Why The Towers Fell

Status
Not open for further replies.

quandary121

Time Out
Apr 20, 2008
2,950
8
38
lincolnshire
uk.youtube.com
9-11 Anomalies

Anomalies of the September 11th Attack, Its Run-Up, and Response

Accepting the official story of the 9/11/01 attack requires one to accept a long series of anomalies -- extremely improbable events, amazing coincidences, and contradictions. This page lists many such anomalies. The Top Anomalies page focuses on the more salient ones. The anomalies described on this page are organized into the following topics:
Run-Up to the Attack

Numerous incidents preceding the attack indicate many people had advance knowledge of the attack.
  • Put Options
    Stock trades bet on the fall in share values for the two airlines whose planes were used in the attack.
    • Put options purchases on United Airlines and American Airlines stock rose to four and 25 times normal levels in the days preceding the attack. [SIZE=-1]1 [/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]2 [/SIZE]
  • Avoidance of the Airlines, the WTC, and the Pentagon
    Government officials and executives avoided the targets of the attack.
    • Pentagon officials canceled travel plans on September 10th. [SIZE=-1]3 [/SIZE]
    • San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown received a warning not to fly on September 10th. [SIZE=-1]4 [/SIZE]
    • Scotland Yard prohibited Salman Rushdie from flying on September 11th. [SIZE=-1]5 [/SIZE]
    • Two employees of Odigo, the instant messaging service, received e-mail warnings of the attack two hours before the first assault on the WTC. [SIZE=-1]6 [/SIZE]
    • Business executives, some of whom worked in the WTC, were in Nebraska to attend a meeting at Offutt Air Force Base hosted by billionaire Warren Buffett on the morning of September 11th. The same base would be visited later that day by George W. Bush. [SIZE=-1]7 [/SIZE]
Hijacking Scenario

The attack scenario was irrational on the part of the alleged hijackers, and its execution is incomprehensible in light of their behavior. There is little or no credible evidence that Arab hijackers were involved in the September 11th attack, except in the takeover of Flight 93.
  • Attack Plan
    By flying from remote airports and going far out of their way, the attack planners exposed their plan to almost certain ruin, had the air defense system operated normally.
    • The originating airport for Flights 11 and 175 was Boston Logan instead of any of several airports near New York City. This created about 40 minutes of exposure to interception for each flight.
    • Flight 77 flew to the Midwest before turning around to return to Washington D.C.. It was airborne an hour and 23 minutes before allegedly attacking the Pentagon. That would provide ample opportunity for interception even if the air defense system were mostly disabled.
    • Flight 93 flew to the Midwest before turning around to fly toward Washington D.C. Had it reached the capital, it would have been airborne for more than an hour and a half. The odds of escaping interception with that plan would be infinitesimal under standard operating procedures.
  • Behavior of Villains
    The behavior of the alleged hijackers preceding the attack is inconsistent with skill and discipline needed to have a hope of pulling off such an attack.
    • Mohammed Atta allegedly barely caught Flight 11, a key flight in the event that he was supposedly planning for years.
    • The alleged hijackers partied at topless bars and drank alcohol, despite being portrayed as fundamentalist Muslims, for whom such behavior would be surprising, to say the least. [SIZE=-1]8 [/SIZE]
  • Evidence Void
    There is no hard evidence that any of the alleged hijackers were on any of the doomed flights, and substantial evidence that some weren't involved.
    • No video of any of the 19 hijackers at any of the three originating airports of the four flights has been made public, except for a video allegedly showing hijackers of Flight 77.
    • At least six of the alleged hijackers have turned up alive since the attack.
    • None of the four flight crews radioed Air Traffic Control about hijackings in progress.
    • None of the four flight crews punched in the four-digit hijacking code. [SIZE=-1]9 [/SIZE]
    • No public evidence indicates that the remains of any of the hijackers was identified at any of the crash sites.
    • None of the contents of any of the black boxes have been made public.
    • The only 4-1/2 minutes of the phone call from Flight 11 Attendant Betty Ong made public describes a stabbing but does not provide any details indicating that Arab hijackers were on board.
  • Phenomenal Success
    The success with which hijackers allegedly took over four jets with knives and then piloted the jets to small targets is simply miraculous.
    • None of the four flight crews were able to stop the alleged hijackers, in spite of several of the pilots being Vietnam veterans.
    • None of the alleged hijackers were good pilots, yet the three buildings were hit with phenomenal precision.
(Lack of) Military Response

Despite normal intercept times of between 10 and 20 minutes for errant domestic flights, the airliners commandeered on 9/11/01 roamed the skies for over an hour without interference.
  • Failures to Report
    According to NORAD's timeline the FAA reported errant airliners after inexplicable delays.
    • The FAA took 18 minutes to report Flight 11's loss of communication and deviation from its flight plan.
    • The FAA took 39 minutes to report Flight 77's deviation from its flight plan.
  • Failures to Scramble
    Interceptors were only scrambled from distant bases after long delays.
    • Despite the fact that Flights 11 and 175 were headed for New York City, no interceptors were scrambled from nearby La Guardia, or from Langley, Virginia.
    • Despite NORAD's having received formal notification of the first hijacking at 8:38, no interceptors were scrambled from Andrews to protect the nearby Pentagon until after it was hit at 9:37.
  • Failures to Intercept
    Once in the air, interceptors flew at only small fractions of their top speeds, assuring they would fail to intercept the airliners.
    • The two F-15s scrambled from Otis AFB to chase Flight 11 flew at an average of 447 mph, about 23.8% of their top speed of 1875 mph.
    • The two F-16s scrambled from Langley to protect the capital flew at an average of 410.5 mph, about 27.4% of their top speed of 1500 mph.
  • Failures to Redeploy
    Nearby fighters on routine patrol duty were not redeployed to intercept the airliners, nor were fighters that belatedly reached Manhattan sent to defend the capital.
    • Two F-15s flying off the coast of Long Island were not redeployed to Manhattan until after the second tower was hit.
    • The two F-15s scrambled from Otis AFB to protect Manhattan could have reached the capital in 9.6 minutes once they arrived over New York City. That was still 34 minutes before the Pentagon was hit.
World Trade Center Destruction

On 9/11/01 three skyscrapers were totally destroyed, with structural collapse primarily due to fires given as the explanation. Fires and bombings have never before or since caused steel-frame buildings to collapse.
  • Building 7
    Building 7 imploded late on 9/11/01. It was not hit by an aircraft.
    • Building 7 experienced total collapse, allegedly because of fires, when no steel-frame building before or since has ever collapsed, totally or even partially, due to fires. Building 7 was an over-engineered 47-story steel-frame skyscraper, standing over 350 feet from the nearest of the Twin Towers. Public evidence documents only small fires in it on September 11th.
    • Building 7 collapsed in a nearly perfectly vertical fall, producing only minor damage in the Verizon and Post Office buildings only 60 feet on either side of it.
    • Building 7 collapsed into a remarkably small rubble pile of mostly pulverized remains, when no steel building falling for any reason has ever pulverized itself.
    • Building 7 contained a 15-million-dollar emergency command center, but instead of using it for its ostensible purpose, then-Mayor Giuliani evacuated his team to a makeshift command center as soon as the September 11th attack started. [SIZE=-1]10 [/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]11 [/SIZE]
    • The emergency command center was destroyed along with the rest of the building, even though it was constructed as a bomb-hardened shelter.
    • The remains of Building 7 were rapidly removed and the steel recycled, evidently without any on-site and only extremely limited off-site examination. The rapid disposal operation proceeded despite the fact that no one was believed buried in the rubble, and the tidy rubble pile was not blocking adjacent roads.
  • Twin Towers
    The Twin Towers exploded into dust and shattered steel, a behavior inconsistent with the known behavior of steel structures outside of explosive demolition.
    • The South Tower was struck 17 minutes after the North Tower, and in a less damaging manner, and it had less severe fires, yet it collapsed 29 minutes before the North Tower.
    • The South Tower's core structure was largely undamaged by the off-centered jet impact, unlike the North Tower, yet it collapsed sooner.
    • The South Tower had much less severe fires than the North Tower, and yet collapsed sooner.
    • Smoke from the fires in the South Tower became progressively darker up to the time it collapsed.
    • Firefighters reached the crash zone of the South Tower and calmly described controllable fires.
    • Both towers started to disintegrate at regions above and below the crash zones in the first seconds of their falls.
    • Both towers fell straight down, through themselves, following the path of maximum resistance, a behavior never before observed in spontaneous collapses of any type of vertical structure.
    • The collapses of both towers exhibited features never otherwise seen except in controlled demolitions: sudden onset accompanied by thunderous bangs, visible explosions ringing their perimeters, energetic ejections of dust at regular intervals, and copious production of dust.
    • Both towers exploded outward and were shredded and pulverized -- a pattern of destruction much more destructive than normal controlled demolitions, yet this result was supposedly produced without the added energy of explosives.
Pentagon Attack

The Pentagon attack defies expectations that this prime terrorist target would have been defended, and that a terrorist would have hit the front side in a simple maneuver, rather than the back side in an extreme precision aerobatic maneuver.
  • Wide-Open Target
    The Pentagon -- the heart of the military establishment of the world's greatest super-power -- was hit after ample warning without being protected by any defensive action.
    • The 9:37 strike was well over an hour after the first signs of a hijacking and 34 minutes after the South Tower strike confirmed that an attack was underway.
    • The Pentagon is within 11 miles of Andrews Air Force Base, which apparently had two combat-ready fighter wings on 9/11/01.
    • The attack plane was monitored on radar as it approached the capital.
  • Unlikely Super-pilot
    Alleged Flight 77 pilot Hani Hanjour was not up to the task.
    • The spiral dive approach to the Pentagon was such an extreme maneuver that experienced air traffic controllers thought it was military jet. [SIZE=-1]12 [/SIZE] The tree-top final approach skimmed objects in the yard and crashed the plane into the first floor of the building. Experienced pilots have wondered if any human pilot could have executed the maneuver.
    • Hani Hanjour was considered incompetent by his flight school instructors, and was denied rental of a single-engine plane. [SIZE=-1]13 [/SIZE]
  • Evidence Vacuum
    Authorities systematically confiscated or destroyed the evidence.
    • Video recordings from adjacent businesses were seized by the FBI shortly after the attack and have never been seen since.
    • Only two video segments have been released by the Pentagon from all the security cameras that monitor its periphery. Neither clearly shows the attack aircraft.
    • Investigators were not allowed access to the crash site until well into October.
  • More Than Just a Crash
    Was the crash engineered?
    • A photographed scrap of aircraft debris that has markings similar to an American Airlines 757 corresponds to the forward portion of the starboard (right) side of the plane, yet the scrap was far to the left of the plane's path.
    • Eyewitnesses reported the smell of cordite.
    • Several eyewitnesses reported that the jetliner exploded before reaching the facade of the Pentagon.
    • Portions of the facade where the wing ends and tail of a 757 would have collided show no gouging. Were these parts shredded by explosives before they reached the facade?
Death Toll

The death toll of the attack, though horrific, was much lower than it would have been if not for numerous aspects of target selection and timing.
  • Flights
    All four flights were unusually empty.
    • Flights 11, 175, 77, and 93 were only at 51%, 31%, 20%, and 16% occupancy, respectively.
  • World Trade Center
    The towers were attacked before most people had arrived, and were hit high enough to allow most people to escape.
    • When Flight 11 hit the North Tower at 8:46 AM, the World Trade Center buildings were at less than half the occupancy of a typical mid-day.
    • The first tower to be attacked was hit just 15 stories below the top, and trapped people mostly between the 95th and 110th floors.
    • The second tower to be attacked was hit only 30 stories below the top, and the plane missed the core, allowing people to evacuate from above the impact zone. The 17 minutes that elapsed since the first hit allowed many people to escape the second tower while the elevators were still working.
  • Pentagon
    125 people were killed in a building with 20,000 people.
    • The portion of the Pentagon that was attacked, the West Block, was in the process of being renovated, and so was at low occupancy.
    • No high-level Pentagon officials were killed in the attack.
Coincidences in Service of Incompetence

Many decisions and events in the days and months preceding the attack helped to make the incompetence theory more plausible.
  • War Games
    Several war game exercises were being conducted on 9/11/01.
    • Operation Northern Vigilance redeployed northeast sector air defense resources to northern Canada and Alaska. [SIZE=-1]14 [/SIZE]
    • Operations Vigilant Warrior and Vigilant Guardian, which simulated hijackings and involved live radar "injects," may have confused military and civilian personnel monitoring aircraft. [SIZE=-1]15 [/SIZE]
    • The National Reconnaissance Office, which monitors satellites and airborne objects, was evacuated while the attack unfolded because it was conducting a plane-into-tower crash drill. [SIZE=-1]16 [/SIZE]
    • The Tripod II biowarfare exercise, scheduled for 9/12/01, resulted in the deployment of FEMA to Manhattan before the attack. [SIZE=-1]17 [/SIZE]
  • Rules Changes
    Procedural changes would limit the ability of pilots and military commanders to respond to hijackings.
  • Out to Lunch
    Top officials were not available until after the attack was over.
    • President George W. Bush remained at the publicized location of Booker Elementary School until about a half-hour after the news of the attack went on TV worldwide, first reading My Pet Goat to second-graders, and then holding a press conference.
    • Acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff allegedly remained in a meeting with Senator Max Cleland until nearly the time the Pentagon was hit.
    • Brigadier General Montague Winfield had Navy Captain Charles J. Leidig, Jr. -- a rookie -- assume his watch as Deputy Director for Operations for the National Military Command Center (NMCC) at 8:30 am on 9/11/01, and relieved him after the attack was over. [SIZE=-1]18 [/SIZE]
Government Response

Despite the worst failure in history of the military to protect American civilians, and the worst alleged engineering failures in history, there were no consequences for the responsible authorities, and no honest investigations.
  • Air Defense Failures
    No one was held to account for the numerous unprecedented failures in air defense.
    • General Richard Myers, Acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on September 11th, was confirmed as Chairman on September 13th in spite of being unable to provide any meaningful answers to questions regarding the air defense failures.
    • General Richard Eberhart, commander of NORAD on September 11th, was promoted to head the newly created NORTHCOM. [SIZE=-1]19 [/SIZE]
    • NORAD's press release contradicted early statements by high-ranking officials that no interceptors had been scrambled on 9/11/01.
    • NORAD's vague timeline raises far more questions than it answers, yet officials have never been required to give a full account.
    • The 9/11 Commission advanced a new timeline which contradicts NORAD's earlier timeline and the testimony of military officials to the commission itself.
  • Building Collapse Inquiry
    The total collapses of WTC 1, 2, and 7 were the three largest engineering failures in history (based on the official story). How were they investigated?
    • FEMA was given the sole authority to investigate the collapses even though it is not an investigative agency.
    • The investigative team assembled by FEMA consisted of unpaid volunteers.
    • The investigators were not allowed access to Ground Zero.
    • The investigators were not provided with the blueprints of the buildings.
    • FEMA's report states the causes of the collapse "remain unknown at this time". (By the time the report was released the steel had been entirely disposed of.) The fact that Building 7 (supposedly) failed in a way that contradicts 100 years of engineering experience makes it the largest and least understood structural failure in history.
    • The 9/11 Commission Report failed to even mention the existence of Building 7.
    • The 9/11 Commission Report denied the existence of the Twin Towers' core structures.
    • NIST's report on the collapse of the Twin Towers purports to provide a "probable collapse sequence" for each Tower but truncates its timelines before the collapses even begin.
Means, Motive, and Precedent

The preceding list is far from complete. It does not include consideration of facts pertaining to the means, motive, and precedent for the crime. The official account's blaming one organization, while ignoring others with much more to gain and possessing tools and access better suited to the commission of the crime is arguably a vast anomaly. This subject is addressed by 911Review.com:
[SIZE=-1]NOTE: For more complete sources, visit the pages linked to. [/SIZE]References

[SIZE=-1] 1. Profiting From Disaster?, CBSNews.com, 9/19/01
2. Prices, Probabilities and Predictions, OR/MS Today,
3. Bush: We're at War, Newsweek, 9/24/01
4. Willie Brown got low-key early warning about air travel, SFGate.com, 9/12/01
5. , London Times, 9/27/01
6. Odigo says workers were warned of attack, HAARETZ.com,
7. Franklin unit rebuilds after 9/11 tragedy, San Francisco Business Times, 2/1/02
8. Manager: Men spewed anti-American sentiments, AP, 9/14/01
9. The Day the FAA Stopped the World, time.com, 9/14/01
10. Giuliani Improvises After Command Center Gets Hit, Washington Technology, 10/08/01
11. Terrorism and Anti-Terrorism, Gotham Gazette, 9/12/01
12. 'Get These Planes on the Ground', ABCNews.com, 11/24/01
13. A Trainee Noted for Incompetence, New York Times, 5/4/02, page 10
14. The scene at NORAD on Sept. 11: Playing Russian war games ... and then someone shouted to look at the monitor, Toronto Star, 12/9/01
15. Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror, 2004
16. Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building, AP, 8/21/02
17. Tripod II and FEMA: Lack of NORAD Response on 9/11 Explained, FromTheWilderness.com, 2004
18. Statement of Capt Charles J. Leidig, Jr., 9-11commission.gov, 6/17/04
19. Eberhart To Head NORTHCOM, afa.org, 8/02 [cached] [/SIZE]
 

quandary121

Time Out
Apr 20, 2008
2,950
8
38
lincolnshire
uk.youtube.com
Intents of the Perpetrators

Analysis of the September 11th Attack

An analysis of the characteristics of the September 11th attack supports certain inferences about the intents of the perpetrators. Most striking is the seeming calculation to maximize the psychological impact while minimizing the (still horrific) fatalities.
The maximizing of psychological impact seems at least consistent with, if not characteristic of, terrorist incidents of the kind attributed to Muslim extremists before September 11th. However, no such previous incident even came close to inflicting the level of psychological damage wrought by the September 11th attack. Previous attacks attributed to the Al Qaeda network targeted only military equipment and personnel deployed in Middle Eastern countries with large Muslim populations. The attack on New York City and the Pentagon using hijacked jetliners flown long distances in open defiance of the United States' air defense network would represent a quantum leap in the capabilities of the organization.
The minimizing of fatalities is even more difficult to reconcile with the understood goals of an organization such as Al Qaeda. Why would zealots calling the United States the "Great Satan" make such painstaking efforts to lower the death toll?
 

quandary121

Time Out
Apr 20, 2008
2,950
8
38
lincolnshire
uk.youtube.com
Web Resources

The web resources provided by 9-11Research are listed on pages focused on different themes, such as the World Trade Center attack, or the lack of timely military response. Websites may be listed under different pages because of their contribution to each page's content.
9-11 Research does not necessarily endorse the conclusions and implications contained in sites it links to. In some cases we link to sites only because we think they are important in the history of the 9/11 skeptics movement. We do attempt to avoid linking to sites that we believe are actively promoting disinformation, not as a form of censorship, but because our linking to such sites would increase their reach and thereby hurt our efforts to expose the truth behind the 9/11/01 attack. This is because the ranking of sites in search engines such as Google is based on a measure of a site's popularity, measured by the PageRanks of its pages. A page's PageRank is largely a function of the number of links to it from pages on other sites which themselves have a high PageRank. Since 9-11 Research is a high-ranking site, our links to other sites contribute significantly to their PageRank.
For readers interesting in exploring the role of disinformation in concealing the truth behind the attack, we recommend perusing the sites listed on the misinformation links page. In particular, the page Disinformation masquerading as 9/11 Truth exposure has a rundown of sites whose purpose appears to be to pollute discourse with disinformation.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
FINAL PROOF of the IDIOTIC NATURE of the CONTROLLED DEMOLITION THEORY

THE LARGEST BUILDING EVER TAKEN DOWN BY CONTROLLED DEMOLITION (by 1998)

J. L. Hudson Dep't Store in Detroit.

It was 33 stories high (the WTC was 110 stories high)

21 man demolition crew was on-site for 4 MONTHS preparing the building.

12 man explosives crew then took 24 DAYS to place the explosives.

4,118 charges in 1100 locations.

2,728 lbs of explosives.

(get this) 36,000 feet of det cord.

4512 non-electric delay elements placed (whatever the hell they are)

All to drop 33 stories.

Say good-night boys, the debate is over for any reasonable human being. Obviously, setting up the CD of the WTC in secret was simply impossible.

http://www.controlled-demolition.com/default.asp?reqLocId=7&reqItemId=20030225133807
 

quandary121

Time Out
Apr 20, 2008
2,950
8
38
lincolnshire
uk.youtube.com
Say good-night boys, the debate is over for any reasonable human being
Not so fast mr debunker
Building 7's Collapse

Features of a Textbook Implosion

[SIZE=-1]These three images (cropped from larger photographs) show WTC 7 at three different moments in its collapse. [/SIZE]The total collapse of WTC 7 at 5:20 PM on 9/11/01 shows all of the features of an implosion engineered through controlled demolition.
Controlled demolition is the use of pre-positioned explosive charges to destroy structures. Depending on the nature of the structure and constraints imposed by its surroundings, a controlled demolition may require a great deal of precision in its planning and execution. That is especially true of tall steel buildings in urban settings, given the natural tendency of such structures to topple. Controlled demolitions of buildings in cities are designed to implode the structures, making them sink into their footprints and fold in on themselves into a small consolidated rubble piles
Observing the collapse of 47-story WTC 7 shows it to have all of the features of an implosion engineered by controlled demolition.
  • The collapse of the main structure commences suddenly (several seconds after the penthouse falls).
  • The building sinks in a precisely vertical manner into its footprint.
  • Puffs of dust emerge from the building's facade early in the event.
  • The collapse is total, producing a rubble pile only about three stories high.
  • The main structure collapses totally in under 7 seconds, only about a second slower than it would take a brick dropped from the building's roof to reach the ground in a vacuum.
Proofs of Demolition

Demolition of the Twin Towers is Provable Through Simple Analysis

Despite the destruction of the most significant evidence of the Twin Tower collapses -- the structural steel -- it is relatively easy to prove the towers were demolished. Determining how they were demolished without the benefit of the steel may be difficult or impossible, but proving that a gravity-driven collapse is insufficient to explain the characteristics of the collapses documented by photographic and seismic evidence is not.
There are numerous pieces of evidence that strongly indicate demolition, including the fact that authorities destroyed and suppressed evidence, the more than 100 years of engineering experience with steel-frame buildings, the misleading representation of the towers' design by truss theory proponents and the implausible sequence of events proposed by that theory, and the many collapse features that seem irreconcilable with gravity-driven collapses.
Proving demolition requires more than enumerating evidence. It requires making logical inferences about events using the evidence. Three fairly strong proofs are as follows. These are presented as qualitative arguments only. Each suggests an approach for developing a rigorous quantitative proof.
Demolition Theories

Theories of the Twin Towers' Destruction Rejecting Gravity-Driven Collapse

Plausible theories of the destruction of the Twin Towers recognize that the observed features of the collapses are not consistent with gravity-driven collapses, and postulate additional inputs of energy by some means. In the five years since the attack there has been a great deal of speculation about just how the demolitions were engineered. We review some of the most prominent theories, some of which are credible and some of which aren't. We divide the theories into three categories: untennable ones contradicted by evidence, exotic ones lacking proof of concept, and plausible ones consistent with evidence.
The various theories are not mutually exclusive. It is possible that a combination of distributed conventional explosives, thermobaric devices, and thermite preparations were used in combination to execute the demolitions.
 

quandary121

Time Out
Apr 20, 2008
2,950
8
38
lincolnshire
uk.youtube.com
FINAL PROOF of the IDIOTIC NATURE of the CONTROLLED DEMOLITION THEORY

THE LARGEST BUILDING EVER TAKEN DOWN BY CONTROLLED DEMOLITION (by 1998)

J. L. Hudson Dep't Store in Detroit.

It was 33 stories high (the WTC was 110 stories high)

21 man demolition crew was on-site for 4 MONTHS preparing the building.

12 man explosives crew then took 24 DAYS to place the explosives.

4,118 charges in 1100 locations.

2,728 lbs of explosives.

(get this) 36,000 feet of det cord.

4512 non-electric delay elements placed (whatever the hell they are)

All to drop 33 stories.

Say good-night boys, the debate is over for any reasonable human being. Obviously, setting up the CD of the WTC in secret was simply impossible.

http://www.controlled-demolition.com/default.asp?reqLocId=7&reqItemId=20030225133807


Conventional Demolitions

Conventional demolitions employ numerous explosive charges, placed adjacent to all the vertical support structures of the building and on multiple levels, starting at the ground. Careful timing of the detonations is essential to achieving vertical collapse of the building into its footprint. Typically, charges on the interior columns at ground level are detonated first, causing the central portion of the building to begin to collapse, pulling the perimeter of the building inward. Detonations then proceed outward, destroying perimeter columns after inner columns, and upward, destroying sections of columns just as they reach the ground. The net effect is a vertical collapse in which the building implodes, falling into a rubble pile almost entirely within the building's footprint.
Most conventional demolitions use detonation cords to set off the explosive charges. However, equipment currently on the market, such as the HiEx TeleBlaster, allows the detonation of charges without the use of cords or wires. [SIZE=-1]2 [/SIZE] Such wireless equipment allows demolitions to be set up in a much less intrusive manner than was previously possible.
 

quandary121

Time Out
Apr 20, 2008
2,950
8
38
lincolnshire
uk.youtube.com
Twin Towers' Demolition

The Twin Towers' demolition, if achieved through distributed explosive charges, was engineered in a decidedly different manner from conventional demolitions to make it consistent with the story that the Towers collapsed as a result of the jet impacts and fires. The main differences were:
  • Explosions started at the impact zone and proceeded down the intact portion of the Tower and up the overhanging portion, instead of starting at ground level.
  • Much more powerful explosives were used than in a conventional demolition.
  • In the South Tower demolition, the overhanging portion was allowed to tip for a few seconds before the larger explosions commenced.
The Twin Tower demolitions resembled conventional demolitions in that the Towers fell with dead-centered vertical symmetry; but differed in that material was ejected horizontally in all directions, resulting in rubble piles several times the diameter of the Towers' footprints. The Twin Towers exploded rather than imploded.The Twin Towers were also demolished at a more rapid rate than is the case in conventional demolitions. When buildings are demolished from the ground up, gravity is typically relied upon to do most of the work once several floors have been demolished, and the upper portion of the building is falling with considerable kinetic energy. The tapping of that energy to break up the structure slows the fall. In the case of the Twin Towers, it appeared that the explosive events were progressing down the Towers' intact portions at a rate only slightly slower than free-fall
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Are you going to add to this debate or are you going to continue with your nonsensical quips, ponderous intellect is right, i ponder whether you have any at all
Oh ... I have added. Do your talents extend to scrolling back? One may have to wade through all this bloody cut and paste. You realize C&P IS in rather poor form don't you? An expert in everything would know that.
 

quandary121

Time Out
Apr 20, 2008
2,950
8
38
lincolnshire
uk.youtube.com
Disaster Engineering

One might ask questions about two features of the demolition, both of which would seem to detract from the realism of simulated gravity-driven collapses.
  • Why would the perpetrators use much higher explosives than in a conventional demolition?
  • Why would they destroy the Towers at such a rapid rate?
The answer to the first question probably has to do with economics. Lower-powered explosives would fail to break up the Towers' structures as thoroughly. Since the destruction started a thousand feet aloft, large falling pieces could have been deflected hundreds of feet when they hit other objects near the ground. Had not the Towers' perimeter walls been so thoroughly shredded, they might have fallen away in large sections, pivoting large distances from the Towers. The result could have been more damage to buildings outside the World Trade Center complex than occurred. While the high explosives threw pieces of the perimeter wall as much as 500 feet laterally, their distribution was more predictable and their sizes were smaller and less likely to do serious damage than might have happened with less powerful explosives.
The answer to the second question probably has to do with hiding obvious evidence of explosions. Increasingly powerful explosions occurred as the destruction progressed down the Towers, perhaps to ensure the thorough destruction of the stronger structures lower in the Towers. If the rate at which the explosives were detonated was not fast enough to stay ahead of the falling rubble, the perpetrators ran the risk that the rubble would fall away from the moving zone of destruction, revealing large obvious explosions at the top of the exposed structures.
Contrary Evidence

The distributed explosives theory can easily explain the gross features of the collapses from the top-to-bottom destruction to the pulverization of the Towers' materials. However, there are a number of more subtle features of the collapses that do not appear to be consistent with this theory, at least in its simplest form. The following collapse features suggest that the demolition of the Towers was accomplished using technologies other than just distributed conventional explosives. In contrast, many of the same features do appear to be consistent with the thermobarics theory, and the final one suggests the thermite theory.
  • Absence of high blast pressures in collapse onsets
    Careful study of photographs and videos of both collapses shows that the perimeter walls do not immediately blow out in the way one would expect if explosives adjacent ot the perimeter columns were used to destroy them. Rather, the walls telescope as they disappear into the burgeoning dust clouds, to partially reappear seconds later as fragments outracing the dust cloud.
  • Rapid degradation of structure
    Features of the onset of both collapses indicate that structures around and above the crash zones lost almost all their strength. In the South Tower, the top not only tips, it bends: The outer wall exhibits a peculiar curve extending about 15 floors above the crash zone. Similarly, in the North Tower, the top begins to telescope straight down with no evidence of bucking in the perimeter columns. In both cases the structure's strength seems to disappear even before any of the explosive features appear.
  • Uniformity of pulverization
    Photographs and reports from Ground Zero indicate that the vast majority of the estimated 90,000 tons of concrete in each Tower was turned to fine dust, not a mixture of dust and gravel or larger chunks. Since blast pressures from explosive charges fall off with the square of the distance from the source, achieving such thorough pulverization with distributed explosives would seem to have required a huge number of individual packages being placed throughout the building.
  • Vaporization of people
    Over 1000 victims were never identified despite over a year of efforts to identify victims from even the smallest fragments using DNA. Explosive charges would be unlikely to so thoroughly degrade the remains of so many people.
  • Persistence of core structures
    In both collapses, a large section of the core structure extending up over 600 feet remains standing for a few seconds and then collapses. The persistent remnant of the North Tower is very narrow and delicate. It is difficult to imagine how such structures could have survived the blast pressures generated by demolition waves of explosive charges, only to themselves collapse a few seconds later.
  • Rapid oxidation and intergranular melting of steel pieces
    The limited metallurgical examination of some of the few pieces of structural steel that escaped the blast furnaces shows very peculiar features, such as rapid oxidation turning inch-thick steel into paper-thin scrolled pieces, cavitation giving steel the appearance of Swiss cheese, and intragranular melting. These suggest a more exotic process of destruction than mere explosives.
 

quandary121

Time Out
Apr 20, 2008
2,950
8
38
lincolnshire
uk.youtube.com
You realize C&P IS in rather poor form don't you
Do you expect me to prove what im saying with out the use of cut and paste ,i have been asked to back up what im saying this i am doing ,or would you prefer me to speak on my own, with out such proofs , giving you verbatim to say i don't know what im talking about, or that i know nothing as im not a demolitions expert ,or a aviation fuel expert, or a wielder, or any number of other definable experts, needed to describe the truth about this being an inside job

PS: when others cut and paste you say nothing but when Quandary121 says it you say that that is all i do how very very civil of you lone-wolf.!
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Oh ... I have added. Do your talents extend to scrolling back? One may have to wade through all this bloody cut and paste. You realize C&P IS in rather poor form don't you? An expert in everything would know that.

Do you expect me to prove what im saying with out the use of cut and paste ,i have been asked to back up what im saying this i am doing ,or would you prefer me to speak on my own, with out such proofs , giving you verbatim to say i don't know what im talking about, or that i know nothing as im not a demolitions expert ,or a aviation fuel expert, or a wielder, or any number of other definable experts, needed to describe the truth about this being an inside job

Why not? Search the archives. I did rather well at it. Links are good enough. C&P turns readers off.
 

quandary121

Time Out
Apr 20, 2008
2,950
8
38
lincolnshire
uk.youtube.com
Those outer frames were rung like schoolbells on impact. There was little to prevent rebound of a solid shell around a solid core as OWSJ are not designed for lateral shift and there were no internal structural members. WTC 2 (the second impact) went down first because the plane struck at an angle putting addional gyration into the rebound. Whether there was a failsafe mechanism in place to bring the building down into its own footprint is something we're not likely to hear

if this is what you meant when you say you added something this is hardly sound observations as the towers had an inner core of around 24 steel framed girders in the centre to prevent movement of high winds such as hurricanes


Shattering of Structure

The Twin Towers' Frames Disintegrated Before Falling

[SIZE=-1]This photograph shows the top of the South Tower disintegrating as it has only just begun to fall. Note the curves in the edges of the walls above the zone of collapse. [/SIZE]There is clear visual evidence that the structural frames of many stories above the impact zones in both towers were shattered before the tops had fallen significant distances. The evidence is particularly strong in the case of the South Tower.
 

quandary121

Time Out
Apr 20, 2008
2,950
8
38
lincolnshire
uk.youtube.com
A white paper released on February 3, 1964 states that the Towers could have withstood impacts of jetliners travelling 600 mph -- a speed greater than the impact speed of either jetliner used on 9/11/01.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
Conventional Demolitions

Conventional demolitions employ numerous explosive charges, placed adjacent to all the vertical support structures of the building and on multiple levels, starting at the ground. Careful timing of the detonations is essential to achieving vertical collapse of the building into its footprint. Typically, charges on the interior columns at ground level are detonated first, causing the central portion of the building to begin to collapse, pulling the perimeter of the building inward. Detonations then proceed outward, destroying perimeter columns after inner columns, and upward, destroying sections of columns just as they reach the ground. The net effect is a vertical collapse in which the building implodes, falling into a rubble pile almost entirely within the building's footprint.
Most conventional demolitions use detonation cords to set off the explosive charges. However, equipment currently on the market, such as the HiEx TeleBlaster, allows the detonation of charges without the use of cords or wires. [SIZE=-1]2 [/SIZE]Such wireless equipment allows demolitions to be set up in a much less intrusive manner than was previously possible.

Okay, that's reasonable..............that does away with the need for several times the 36,000 feet of det cord required to drop the Hudson Store......

It DOES NOT address the need for months of preparation by dozens of men moving away insulation and walls, cutting steel, and other prepatory work........

Then placing at least 5 TONS of explosives in strategic locations (we are talking three buildings here, right?)

All without anyone noticing..........

And you still haven't explained why the WTC collapsed from the top down, while CD collapses structures from the bottom up.

Face it, the whole idea of CD of the WTC is so ludicrous, so out there, and so easily debunked...........it is simply silly to think this is possible.

oh, and BTW, the number of people capable of planning and carrying out a cd like this is miniscule.....................absolutely tiny.

the concept is ludicrous.

Just ridiculous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.