bombings, just ask a bomb squad member. Let us not forget that I have seen test results that show that, although extremely hot in burning, thermite also burns incredibly fast, which makes it difficult, if not impossible to melt steel, which must absorb that heat to melt. I ask you, why must there be thermite? So how “incriminating” is that now?
You continued by saying that I have “no leverage or authority for being an Architect”. Is that a personal attack? I am betting that you see yourself as civilized and advanced, yet you stoop to the mid-evil tactic of shooting the messenger of bad news. Your personal attack like that might be interpreted as a deep seeded distrust of the very views you seem to be espousing. I have over 3 decades of designing buildings and analyzing them, what experience are you calling on? I have been on site after a catastrophic event, have you? You need to read my profile, I am Registered in three states, and I hold two Building Code certifications, but because I said something that you disagree with, you believe that is grounds to discount all my experience. What my outrage is about is that people, with ABSOLUTELY no scientific background or evidence, spout off as facts things that have no validity. I have spent a life time learning what I do, and if someone is going to attempt to contradict me, at least provide me the courtesy of using facts and proven science.
As for the subsequent wars, I never mentioned anything like that in this hub, so why do you have to be so petty in an attempt to get your view out that you have to overshadow what this hub was about. We can discuss the wars later, but how do these wars have an impact on the science behind the collapse of these buildings and the lives lost? Why not be honest about your attempt to promote your own personal agenda. I accept the fact that personal agendas are not founded in science; just do not try to sell me on our own agenda as science if there is little or none.
Here are several images showing molten steel at the site: http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/Graphics-Other/PSCI/Wtc
http://9eleven.info/moltenstreamthermate.jpg
http://www.camelotcorp.com/Fires-burned-and-molten
and the article I cited about the incriminating evidence of thermite: ~http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCP/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM
another one
http://physics911.ca/pdf/2004/grimmer_thermite.pdf
and another one
http://www.springerlink.com/content/f67q6272583h86
and another one concerning sismology: http://bb.domaindlx.com/alexjames9999/chapters/wtc
It is not the specialists role to say what is the truth, it is evidence's.
I am sorry, I do not want to attack you personaly. I am only trying to present evidence. Sometimes people do not want to believe what is known.
Here is my response: http://unendingevolution.wordpress.com/2009/10/14/
It is not the specialists role to say what is the truth, it is evidence's.
I am sorry, I do not want to attack you personaly. I am only trying to present evidence.
Sometimes people do not want to believe what is known.
Roger,
First, what is your background? Do you have any FIRST HAND knowledge on how buildings are constructed, designed and/or engineered? I am analyzing the information provided. At first glance a couple thoughts come to mind immediately. The first picture I looked at that you provided was of what appeared to be steel that was red hot. For the record, that is NOT molten steel. Molten steel is steel that is heated to a liquid state. The steel in the picture still held its form, but had absorbed enough heat to become red hot. That would be similar to the temperature that a blacksmith would heat iron or steel to form it. There were reports that the police helicopter reported seeing columns white hot as he was circling the buildings in the first hour of the event. Those white hot columns were hotter than the red hot steel in your first picture. That is science, not me. Go to your local high school and ask the chemistry teacher there, you will find this corroborated.
Another picture showed what was claimed to be “mini” explosions from below the floors as the building collapsed. The most basic physics confounds such a claim as that. As the floors above collapse, air is compressed on that floor. Air will have to move away from the compressive force taking the path of least resistance. The air that could not be forced out the windows on the collapsed floor would most likely find a vertical shaft and escape from a lower floor blowing out windows. Looking at the picture you referred to does nothing to discount these forces of physics. It appears that all the information that you are citing is from other sources and that you, personally, have no experience with issues such as these, and there is nothing wrong with that. I know nothing of delivering a baby, yet I watched the Doctor deliver all three of my children. No one person can know everything, which is why there are “specialists” and that is by itself not derogatory. It is just the way things are. We that are not “specialists” need to be very discerning about those that we do listen to. Do our own research to confirm that at least the basic science espoused by those speaking is correct. If that cannot be substantiated , then one must question the validity of the rest of their claims.
It must also be submitted as evidence that it would have taken weeks, with hundreds of man-hours to wire those towers for explosive demolition. Why has no one come forward with such information and evidence? I am sure that would be very lucrative for one conspirator. It is known that the more people that know about a secret, the less likely it is to stay a secret, and that would have taken a lot of poeple to complete and thus keep quiet.
So I will look closer at your information, but you need to be honest with this question as well. Why must there be conspiracy? Why, in your opinion, does this have to be an “inside job”? Is it that difficult for you to accept that a handful of extremist could perpetrate such a crime on their own without “inside” help?
Dan and Roger - I have absolutely no knowledge or expertise in structural engineering, (other than Bunkers I've built when I needed them). I would point out though that OBL did have an Engineering background but even with that background and the building plans available, the total collapse was considered a bonus not the primary objective, (He stated so in the interview he gave after the attack.) He had rather hoped the damage of the attack would have stood as a monument to it on the New York Skyline for the years it would have taken to fix the structures. Where all this fits in the current argument I do not know, what I do know however is that the attacks took place and were funded , planned and executed by Al Quieda, a force of evil on our planet that requires the same fate we hand out to a bumble bee or mosquito that stings or bites us, we need to find them and kill them. - Hmrjmr1 Out
Hammer,
Thanks for helping us focus. Great thoughts.
Dan
My background is Biochemistry but that does not define me. The important thing is I had the fortune to learn a bit about critical thinking. Even when an insect stings, the best way to prevent it from happening again would be to... understand the cause. To kill a bee is just like painting a target on yourself causing others to attack most of the times, because of the pheromones released. Generally US paranoia about national security naturally leads ironically to national and international insecurity. Anyway, the evidence is presented and I am sure there is a lot more. The jury is out. As you might have realized I am not a proponent for either side, rather I am trying to make each side notice gaps of knowledge characteristic to them. I bet any of you haven't imagined that such scientific articles have been produced in the wake of this terrible event. Only thing really relevant is to make it impossible to repeat itself by knowing its cause as best as possible.
"what I do know however is that the attacks took place and were funded , planned and executed by Al Quieda, a force of evil on our planet that requires the same fate we hand out to a bumble bee or mosquito that stings or bites us, we need to find them and kill them."
Hitler also called soviets a force of evil and used such to promote fascism, and eventually, total war. War is the worst way to try to solve problems.
Roger,
I can respect your words. Differing opinions have been the guiding light in our Country from its inception. If you truly are trying to point out gaps in both sides, then you need to question the very same things that I have. The set up for the demolition alone could not have been done by one person, a group would have to be required. As a result, EVERYONE in that group MUST keep silent, and that has been proven historically as not likely. Also, the use of any chemicals would leave trace evidence that would be discovered. Where is that evidence? How would so many people be kept silent for so long? The claims of explosion from inside the building are used as evidence that there were explosives. Ask any firefighter, in a structure fire oxygen can build up in areas of the structure on fire and create explosions and backdrafts. There was even a movie a few years ago about those events, remember it's named was Backdraft.
When I started my career, there was a document that I had to study for my exams. It was ANSI A58.1, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. It is that standard that outlines the loading requirements and the process for design for localized collapse in case of a catastrophic event. These building, like Oklahoma City, all performed in the manner that they were supposed to. As a result only about 2,200 building occupants lost their lives, not that I am diminishing the value of human life, we must be aware the deaths could have been in the thousands, if not tens of thousands.
Dan,
Great article. Once a conspiracy theory is started and particularly believed, it is fruitless to confuse the believer with the FACTS. As an electrical engineer who for the predominant part of my career in the aluminum industry I know for a FACT that if aluminum is exposed to an open flame thermite will result. I am sure there was some aluminum in the towers so if no thermite (oxidated aluminum)
had been found it would be miraculous.
I am not sure what Roger proposes in our struggle with radical islamist. I don't think a dinner invitation will solve the problem. We ARE in a KILL OR BE KILLED SITUATION!!!!!!
Tom,
What great insight. As I pointed out in this hub, I only wanted to invoke my emotions that day, and the after analysis of the collapse. I do not believe that a building in any other Country could have faired as well. I especially find it interesting to study how the buildings failed, and how the lives got out. After all, that is what building safety is all about.
Tom said
"I am not sure what Roger proposes in our struggle with radical islamist. I don't think a dinner invitation will solve the problem. We ARE in a KILL OR BE KILLED SITUATION!!!!!!"
Damn, that is quite an ignorant statement to be made. You shouldn't be proud. More Americans died in the Iraq war than in 9-11. And nobody cares about the plus one million Iraqi civilians killed during this war. Your xenophobic affirmation is very unchristian if you are one. If you are not one you should be ashamed for not being able to use critical thinking, or even common sense for that particular matter.
The Iraq war resulted in increased hatred across the world towards US oppression. There has never been so much will to react against US especially by these oppressed people (sometimes in a violent manner) Plus, the war was mainly all about oil. The Iraqi oil reserves and future Afghan pipeline.
Watch this documentary:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/194794-Video-The
and please just do one thing: think!
Even the freefall time of the towers has been ignored by you all, also the vertical columns were not there in ground zero (if thermite was not used). Everything was, at ground zero, so to speak. Also the impossible-to-keep-secret is not a very strong argument. Nazis kept the concentration camps secret for years until Germany lost WWII.
Even though history doesn't perfectly repeat itself, it progresses in rhymes.
Roger,
Let me first address a couple things you said about Tom's comments that are absurd. How do you equate innocent civilian lives with the lives willing to be placed on the line by our military personnel? When you sign up in the military, you knowingly accept that you will be placed in harm's way at some time, and you may need to sacrifice to save some one else. A civilian going to work makes no such commitment. Get real!! In fact many who have given that ultimate price did so because of the events of 9-11. How about Pat Tillman of the Arizona Cardinals? If you do not know who he is, look him up. Before you start preaching "Christian", please look at the Bible. Under the Law of Mosses, there are both civil and religious law components. The Civil (Governmental or Societal) Law and the Individual (Personal Responsibility) Law. The personal part of the law was fulfilled as being that of forgiveness of those that wrong you. However, there was no contradiction to the civil side of those Laws.
As for the wars, they have always been there throughout the world. The Arabs (Iraqi) and the Persians (Iranians) have been enemies for generations. Many more have died in that long running feud, from each side, than have died in any war with another enemy. As far as American oppression, maybe you failed to study in school, but after WWII, the allies demanded that the US protect them with our military. As for the violence, only since 9-11 has Americans been dealing with issues that the rest of the world has struggled with for eons. Did you forget the Protestants and Catholics in Ireland, the Palestinians, Iran and Iraq, China and Chinese Taipei, Tibet, etc.? The security measures that were initiated after 9-11 here in the U.S. have been happening all around the world for decades. Conflicts are part of history, why single out a handful to object to? To be consistent, should you not object to all of them? As far as war goes, most all wars are economical in basis, making the claim about the current ones only are ludicrous. Why not use critical thinking about that? Oh well, that is enough of your comments towards what Tom said.
I must ask this about your comments about the "freefall time of the towers". What the hell are you talking about? Once collapse started the towers fell within moments, are you claiming that that they took to long to fall to the ground or collapsed to quickly? Is this part of the "critical thinking" you were referring to? If it is, it completely eludes me. As for your claim that no columns were at ground zero (because of thermite), that information is completely inaccurate. I personally know one of the workers that had been at ground zero, a Structural Engineer, and he will dispute that, as he had to over see the dismantling of the columns and beams in order to move the rubble. I believe that pieces of those elements had been cataloged at the Long Island site that most of the buildings were taken to be inspected before being sent out to their respective dumps and recycling centers. As for the Nazis, their secret last only about 6 years, now that is something to think about. Finally, again I ask you, why must there be a conspiracy?
Dan,
I thank you for your courtesy in your responses.
I do not appriciate being called ignorant by Roger. I was raised as a Christian. I was also raised by a father who volunteered to go into the Navy in January of 1942 at the age of 33. My brother was 8, and my sister was 4 at that time. Dad knew he would never be drafted but he believed in defending America. So he did a four year hitch in the South Pacific, and I was born one year to the day after he finally returned home.
I do not relish war but I am not stupid enough to believe that it can always be avoided.
Tom,
I truly respect those that choose that type of commitment as your father did, it because of them that we have our freedom. It is that gift of freedom that we hand down to our children and grandchildren. I believe that the only way to continue to pass this gift down is through truth and I believe, of course, that truth can, and will, stand scrutinizing by all. I welcome those of differing views, however I do demand that you come with facts and not emotions. Facts can be analyzed and discussed with results, where emotions cannot. If someone feels something, I respect that; I will not argue that as it is based in that one's own feelings. I believe that my wife is the most caring, loving, desirable woman in the world. Do not try to argue differently with me, as I will respectfully disagree you with you and there is no changing my view.
If one argues Government from that type of emotional base, then there is no way to change Government's direction, and that will truly be a travesty. We must remember that passion often drives leaders, and blinded passion often results in innocent deaths. For example the Nazis and concentration camps, Saddam Hussein gassing the Kurds, militants and the bombing of innocents (Pan Am Flight 103 in Lockerbie, Scotland, the hijackers of 9-11, the Olympic park bombing, etc.). Like you, I believe war is not something that should be engaged in lightly, but once there; the only acceptable outcome should be victory. I learned that from sports, a true competitor never competes for second place. Thanks for reading.
Ok what about this man's statements?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daNr_TrBw6E
Major General Albert "Bert" N. Stubblebine III, head of all intelligence says:
Pentagon NOT hit by a plane
WTC 7 brought down by explosives
Media in America is controlled
Still in denial?
Human creativity is limitless in solutions and directions.
Opting for war is a true failure in realizing the potential of human creativity.
The easy way out.
Roger,
Again, let me focus you on my one question you have resisted responding to. Why must there be a conspiracy? Is it impossible for you to accept that these radicals acted on their own without "inside" help?
Stop letting others speak for you, you are a biochemist, which tells me you are educated. Use your chemistry education. The basic chemistry on the steel deformation I have spoke of, you have not responded to, and that was a subject you should have to studied in school. Are you saying that the physical properties of steel in these buildings acted differently on September 11, 2001? Are you kidding me? Here is your chance to respond, take it!!
The Major General's comments were very interesting. He admitted that he has never said what hit the Pentagon, just that he did not believe that it was a plane. However, then how would you explain the bodies of those that were on the "alleged" plane being scattered in front of the nose of the "alleged" plane on rings C & B of the Pentagon, according to the reports? I took an aeronautics class in Junior High, and the weakest point on any plane is the connection between the wings and the fuselage. Anyone who has flown RC planes will agree with that. So the wings folding and going into the building with the fuselage is conceivable. I did not see him provide any evidence to contradict that theory, just his belief. However I have seen evidence that would appear to support the theory that the wings folded, and no one has refuted it. I am open to any new evidence. Present it.
The Major General's comments on the collapse of Tower 7 contradict the very ANSI building standard that I have already cited above. A building must never be allowed to tip over, or more lives would be jeopardized. His comments must be weighted as any other opinion from a source that has limited technical background on this topic.
Are you saying that the President has control over the media? If so, how is it that President Obama still cannot quash the reports of his "alleged" Kenyan birth or Muslim roots? If he had such claimed control I would think that he would eliminate these topics from the media. So how do you propose that President Bush exercised such control that his successor cannot exercise?
Are you still smoking something?!?!?
I agree that human creativity is limitless, however other physical laws have to be obeyed. I still do not have my transporter and I am impatiently waiting for it to come.
As for opting for the war, that decision rested solely, on then, President Bush and whether or not that was a good decision still has no bearing on the collapse of these structures, so what is your point? Are you claiming that President Bush ordered the buildings to be sabotaged?
It is easier to explain violations to normal human conduct as you deem "conspiracy" than to physical principles. The towers fell through the path of most resistance. And yet they fell with a speed that is consistent with freefall. They had no matter in the way providing resistance. The supporting structure was not conferring resistance. There was a major fire in 75 in WTC north tower and the strucure did not even waver. I am not saying that jet fuel weakens steel. What I am saying is that It is more probable that you were duped by your government (the neocons), than physical laws were violated such as fall speed of objects in a path where mass is.
Even the NIST scientists said that there is a problem in the official report because the buildings fell with freefall speed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0GHVEKrhng
9-11 deserved over 100 million dollars for investigation (like Collumbia and Challenger Shuttles) and it only deserved 15 million.
There is footage still apprehended, illegal wars on oil bearing countries and future oil pipeline countries, planted witnesses, trillions of dollars shifted hands when the towers were hit, more than a million dead since then and I and a very large group of citizens of the world want a real investigation.
I am still looking at the pictures of molten metal you don't believe in.
Well I don't believe in the NEOCON artists.
It is also very difficult to believe that a guy in a cave orchestrated the biggest sneak attack since pearl harbour...
Unless you believe everything your government and corporate news tell you.
Roger,
You sound like such the liberal approach, the more money you spend the more "correct" the answer is. How ridicules. I do not need $100 million to drop a ball off a building to find a more accurate answer to how fast the ball will fall. Its speed of decent will be the same if I spend a few thousand dollars to measure it or if I spend a few hundred million dollars to measure it.
The scrutinizing of results, and subsequent revision to such results happen quite frequently. Dare I remind you of Utah's supposed discovery of cold fusion a few years ago? After the scientific community studied it, there were problems with the conclusions, and subsequently the ultimate retraction of the claim was made by Utah. This is not surprising, as the very steps to prove a scientific hypothesis is flawed, at least in my opinion. The reason I have that opinion is because the way the process goes, as I was taught in school, is:
1. Form a hypothesis
2. Devise an experiment TO PROVE THE HYPOTHESES
3. Write a report
The flaw as I see it is that, most people do not want to be proved wrong, so they will find a way to place the results in a favorable light to their hypothesis. That is why the balance of the scientific community scrutinizes the results, and performs their owns experiments. It is a checks and balance. So I am not sure that the "flaw" is as critical as the person that was speaking in your clip.
Using that very same clip, I timed the fall my self several times, and I came up with around 5 seconds from the time parapet started movement to the time that that it disappeared, which is what the NIST report claimed that you are disputing. I will not get into that pissing contest with you, as I have said before, I will not argue emotions. I draw the conclusion that your arguments are emotional, rather than factual, based on the statement that you made "I am still looking at the pictures of molten metal you don't believe in." You studied chemistry, and you are selectively ignoring the definition of "molten" steel. Where the hell the liquid steel that constitutes "molten" by definition, or are you selecting to re-define the word to suit your needs now? For the record, I do not only have photos that I have looked at, but first hand reports from those that were on site shortly after the buildings fell, do you have information with equal veracity?
Again, quit avoiding my questions, your absolution will not make these questions go away. How is it so hard to accept that maybe "a guy in a cave orchestrated the biggest sneak attack since pearl harbour [sic]..." or did you forget that he waged a nine-year war and defeated the USSR in Afghanistan?
Stop grinding your axe on wars that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic of why these buildings collapsed. You show nothing but a childish behavior when you try to obscure the debate with irrelevant, useless facts. You speak of how "limitless" the human creativity can be, but as soon as it goes outside the box you have in mind, you discount it. Is that not being a little hypocritical?
I am the first one to question the Government and news media. I do not blindly accept that which is told to me, however, I do believe that physical laws cannot be ignored. As my 2 year old son has found out, no matter how many time he stands on the back of the coach, he will come down eventually, either by his direction or by gravity. Now at least respect me enough to address my questions to you that I have posed in previous comments. Please read the past comments if you forgot what they are. Your claim is "you might have realized I am not a proponent for either side, rather I am trying to make each side notice gaps of knowledge characteristic to them." If this is true, why do you not attempt to answer my questions posed to you? I encourage you to prove me wrong with my facts! Otherwise, concede that your comment is untruthful, and that you are essentially trying to prove the "conspiracy" at all costs. You could start with the questions if one President could control the media so well, why is it that the next President unable to accomplish the same?
Well if you think your president in the US is the utmost and all knowing authority you better think again. I was not, and the General, I believe, was not referring to the president.
Dig in this document to know what I mean:
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/lind1.html
You also did not respond about the fire of 1975, so no one is perfect.
As for the steel, why was it all shipped to China to be melted in such a hurry? Why destroy the scene of a crime? Or a at least the evidence?
There are a lot of whys that I still have.
Do you think everything in this page is pure nonsense?
Possibly I will find incorrections just like with you.
It is very strange there is even an engineers and architects group trying to show just how fake the official report is. Have you anything to say about them? I would be truly interested to know, as you share the field of work. Here is their website:
I at least have less emotional connection to the attacks because I am not an American. I am not biased by mass media as I do not watch television and neither biased by the US government. My concern is especially with the implications 9-11 had in millions, maybe billions of lives in the world after the fact.
Which is undeniable.
Roger,
Since you are obviously paranoid and even hiding your identity by having your avitar linked to a paranoid conspiracy website I would sugget you find a good psychiatrist and get yourself some good meds.
Your paranoia is undeniable.
Sorry but I am not famous enough to have a wikipedia entry to link to. I also don't rely on internet networking like myspace and others...
By the way it is my site. What do you have against it. I really would like yo know point by point if you find something in it that requires correction?
Also ad hominem attacks do nothing to favor your rationale.
Roger,
So now I ask you to be transparent. Not being American, why do you even have an interest in this matter? What is your motive for participating in this debate? Where do you live? Where are you from? Are you really a Biochemist? If so, why are you failing to apply basic definitions, such as molten requires a material to be in a liquid or fluid state, not a pliable state?
I do not understand why one has to be “famous” to be open about who they are, as you claim, I am certainly not “famous” by any stretch of the imagination, yet my profile lets everyone know who I am. You do not have to be “famous” to be open and honest. So why not tell us who you are? Why do you have to be so clandestine to voice your words?
As far as your reference to the ae911truth.org citation, one of your previous comments took us to this group’s clip on the NIST report on Tower 7. What was confounding about that clip, it was from a High School Physics Teacher, not an Architect or Engineer? The Architects and Engineers that I know would want a Registered Professional to lead that discussion in order to substantiate the organization (since it is an Architects and Engineers organization), not a High School Physics Teacher.
Again, in order for this to continue in a transparent fashion, why not just tell us exactly who you are, what your background is, and why you have an interest in this matter. You may be educated as a scientist, yet you are failing to apply basic definitions to the words you use. Why is that? You above all should know the meanings of these words. Even when I was teaching, I made sure that my students used words correctly or the would not pass. Words do have meaning that is why there are dictionaries. A person cannot redefine a word for each use; otherwise no one would be able to communicate. If you use words, be sure to correctly use their meaning. Or, as a scientist, are you falling into that pit that I have already discussed in my previous comments. Are you just attempting to prove your hypothesis no matter what? I could draw no other conclusion for the redefining of words as you are doing.
Roger,
My attack was not ad hominem it was the opinion of a clinical psychologist that I know. They would not make a true diaganosis since they never had you in a session. They gave an opinion as to your mental state, and a statistical analysis that I expressed in my previous post. The symptoms gave them the opinion that their analysis was accurate within a 70% probability.
Your obvious inability to accept facts from experts in a field is typical delusional behavior.
I find it pointless that my background is found relevant when what is on the table are things that have nothing to do with my personal life. Anyway here is my youtube profile: http://www.youtube.com/rogeriopfm
Modern Psychiatry is also wrong in many aspects. Studies have been made that show how most of the population would be considered insane when diagnosed by current standards in a session. Everyone thinks different. Deal with it. I am not violent, by contrary as you might have noticed. I am just an idealist and that freaks the hell out of you. And I question what most deem unquestionable. Sorry about being so annoying by that but you have to be prepared to get questions if you are talking about an unresolved dispute.
So the "problem" that your psychiatrist friend has found just from some lines of text is not one that implies a real threat to society.
Ok I am ready to accept the molten metal is not self evident in the photographs I presented as I am not a steel specialist. However a friend of mine that is a steel expert says that there was molten steel. If we only had the thermal readings of an infra-red camera...
I still have the questions about:
Metal shipped to China in a hurry to be melted;
AE911 members, there are more of them (the physics teacher is one in 952 people trained in the realms of Physics, Architecture and Engineering of the "conspiring lot" as you might deem them to be);
Still have no response about the fire of WTC in 1975;
As for the free-fall I would endearingly like to see your actual measurements. Or are they also closed knowledge?
I hope the above questions can deserve your comments.
"did you forget that he waged a nine-year war and defeated the USSR in Afghanistan?"
Yes, but not without good old uncle Sam's help at the time.
Cheers
Before the 1975 fire had the structure been weakened by having a plane crash through it? Leaving a large gaping hole?
"Before the 1975 fire had the structure been weakened by having a plane crash through it? Leaving a large gaping hole?"
I ask the same about building 7 then.
Roger,
First, I find it borderline dishonest (almost arrogant) for you to attempt the claim "I find it pointless that my background is found relevant…" This comment is at best disingenuous, if not more deceitful, as everyone has a bias on any particular topic, as we all have experiences that will form ideas and/or ideologies that provide us with basic reasoning capabilities from our own perspective.
For example, you finally conceded that the pictures you offered as evidence to "molten" steel really show nothing of that nature. I commend you for finally exercising some of that education you have. We have now agreed on a definition, the first key to communication. Now we can progress to the next phase. If "molten" steel had been present in the debris, there would have been harden and/or fluid "puddles", of steel found on the site. So that would be the evidence that we would want to find to support the claim of "molten" steel in this event. I personally know a Structural Engineer that was on site directing how the piles of steel and concrete could be safely removed. He was on site the week after the event. He reported no sightings of molten steel or hardened puddles from molten steel. With molten steel at 2500 degrees F and an outside temperature lets say for argument sake 60 degrees F, it would take molten steel over fourteen days to cool to a harden state (somewhere about 900 degrees F). Now I know that I did not calculate these times as there is no way to accurately account for the heat transfer resistance due too the debris on top of the "molten" steel providing some sort of resistance value (R-value), however we must agree that it would be held in a fluid or slightly harden state for an extended time do to this inhibited cooling capacity. With that being said, there are no reports of any molten or hardened puddles anywhere on site, so it escapes me as to what your friend is basing his claims on. Does he have any pictures of these molten or hardened puddles? If so, I would absolutely love to see them.
As for the mental health issues you described, I am curious, is this information that you have "quoted" or is it information that has been proved to you by specialists in that field of practice? As far as scaring the hell out of me, that is far from the truth. In fact I take pity on those that form opinions on non-existent facts, then drown while holding onto them even when they are proven inappropriate. For example, you finally conceded that the picture you published did not indicate what you claimed, but then instead on conceding the point, you attempt to defend your position with the "my friend says" without any other supporting evidence. I am afraid that I do not grasp your concept of "unresolved dispute". Just because you reject the hard evidence and fail to support your position with other hard evidence does not make this an "unresolved dispute". When one rejects hard evidence in lieu of no hard evidence, it does not constitute "unresolved", it just shows an individual's bias. So again I ask why do you have an interest in this topic? I do not see a vast number of people in Portugal having a great deal of interest in this, so why do you?
As far as my measurement, I have this great tool called a computer. Embedded in that clip is a clock. I can stop the clip at the moment the parapet starts to move, note the time within the clip, start the clip again and stop it at the time the parapet disappears from the screen. Now since that is what the NIST report claims did, I see about 5 seconds elapsed time (I cannot go to the fraction of a second that the NIST repots claims) but the 5 seconds appear to be closer than the 2 seconds claimed by the ae911 Members claim. As far as Tower 7, once again I must REMIND you that the fire burned uncheck for about 8 hours. What the hell did you expect? Do you think that the fire would have burned everything, except the main steel frame and put its self out leaving the structural frame in tact?
As for the 1975 fire, I have no data to analyze with respect to 9-11, but the repairs were deemed as making the building structurally sound, so is your claim that this devious plan to destroy these buildings started in 1975? Are you saying that explosives were buried into the structure at that time, just waiting for 2001? That sounds like someone is really smoking something.
As for help for the "cave guy", he did have the support of the Taliban and the Afghan Government. So what is your point?
Indicators of a delusion
Psychology
The following can indicate a delusion:
1.The patient expresses an idea or belief with unusual persistence or force.
2.That idea appears to exert an undue influence on his or her life, and the way of life is often altered to an inexplicable extent.
3.Despite his/her profound conviction, there is often a quality of secretiveness or suspicion when the patient is questioned about it.
4.The individual tends to be humorless and oversensitive, especially about the belief.
5.There is a quality of centrality: no matter how unlikely it is that these strange things are happening to him, the patient accepts them relatively unquestioningly.
6.An attempt to contradict the belief is likely to arouse an inappropriately strong emotional reaction, often with irritability and hostility.
7.The belief is, at the least, unlikely, and out of keeping with the patient's social, cultural and religious background.
8.The patient is emotionally over-invested in the idea and it overwhelms other elements of his or her psyche.
9.The delusion, if acted out, often leads to behaviors which are abnormal and/or out of character, although perhaps understandable in the light of the delusional beliefs.
10.Individuals who know the patient will observe that his or her belief and behavior are uncharacteristic and alien.
Yes Rogerio delusional people are often a danger to themselves or others.
Thank you so much for that hub,. It has put many demons to rest inside myself. I was horrified at rumours of 'inside jobs' etc., but I had no engineering or architectural knowledge to rebuff the stupid people. Thank you again
Thank you for your words. I am only trying to keep the science and facts forward. This is not a topic that should be politicized. I have some other hubs that might also help your understanding of the building sciences and arts.
|
New York September 11
Price: $0.83
List Price: $29.95 |
|
102 Minutes That Changed America
Price: $6.95
List Price: $24.95 |
|
Tower Stories: An Oral History of 9/11
Price: $15.75
List Price: $27.95 |
|
September 12th: We Knew Everything Would Be All Right
Price: $68.41
List Price: $3.99 |
breakfastpop says:
3 months ago
Great Hub, informative and moving. I too remember where I was on September 11. I was on my way to the Jersey Shore when a news broadcast announced that a plane hit the Towers. My immediate thought was a small single engine plane, because anything else was way too difficult to fathom. We pulled our car over and people were standing around by the beach, stunned and silent. We could actually see the smoke rising from the towers in the distance. My children worked in Manhattan at the time and a close friend in the Towers. I don't have to say what my husband and I were going through at that moment. Thankfully, our children and friend were safe, but my heart still cries for all those who lost their lives that day. I have no patience for idiots like Rosie who muddy the waters with their insanity.