23 votes

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

Use this to convert your last hold-outs. Nifty, concise, easy to read.

--------
http://911explained.blogspot.com/2013/03/where-are-you-in-yo...

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

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?

    http://www.naderlibrary.com/911.blue...ortruthae3.htm

    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.

  • 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.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jO15C...

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




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Could you take a look at the

Could you take a look at the link I posted in response to sharkhearted?

If nothing else, doesn't it prove at least that aluminium CAN look orange in certain circumstances?

sharkhearted's picture

Oh my god are you serious??

Molten aluminum is SILVER.

This stuff was incandescent orange yellow and was pouring out from near the corner perimeter column just before that very column failed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaDB5sBoqZE

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

http://drjudywood.com/article

http://drjudywood.com/articles/aluminum/aluminum_glows.html

It seems to look orange in a lot of these pictures. It may have to do with how it is alloyed though.