Conspiracy theory

This is a bit of a hypocritical post, because I think that youtube clips have been a major cause of propagating nonsensical ideas about 9/11, and here I am posting a link to the same medium.

 

However, I thought it was good that someone took the trouble to spend 90 minutes looking at the science behind some of the conspiracy theory claims. I think it's pretty telling about the quality of the 9/11 'debate' that the first episode has had just 90 views . Unless it's because of the worst theme song ever.

 

Personally, I'm not that interested in the physics behind the WTC event, because there are plenty of other factors that convince me that alternative accounts of 9/11 are untrue without even getting into the science. But it's good to see an engineer putting the other point of view when there seem to be a gazillion youtube clips claiming buildings can't collapse like that, etc, etc.

 

I won't get a chance to watch this video till later. However, I need to ask. Does it explain how a building over 400000sqft fell vertically straight downwards? This would imply that every foundation gave way at exactly the same time. Kind of like setting 4 legs of a table on fire and it falling down flat.

Even forgetting that and looking at the explanation given.

 

Lets say that the jetfuel weakened the steel foundations in the lower floors of the building, the lower floors which people were still running out of as the building started to fall without any burn marks, and they were at the point where they were about to give way. Do all 4 corners give way at the same time with the same degree of drop?

 

Basically what happened with the towers is the same as chopping down a tree only for it to land on top of itself and not fall over.

 

Physically, scientifically and structurally impossible. There is only one explained way that made sense to me for how that particular event happened. As I said it is out of my level of understanding so I won't fully subscribe to that way of thinking, but it's the only one that makes sense to me.

I won't get a chance to watch this video till later. However, I need to ask. Does it explain how a building over 400000sqft fell vertically straight downwards? This would imply that every foundation gave way at exactly the same time. Kind of like setting 4 legs of a table on fire and it falling down flat.

Ok, I give this one more go, as I wanted to stay away from wasting time on conspiracy theories but you are asking genuine questions about structure.

First thing is, forget about foundations, the foundations are underground and they transfer the entire mass of the building onto the Manhatten granite bedrock. The planes hit high up on the building, having no effect on the foundations. For all I know, they may still be there and the new freedom tower might be built off them.

Now, the plane goes in and explodes, hugely, as we all saw on the telly. This causes significant damage to the steel structure as is described in the video above. Fires burn at high heat and start to soften the steel in the area of the crash and a few floors around it.

What you have to understand about buildings is that most (not all) the steel frame is fire protected. this can be done in various methods, you can totally encase the steel in concrete, but that is too expensive and heavy on a high rise, you can clad in various types of board or you can spray on a sort of lightweight cementitious glob. All of those methods are too protect the steel for enough time to evacuate the building of humans. You do not fire proof to save the building from collapsing, merely to give you time to get the hell out. Modern fire regs demand that the frame be allowed to progressively collapse, to protect firefighters and surrounding properties.

Fires in buildings start because people are careless, or wiring is faulty, or maybe even an employee goes mental, so they burn up from a small ignition point. Again one does not design to prevent a fully fueled plane hitting at 500mph, because you cannot build against that threat, economically. (maybe a nuclear reactor, or a military bunker, but not a lettable office space)

When the planes hit and exploded, that explosion blew away all the fire protection, so all the frame was now vulnerable. The hour or 2 hours protection was gone in an instant.

So the floors heat up and they start to droop. You do not need much temperature to do this, so ignore all the bumpf about temp of jet fuel and melting point of steel. The floor beams start to drop out, one by one as the drooping effect makes them too short to span between the columns.

Eventually a void starts to open up in the building.

Now, the thing you need to know about any structure is that its not as simple as beam carries load horizontally and column carries load vertically. In a complex structure they do both, they support each other. Take the floor and ceiling out of your house and you have a ver y unstable brick wall shell, a good wind will crumble it in on itself. The floors of a multi story building brace the columns so that they can carry more load than they could carry on their own.

Imagine glueing 6 bits of spaghetti to the side and corners of a sheet of lasagne, then glue another piece of lasagne on the top. It won't carry barely its own weight before the spaghetti bends and snaps. But glue in more sheets, all the way up every inch. Now it can carry a substantial mass, but its still only 6 bits of spaghetti.

So back to WTC, when the floors started to drop out, the load bearing columns in the area of that void, the crash site are structurally compromised, they are being asked to hold up the huge mass of the floors above. Now they could do that for the last 30 years fine, but now the floors are going, one by one, the structural bracing is falling out, until it can't take it anymore. It all folds in and the massive amount of building above, starts to fall, more or less in a straight line, but its just a big collapsing mass, going right down and no structure below it can stop it moving. Its wnough to destroy the entire structure below.

If you look at the footage of both collapses, you can see they don't fall cleanly vertical, they start to twist and roll. In the immediate aftermath, there are still bits of the core structure standing up 40/50 storeys high, that eventually crumble.

There have been no other collapses like those, because all the other building to have subsequently caught fire have not done so through a plane hitting at high level. The Madrid hotel ends up a twisted mass of steel, without collapsing, because the whoel thing went up in flames.

for WTC 7 to have fallen the way it did, all the core columns must go at the same time

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a54Uvyp2Yzs

and anybody who seems to question anything winds up dead!

News Report from July 2011

Demolition expert Danny Jowenko, one of world's leading building demolition experts, was killed in a one-car accident last week when his car slammed into a tree. Jowenko received international attention as the expert who unequivocally described the collapse of Building 7 at the World Trade Center on 911 as a "demolition."

Jowenko made the judgment before he knew it was WTC7 he was watching on the video. He commented: "This is a controlled demolition which was carried out by a team of experts."

CLICK VIDEO: Demolition expert Danny Jowenko watching Building 7 video for first time, "it was controlled demolition."

Jowenko gained further noteriety when former Director of Studies at the US Army War College, Dr. Alan Sabrosky, said in a radio interview in 2010, that his skepticism of the official 911 story was prompted by Jowenko's testimony. Jowenko's death comes three days after Sabrosky gave an exclusive interview to PressTV in which he again reiterated his belief, which he says is common knowledge in some intelligence circles, that elements within both the CIA and Israeli Mossad planned 911. Dr. Sabrosky holds the General of the Army Douglas MacArthur Chair of Research at US Army War College.

He holds that the attacks were planned and executed in order to achieve dovetailing foreign policy goals, foremost the invasion and Balkanization of Iraq. Sabrosky says this has long been a goal among "Neo-conservatives" associated with the think-tank Project for a New American Century (PNAC.)

Dr. Sabrosky's teaching and research appointments also include the United States Military Academy, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). He is a Marine Corps Vietnam veteran and a 1986 graduate of the U.S. Army War College.

Dr. Alan Sabrosky

You're not dead. The Loose Change guy is not dead. That shock jock guy is not dead, the lead architect of the Architects and Engineers for Truth, or whatever they're called, he's not dead.

This poor chap was a one car accident, so how could it be an arranged hit....unless...unless...no! Not Princess Diana too? Was she murdered?

There's a few one car accidents on here over the last 10 years. Maybe they are suspicious too if lone accidents are so unusual.

There have been no other collapses like those, because all the other building to have subsequently caught fire have not done so through a plane hitting at high level. The Madrid hotel ends up a twisted mass of steel, without collapsing, because the whole thing went up in flames.

WTC7 sustained damage due to the twin towers fall and had fires but nothing like the fires at madrid and some other China hotel fire but collapsed after little time really.

I can see a sustained fire in WTC7 eventually causing a partial collapse of the side significanty damaged by the previous collapse but to pancake across it's whole base like the other impacted towers seems odd does it not?

Not really, there was a dirty great hole in the front of it, removing vital structure. See the tl;dr above.

Not really, there was a dirty great hole in the front of it, removing vital structure. See the tl;dr above.

I am no structural engineer & have limited knowledge on building design & foundations but wouldn't a hole in a structure cause it to topple over? Or fall at an angle, the hole would have put great stress in that region of the building but should it be enough stress to bring down the whole tower (which I think was 42 floors) in the manner it did?

I don't think the official report concluded much more than we are not sure how it came down but they will look into it more in depth. I appreciate that a number of variables are involved in investigations like these but I don't think we will ever know the real truth no matter how many questions are asked.

Another thread full of conspiracy tosh

I'd love to know how many of the Structural engineering experts in this thread actually know anything about the design of the towers, rather than just spouting crap they've seen on the Internet.

Does it not occur to you, that the material you're looking at is likely biased?

It also occurs to me, that on the anniversary of the worst incidence of terrorism in recent world history, to accuse the country in mourning of murdering it's own citizens really is in the worst taste. Infact it's just plain disgusting!

The US and other govts are capable of anything to further their cause, destroying their own landmark and killing 3000 people in the process is just collateral damage in the larger scheme of things.

Rubbish

Another thread full of conspiracy tosh

 

I'd love to know how many of the Structural engineering experts in this thread actually know anything about the design of the towers, rather than just spouting crap they've seen on the Internet.

 

Does it not occur to you, that the material you're looking at is likely biased?

 

It also occurs to me, that on the anniversary of the worst incidence of terrorism in recent world history, to accuse the country in mourning of murdering it's own citizens really is in the worst taste. Infact it's just plain disgusting!

I am sorry if this offends you but I am supposed to keep quiet when I have lost colleagues on this tragic event which has a lot of unanswered questions for myself? I don't sign up to all the conspiracy stuff on the net, but do we just sit back & take what the government tells us? Remember these are the people who took us to war stating WMD could be released in 45 mins.

A bad as it sounds, much more innocent lives have been lost since this & do you feel any safer?

I am sorry if this offends you but I am supposed to keep quiet when I have lost colleagues on this tragic event which has a lot of unanswered questions for myself? I don't sign up to all the conspiracy stuff on the net, but do we just sit back & take what the government tells us? Remember these are the people who took us to war stating WMD could be released in 45 mins.

 

A bad as it sounds, much more innocent lives have been lost since this & do you feel any safer?

Our goverments dont send out suicide bombers to kill civi's or start a modern war in the name of religon, and i dont fear bombers because the Brits have lived with this threat for the past 40+ years (I.R.A etc) so they will have to do better than that. Seems to me these people are more affraid of the free world because they will lose there religous/control power base

I am sorry if this offends you but I am supposed to keep quiet when I have lost colleagues on this tragic event which has a lot of unanswered questions for myself? I don't sign up to all the conspiracy stuff on the net, but do we just sit back & take what the government tells us? Remember these are the people who took us to war stating WMD could be released in 45 mins.

 

A bad as it sounds, much more innocent lives have been lost since this & do you feel any safer?

As said, this isn't really the time. My thoughts are with the victims and their loved ones.

All I would say is yes it sustained heafty damage but like Abz above my logic (admitedly perhaps flawed) doesn't seem to think it would fall so uniformly?

All I can use to back up this 'hunch' is that for controlled demolitions it seemingly takes lots and lots of time, expertise and explosives to safely reduce a building into a pile of rumble close to within its existing footprint, if you could just take away half the base and have it fall straight down then this need for what always seems like military precision on these demolition jobs seems somewhat over the top.

my understanding of controlled demolition and some very old physics mixed in is that moving objects will take the path of least resistance, so they explode away a whole floor of supporting columns in a building everything above will come straight down (a la the text book ones you see), cut away a part of the base (thinking Fred Dibnah chimneys here) and the structure will fall that way.

So in a building that has sustained significant damage in some places and none in others it seems difficult to see how it fails so uniformly even if the fire was raging equally (which is almost certainly wasn't) and thereby weakening the remaining steel equally, over the whole floor area...........it seems to me you would have a structure with massively varying strength and so some part/area will go first and whilst this may cause everything to come down around it, it just doesn't seem logical it would be comparable to a controlled demolition.

I reckon the government made it 7/7 so that the Americans couldn't change the way you should write the date. It's either that or I'm doing something. My ex's birthday is 9th September and my current OH's birthday is 7/7. I think my theories are a bit more credible at least.

Our goverments dont send out suicide bombers to kill civi's or start a modern war in the name of religon, and i dont fear bombers because the Brits have lived with this threat for the past 40+ years (I.R.A etc) so they will have to do better than that. Seems to me these people are more affraid of the free world because they will lose there religous/control power base

Which government? And which religion?

I started writing a technical response related to the structure and collapse but I lost interest. People love a good argument and I realized I'd end up posting in the thread even more as "jet fuel burns cool" and "buildings don't fall straight down". Maybe it was a Fred Dibnah copycat!

RIP to anyone and everyone lost in the tragedies on and since 9/11.

Ok, I give this one more go, as I wanted to stay away from wasting time on conspiracy theories.

I can relate to that. It's so hard to leave alone, even though debating it is completely fruitless.

There was a program on the other day whereby an Irish comedian took some conspiracy believers to ground zero to try to drum some logic in to them regarding what they were saying about how the towers could not have fallen as they did from a plane crash.

But the problem is, once you believe something to be the way it is then the brain fights hard to keep hold of it even in the face of a mountain of contrary evidence.

First of all, my thoughts are with all the innocent victims of this tragic event.

Secondly, I don't believe in conspiracy stories but this one is just too suspicious even for me. The timing says everything.

Which government? And which religion?

I will give you a clue, Western country's days of being controled by their god are long gone?

and anybody who seems to question anything winds up dead!

 

News Report from July 2011

 

Demolition expert Danny Jowenko, one of world's leading building demolition experts, was killed in a one-car accident last week when his car slammed into a tree. Jowenko received international attention as the expert who unequivocally described the collapse of Building 7 at the World Trade Center on 911 as a "demolition."

So they would kill him AFTER he went public with his news, thus giving him even more attention in the media, I'm not the smartest person in the world but even I can see that is a load of tosh

Youtube has so much to answer for.

Loose Change is a very good film about this, i watched it years ago and it screwed my head big time:

full length film:

7E3oIbO0AWE