Venezuela's Chavez AND Charlie Sheen on 9-11


Karlin
#1
Chavez's 9-11 investigation:
http://tinyurl.com/qb8ep
Quote:

Billionaire philanthropist Jimmy Walter and WTC survivor William Rodriguez this week embarked on a groundbreaking trip to Caracas Venezuela in which they met with with the President of the Assembly and will soon meet with Venezuelan President himself Hugo Chavez in anticipation of an official Venezuelan government investigation into 9/11.

Rodriguez was the last survivor pulled from the rubble of the north tower of the WTC, and was responsible for all stairwells within the tower. Rodriguez represented family members of 9/11 victims and testified to the 9/11 Commission that bombs were in the north tower but his statements were completely omitted from the official record.

Jimmy Walter has been at the forefront of a world tour to raise awareness about 9/11 and has still yet to receive any response to his million dollar challenge in which he offers a $1 million reward for proof that the trade towers' steel structure was broken apart without explosives.


Charlie Sheen 9-11 media attention
http://tinyurl.com/elkuf
Sheen's words:
Quote:

Sheen said that most people's gut instinct, that the buildings had been deliberately imploded, was washed away by the incessant flood of the official version of events from day one.

Quote:

The question of how Bush saw the first plane hit the north tower, when no live footage of that incident was carried, an assertion that Bush repeated twice, was also put under the spotlight.
"I guess one of the perks of being President is that you get access to TV channels that don't exist in the known universe," said Sheen.
"It might lead you to believe that he'd seen similar images in some type of rehearsal as it were, I don't know."

and most notably:
Quote:

"That we are to stand by the President right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."

K - but, that is exactly what this Pres. Bush has asked Americans to do , isn't it? Swallow his version whole, "ask no questions or you will be branded a traitor" - that is certain evidence of the Bush mindset that has nothing to do with real and historic American ideals.
Like Charlie and his dad, I also knew right away, within the first hour of 9-11, that this was a huge farce that would be used to launch some more Vietnam-style conservative agenda warmongering. You could just tell the way it was presented on the TV that it had been planned and was propagandistic.
 
aeon
#2
When bush said the second time at a different place that he saw the first plane live on tv, this is where i realize 9-11 was a total joke, and that was in february 2002.
 
Johnny Utah
#3
Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation.
INTRODUCTION

The collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers on September 11, 2001, was as sudden as it was dramatic; the complete destruction of such massive buildings shocked nearly everyone. Immediately afterward and even today, there is widespread speculation that the buildings were structurally deficient, that the steel columns melted, or that the fire suppression equipment failed to operate. In order to separate the fact from the fiction, we have attempted to quantify various details of the collapse.

The major events include the following:

* The airplane impact with damage to the columns.
* The ensuing fire with loss of steel strength and distortion (Figure 1).
* The collapse, which generally occurred inward without significant tipping (Figure 2).

Each will be discussed separately, but initially it is useful to review the overall design of the towers.

THE DESIGN

The towers were designed and built in the mid-1960s through the early 1970s. They represented a new approach to skyscrapers in that they were to be very lightweight and involved modular construction methods in order to accelerate the schedule and to reduce the costs.

To a structural engineer, a skyscraper is modeled as a large cantilever vertical column. Each tower was 64 m square, standing 411 m above street level and 21 m below grade. This produces a height-to-width ratio of 6.8. The total weight of the structure was roughly 500,000 t, but wind load, rather than the gravity load, dominated the design. The building is a huge sail that must resist a 225 km/h hurricane. It was designed to resist a wind load of 2 kPa—a total of lateral load of 5,000 t.

In order to make each tower capable of withstanding this wind load, the architects selected a lightweight “perimeter tube” design consisting of 244 exterior columns of 36 cm square steel box section on 100 cm centers (see Figure 3). This permitted windows more than one-half meter wide. Inside this outer tube there was a 27 m × 40 m core, which was designed to support the weight of the tower. It also housed the elevators, the stairwells, and the mechanical risers and utilities. Web joists 80 cm tall connected the core to the perimeter at each story. Concrete slabs were poured over these joists to form the floors. In essence, the building is an egg-crate construction that is about 95 percent air, explaining why the rubble after the collapse was only a few stories high.

The egg-crate construction made a redundant structure (i.e., if one or two columns were lost, the loads would shift into adjacent columns and the building would remain standing). Prior to the World Trade Center with its lightweight perimeter tube design, most tall buildings contained huge columns on 5 m centers and contained massive amounts of masonry carrying some of the structural load. The WTC was primarily a lightweight steel structure; however, its 244 perimeter columns made it “one of the most redundant and one of the most resilient” skyscrapers.1

THE AIRLINE IMPACT
The early news reports noted how well the towers withstood the initial impact of the aircraft; however, when one recognizes that the buildings had more than 1,000 times the mass of the aircraft and had been designed to resist steady wind loads of 30 times the weight of the aircraft, this ability to withstand the initial impact is hardly surprising. Furthermore, since there was no significant wind on September 11, the outer perimeter columns were only stressed before the impact to around 1/3 of their 200 MPa design allowable.

The only individual metal component of the aircraft that is comparable in strength to the box perimeter columns of the WTC is the keel beam at the bottom of the aircraft fuselage. While the aircraft impact undoubtedly destroyed several columns in the WTC perimeter wall, the number of columns lost on the initial impact was not large and the loads were shifted to remaining columns in this highly redundant structure. Of equal or even greater significance during this initial impact was the explosion when 90,000 L gallons of jet fuel, comprising nearly 1/3 of the aircraft’s weight, ignited. The ensuing fire was clearly the principal cause of the collapse (Figure 4).


THE FIRE
The fire is the most misunderstood part of the WTC collapse. Even today, the media report (and many scientists believe) that the steel melted. It is argued that the jet fuel burns very hot, especially with so much fuel present. This is not true.

Part of the problem is that people (including engineers) often confuse temperature and heat. While they are related, they are not the same. Thermodynamically, the heat contained in a material is related to the temperature through the heat capacity and the density (or mass). Temperature is defined as an intensive property, meaning that it does not vary with the quantity of material, while the heat is an extensive property, which does vary with the amount of material. One way to distinguish the two is to note that if a second log is added to the fireplace, the temperature does not double; it stays roughly the same, but the size of the fire or the length of time the fire burns, or a combination of the two, doubles. Thus, the fact that there were 90,000 L of jet fuel on a few floors of the WTC does not mean that this was an unusually hot fire. The temperature of the fire at the WTC was not unusual, and it was most definitely not capable of melting steel.

In combustion science, there are three basic types of flames, namely, a jet burner, a pre-mixed flame, and a diffuse flame. A jet burner generally involves mixing the fuel and the oxidant in nearly stoichiometric proportions and igniting the mixture in a constant-volume chamber. Since the combustion products cannot expand in the constant-volume chamber, they exit the chamber as a very high velocity, fully combusted, jet. This is what occurs in a jet engine, and this is the flame type that generates the most intense heat.

In a pre-mixed flame, the same nearly stoichiometric mixture is ignited as it exits a nozzle, under constant pressure conditions. It does not attain the flame velocities of a jet burner. An oxyacetylene torch or a Bunsen burner is a pre-mixed flame.

In a diffuse flame, the fuel and the oxidant are not mixed before ignition, but flow together in an uncontrolled manner and combust when the fuel/oxidant ratios reach values within the flammable range. A fireplace flame is a diffuse flame burning in air, as was the WTC fire.

Diffuse flames generate the lowest heat intensities of the three flame types.

If the fuel and the oxidant start at ambient temperature, a maximum flame temperature can be defined. For carbon burning in pure oxygen, the maximum is 3,200°C; for hydrogen it is 2,750°C. Thus, for virtually any hydrocarbons, the maximum flame temperature, starting at ambient temperature and using pure oxygen, is approximately 3,000°C.

This maximum flame temperature is reduced by two-thirds if air is used rather than pure oxygen. The reason is that every molecule of oxygen releases the heat of formation of a molecule of carbon monoxide and a molecule of water. If pure oxygen is used, this heat only needs to heat two molecules (carbon monoxide and water), while with air, these two molecules must be heated plus four molecules of nitrogen. Thus, burning hydrocarbons in air produces only one-third the temperature increase as burning in pure oxygen because three times as many molecules must be heated when air is used. The maximum flame temperature increase for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is, thus, about 1,000°C—hardly sufficient to melt steel at 1,500°C.

But it is very difficult to reach this maximum temperature with a diffuse flame. There is nothing to ensure that the fuel and air in a diffuse flame are mixed in the best ratio. Typically, diffuse flames are fuel rich, meaning that the excess fuel molecules, which are unburned, must also be heated. It is known that most diffuse fires are fuel rich because blowing on a campfire or using a blacksmith’s bellows increases the rate of combustion by adding more oxygen. This fuel-rich diffuse flame can drop the temperature by up to a factor of two again. This is why the temperatures in a residential fire are usually in the 500°C to 650°C range.2,3 It is known that the WTC fire was a fuel-rich, diffuse flame as evidenced by the copious black smoke. Soot is generated by incompletely burned fuel; hence, the WTC fire was fuel rich—hardly surprising with 90,000 L of jet fuel available. Factors such as flame volume and quantity of soot decrease the radiative heat loss in the fire, moving the temperature closer to the maximum of 1,000°C. However, it is highly unlikely that the steel at the WTC experienced temperatures above the 750–800°C range. All reports that the steel melted at 1,500°C are using imprecise terminology at best.

Some reports suggest that the aluminum from the aircraft ignited, creating very high temperatures. While it is possible to ignite aluminum under special conditions, such conditions are not commonly attained in a hydrocarbon-based diffuse flame. In addition, the flame would be white hot, like a giant sparkler. There was no evidence of such aluminum ignition, which would have been visible even through the dense soot.

It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C.4 This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse. It was noted above that the wind load controlled the design allowables. The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.

The additional problem was distortion of the steel in the fire. The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire.

THE COLLAPSE
Nearly every large building has a redundant design that allows for loss of one primary structural member, such as a column. However, when multiple members fail, the shifting loads eventually overstress the adjacent members and the collapse occurs like a row of dominoes falling down.

The perimeter tube design of the WTC was highly redundant. It survived the loss of several exterior columns due to aircraft impact, but the ensuing fire led to other steel failures. Many structural engineers believe that the weak points—the limiting factors on design allowables—were the angle clips that held the floor joists between the columns on the perimeter wall and the core structure (see Figure 5). With a 700 Pa floor design allowable, each floor should have been able to support approximately 1,300 t beyond its own weight. The total weight of each tower was about 500,000 t.

As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.1 It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.


WAS THE WTC DEFECTIVELY DESIGNED?
The World Trade Center was not defectively designed. No designer of the WTC anticipated, nor should have anticipated, a 90,000 L Molotov cocktail on one of the building floors. Skyscrapers are designed to support themselves for three hours in a fire even if the sprinkler system fails to operate. This time should be long enough to evacuate the occupants. The WTC towers lasted for one to two hours—less than the design life, but only because the fire fuel load was so large. No normal office fires would fill 4,000 square meters of floor space in the seconds in which the WTC fire developed. Usually, the fire would take up to an hour to spread so uniformly across the width and breadth of the building. This was a very large and rapidly progressing fire (very high heat but not unusually high temperature). Further information about the design of the WTC can be found on the World Wide Web.5–8

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM...agar-0112.html
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#4
Perfect.

JohnUtah you should get a new tinfoil hat yours has holes in it and a moonbeam like you should stay away from koolaide.
 
aeon
#5
hey johnny don t look more stupid than you are this link debunk your link all the way

http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/...agar_0112.html
 
Sassylassie
#6
Aeon you can post your links filled with propaganda until the cows come home but it's garbage, pure filth. Post links please, I don't want to be forced to read the crap you post.
 
Toro
#7
Quote:

Sheen said that most people's gut instinct, that the buildings had been deliberately imploded, was washed away by the incessant flood of the official version of events from day one.


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

"Most people's gut instinct."

Does he mean "Most people IN HOLLYWOOD WHOM I HANG AROUND WITH'S gut instinct?"

Yes, we should listen to someone from HOLLYWOOD!

Earth to Charlie! Earth to Charlie! Most people don't hang with the likes of Heidi Fleiss!
 
aeon
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by Sassylassie

Aeon you can post your links filled with propaganda until the cows come home but it's garbage, pure filth. Post links please, I don't want to be forced to read the crap you post.


Don t read it, just read the crap from sheep like you are.
 
Johnny Utah
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by aeon

hey johnny don t look more stupid than you are this link debunk your link all the way

http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/...agar_0112.html

All that link shows is Conspiracy Theory Moonbats messed with the information on the legit website to suit their 9/11 Conspiracy Theories agenda, that is something your hero Alex Jones would do. Try again Al Fonz you are the one who looks stupid.
You are still Owned!
 
aeon
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by Johnny Utah

All that link shows is Conspiracy Theory Moonbats messed with the information on the legit website to suit their 9/11 Conspiracy Theories agenda, that is something your hero Alex Jones would do. Try again Al Fonz you are the one who looks stupid.


Your link doesnt even show the right amount of fuel in jetliners according to us officials,both us officials and guys like you doesnt even take the time , to get the same claim ,you are just pathetic.
 
#juan
No Party Affiliation
#11
I'm asking all of you to tone down the insults and name calling.

Please
 
Sassylassie
#12
Aoen you really are a deluded man. Propaganda is not evidence. With todays tecnology and enough money 30% of the population can easily be convinced that propaganda is real.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#13
Good link Aeon, the evidence is conclusive Uncle Sham destroyed the buildings and the people, the oil in the middle east is worth all the dead on both sides,thousands more will die and Unlce Sham will tell us they were all worth it, long as they make a buck they don't care how many have to die and they never did.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by Sassylassie

Aoen you really are a deluded man. Propaganda is not evidence. With todays tecnology and enough money 30% of the population can easily be convinced that propaganda is real.

You're living proof of your own words Sassy. The number of rubes is acctually higher than 30%
 
Johnny Utah
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by aeon

Quote: Originally Posted by Johnny Utah

All that link shows is Conspiracy Theory Moonbats messed with the information on the legit website to suit their 9/11 Conspiracy Theories agenda, that is something your hero Alex Jones would do. Try again Al Fonz you are the one who looks stupid.


Your link doesnt even show the right amount of fuel in jetliners according to us officials,both us officials and guys like you doesnt even take the time , to get the same claim ,you are just pathetic.

Sorry Al Fonz if anyone is pathetic it's you for rushing to a conspiracy website to debunk the legit information I posted. I knew you would do just that and you did, thanks for not disappointing me I knew I could count on you.
 
aeon
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan

I'm asking all of you to tone down the insults and name calling.

Please


Understood, i admit i have my guilt.

Peace!
 
aeon
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by Sassylassie

Aoen you really are a deluded man. Propaganda is not evidence. With todays tecnology and enough money 30% of the population can easily be convinced that propaganda is real.

Exactly, that is what happened on 9-11, when the white house and media, took care of the event.
 
zoofer
#18
GW Bush is some powerful hombre. The flatearthers on another forum solemnly discuss how George was behind the tsunami that hit Indonesia and Sri Lanka. Others point to his guilt in nailing the poor with Katrina. Not satisfied he caused the earthquake in Iran. These addlepated boneheads are convinced and try their damndest to convince other Nutters. Normal people just laugh shake their heads and move on.
When buildings are demolished the experts place the explosives around the foundations but sly George placed his 200 stories higher up. This lot would be hilarious if it weren't for the murdered passengers and office workers. Flatearthers do not care about facts or truth. They would sacrifice their mothers if they could pin it on Bush IMO.
 
Toro
#19
Well said, Zoof.
 
aeon
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by zoofer

GW Bush is some powerful hombre. The flatearthers on another forum solemnly discuss how George was behind the tsunami that hit Indonesia and Sri Lanka. Others point to his guilt in nailing the poor with Katrina. Not satisfied he caused the earthquake in Iran. These addlepated boneheads are convinced and try their damndest to convince other Nutters. Normal people just laugh shake their heads and move on.
When buildings are demolished the experts place the explosives around the foundations but sly George placed his 200 stories higher up. This lot would be hilarious if it weren't for the murdered passengers and office workers. Flatearthers do not care about facts or truth. They would sacrifice their mothers if they could pin it on Bush IMO.


Wait a min mr zoof, no one in here has ever talk about bush being behind katrina,same for the earthquake of iran, the tsunamie, where the hell did you get those??
 
Curiosity
#21
Johnny Utah

I just realized I wrote a thank you for your good explanation post yesterday and I must have pushed the wrong button because it is not sitting where it should be.

Anyway - thank you. Amid the rumblings of the beavis and butthead gang....you outdid yourself.
 
Toro
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by aeon

Wait a min mr zoof, no one in here has ever talk about bush being behind katrina,same for the earthquake of iran, the tsunamie, where the hell did you get those??

A little before your time aeon. Around the time of those events, people here were talking about Bush controlling the weather and causing those catastrophes.
 
Curiosity
#23
Zoofer

I guess people don't know about Bush's "Sun Button" where he can affect global warming too. Radio SETI were talking about it!

 
Sassylassie
#24
Sassy bows before Zoofer, well written and so very true. I decree hence forth not to engage in dialog with Flatearthers. Spit!
 
aeon
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by Toro

Quote: Originally Posted by aeon

Wait a min mr zoof, no one in here has ever talk about bush being behind katrina,same for the earthquake of iran, the tsunamie, where the hell did you get those??

A little before your time aeon. Around the time of those events, people here were talking about Bush controlling the weather and causing those catastrophes.

Come on, what the hell is this?? prove it to me.
 
Toro
#26
Do a search, aeon, of threads around the time of Katrina. I'd do it, but I'm lazy.

I know its hard to believe, but the Fringe believes it to be true.
 
jimmoyer
#27
I second Wednesday's Child's complement to Johnny
Utah on that 9/11 article.

Some of the leftwing's belief about conspiracy
really can't understand the physics and science
of those towers, but political beliefs are so much
more easily understood.
 
aeon
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by jimmoyer

I second Wednesday's Child's complement to Johnny
Utah on that 9/11 article.

Some of the leftwing's belief about conspiracy
really can't understand the physics and science
of those towers, but political beliefs are so much
more easily understood.


The problem with johnny article, it is full of errors, his articles doesnt even go with the us officials story.
 
aeon
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by Toro

Do a search, aeon, of threads around the time of Katrina. I'd do it, but I'm lazy.

I know its hard to believe, but the Fringe believes it to be true.


I did and i found none, nice try though.
 
jimmoyer
#30
The problem with johnny article, it is full of errors, his articles doesnt even go with the us officials story.
------------------------aeon---------------------------------

That's okay if it doesn't speak to every question you
have.

The point of the article was simply to teach more
of the physics of a structure to you.

Regarding all the other interesting details of what
people did in the context of that moment of confusion
fear and desperation is another matter to discuss.

Other than learning the physics and the laws of
physics and the architectural knowlege of the 60s
and 70s I would have to consider the context in
which people irrationally or rationally behave during
a complex emotional moment.
 

Similar Threads

8
Venezuela's Chávez Is a Divider
by sanch | May 20th, 2006
12
Charlie Sheen Divorce Bombshell
by Jay | Apr 27th, 2006