Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum _ South Tower _ Explosive Material Cause Impact Dent On Steel

Posted by: 9/11 Justice Now Jan 2 2009, 01:48 PM

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=SyRw7gEKpBQ&...61C598&index=35

Hi there i find this video highly suspect of showing evidence that the wtc towers where bought down by a controlled demolition. In this video it shows professor
Abolhassan Astaneh going over some of the steel recovered from the wtc plane impact area in one of the towers, notice in the video at 1:08 showing the huge dent
in the steel which prof Abolhassan Astaneh says was due to explosive material hitting the steel and making that fault, i find it highly suspicious how he used the words explosive material, now you really have to ask yourself would you classify jet fuel as explosive material? Does jet fuel fall into this category?

I dont not personaly beleive that jet fuel could explode with enough velocity to create this small dented area as seen on the steel, i beleive that the small impact dent is more consistent with with being create by a high velocity explosive charge, i also beleive that this steel column was placed right next to some kind of high explosive material or demolition charge.

Notice that the dent is only on a small area which seems entirely consistent of it having been created by a small high velocity explosion from a demolition charge.

You have to ask yourself how is it possible? Could exploding jet fuel have created this dent.

Does anybody know the explosive velocity of jet fuel and where it would be enough to have cause this dent?
I assume that this stell is around one inch thick or more.

If someone can prove that this dent is not, the result of the impact from a jet fuel
explosion, then it must have been the work of contolled demolition, i beleive this is an important piece of evidence.

Posted by: hiram Jan 2 2009, 03:54 PM

IMHO jet fuel (or gasoline) are unable to explode, they deflagrate (a slow explosion) and cannot cause the deformations shown. If it were the case, how could you build an "explosion" motor or a jet turbine ?
One could build a kind of gun with jet fuel as propellant and fire a projectile on a column but "c'est une autre histoire".

Hiram

Posted by: 9/11 Justice Now Jan 3 2009, 06:11 AM

QUOTE (hiram @ Jan 3 2009, 05:54 AM) *
IMHO jet fuel (or gasoline) are unable to explode, they deflagrate (a slow explosion) and cannot cause the deformations shown. If it were the case, how could you build an "explosion" motor or a jet turbine ?
One could build a kind of gun with jet fuel as propellant and fire a projectile on a column but "c'est une autre histoire".

Hiram


If exploding jet fuel could not have possibly caused this damage, then what other possible conclusion are there left besides an explosive demolition charge, i cant find any more. What do you guys think?

Posted by: lunk Jan 3 2009, 07:21 AM

The twin towers were designed specifically not to "fall" if hit by a big airplane, according to their designers.
If this is true, then jet fuel, from an airplane, wasn't the cause of the "collapses", either.
If, airplanes and their jet fuel, were not the cause of the collapse of the twin towers,
Then there must have been something else that caused these buildings demise.

This makes the question,

QUOTE
Does anybody know the explosive velocity of jet fuel and where it would be enough to have cause this dent?
completely irrelevant and misleading as it reinforces the impossibility that planes and their jet fuel, caused these steel reinforced concrete buildings to disperse into dust, with almost 3000 victims, on 11/09/2001 (DD/MM/YYYY).

I think a better question is, why do they call it "9/11" and not "11/9"?
...psychopathic poetic meter, perhaps?

imo, lunk

(edit) spellin'

Posted by: kawika Apr 5 2009, 03:28 PM

This fellow is highly suspect.

1. He was hired by the National Science Foundation to look the steel over.

2. He works backwards from his conclusion that fire caused the collapse and fits the evidence into his conclusion.

3. Take a look at this computer simulation he cooked up to explain how the jet reacts with the building.

http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/news/02/tip020904.htm#first

I am working to find the whole simulation, but in the meantime I make the following observations based upon these few frames.

1. Look at the scale of plane to floor height--floor height is about the same as jet height.

2. Look at the steel framing members--all the same dimension.

3. Look at the building--only three columns to smash through before exiting the other side.

4. He conveniently enters the jet above a floor level, the area of least resistance.

4. Look at the exterior column spacing--The WTC exterior columns were about 3 feet apart. They were 14" square.
The plane would be sliced like bread upon entry! The engines would have been hitting more than two columns, heavily reinforced by the steel spandrel, the edge of the concrete floor, the floor pans and the trusses.

We should demand our money back!! What kind of analysis is this anyway? A first year CAD student could make a more realistic drawing. If this is a very hastily assembled aid to his testimony before congress, where can we see the final version? Where are all the pictures he took? Where are all the samples he saved?

Posted by: SwingDangler Apr 20 2009, 02:52 PM

QUOTE (kawika @ Apr 3 2009, 05:28 PM) *
This fellow is highly suspect.

1. He was hired by the National Science Foundation to look the steel over.

2. He works backwards from his conclusion that fire caused the collapse and fits the evidence into his conclusion.

3. Take a look at this computer simulation he cooked up to explain how the jet reacts with the building.

http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/news/02/tip020904.htm#first

I am working to find the whole simulation, but in the meantime I make the following observations based upon these few frames.

1. Look at the scale of plane to floor height--floor height is about the same as jet height.

2. Look at the steel framing members--all the same dimension.

3. Look at the building--only three columns to smash through before exiting the other side.

4. He conveniently enters the jet above a floor level, the area of least resistance.

4. Look at the exterior column spacing--The WTC exterior columns were about 3 feet apart. They were 14" square.
The plane would be sliced like bread upon entry! The engines would have been hitting more than two columns, heavily reinforced by the steel spandrel, the edge of the concrete floor, the floor pans and the trusses.

We should demand our money back!! What kind of analysis is this anyway? A first year CAD student could make a more realistic drawing. If this is a very hastily assembled aid to his testimony before congress, where can we see the final version? Where are all the pictures he took? Where are all the samples he saved?



How do you get a NSF "quick response" grant to model the tragedy shortly after 9/11?

Here is more of the interview and facts about him: http://thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/WTC/astaneh-wtc.htm


More research on the individual in question:

Securing steel cables around the floors of existing buildings may be an effective way to prevent a catastrophic collapse caused by a terrorist bomb, according to test results released by researchers at the University of California, Berkeley.
Source: http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/cables_could_help_protect_buildings_from_bombs
DATED: 20 Feb. 2003!

Hmmm I wonder if he saw something in the debris that the rest of us didn't?

QUOTE
Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, professor of civil engineering at UC Berkeley's College of Engineering, and four of his civil engineering graduate students have successfully tested a system that would shift the gravity load of a collapsing floor to supporting cables if a column were destroyed by a natural disaster, such as an earthquake, or a terrorist bomb. From the University of California at Berkeley:
Cables hold promise in protecting existing buildings from bombs, researchers find.


More terrorist bombs to protect buildings from....but I thought it was heat and gravity that was the excuse for global collapse?? LOL.

QUOTE
Because it would have been too dangerous to set off an explosive during the test, Astaneh worked with computer models and scientists from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to simulate an explosive attack and calculate the effects of dynamic force on the system. "We found that if you apply the force gradually, as we did in our test bay," he said, "the cable could take 40 percent more load than if it were an explosive force."


Huh? Why an explosive? LOL. Was there something he saw in the WTC steel debris that the public did not? Surely he realizes it was gravity that caused the global collapse not an explosive!?!

Lets take a look at the results of the experiment. (Note the fallacy of omission in the article...)

QUOTE
In the first two trials, a vital support column was knocked out, and more than 120,000 pounds of downward force were applied to the weakened floor to simulate the weight of the floor - full of people and office equipment - above the missing column. In the third trial, twice as much weight was applied to stretch the limits of the cable support.

In the trial without the cable, one of the connections between the floor girder and the column broke completely. When tested with the cable, the floor began to cave in at the point where the column had been removed. But despite the audible cracks of stressed concrete and steel and a few busted bolts, the cables were able to halt the impending collapse after the floor dropped two feet, and the connections held.


Notice what the article left out: the results from the floor without a cable when supports were removed!! No mention of complete global collapse. No mention of the entire floor 'pancaking' down to the bottom.

And finally.....OMG....
QUOTE
Admittedly, however, the cable system would only protect the columns on the perimeter of a building. "The approach to protecting interior columns is to increase security so that questionable vehicles cannot enter the parking structures or structurally vulnerable areas of high-risk buildings," said Astaneh.


Ok, I'm convinced this guy knows a lot more about the debris and the global collapse than what he is letting on.

Posted by: kawika Apr 21 2009, 04:13 PM

Note also this reference to video taken during the collapse. Maybe just an innocent error.

http://thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/WTC/astaneh-wtc.htm


The main impediments to my work were and still are:

1. Not having a copy of the engineering drawings and design and construction documents.
2. Not having copies of the photographs and videotapes that various agencies might have taken during and immediately after the collapse.


To further our research here is a list and website showing the eight quick response grants by NSF.

http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/news/media/01/ma0136.htm

NSF QUICK RESPONSE RESEARCH AWARDS

* Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, University of California at Berkeley, and a colleague are collecting data on the mechanical and structural properties of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers, particulary steel affected by heat, fire and impact.

* David Bloomquist, University of Florida, leads a team at the WTC and Pentagon using a new land-based laser system to produce high-resolution 3-D "maps" of the interior and exterior of damaged buildings, particularly identifying displacements and cracks (images available).

* J. David Frost, Georgia Institute of Technology, and his team are collecting data on structural damage at the WTC, using handheld technology recently developed to quickly collect data after earthquakes. The equipment includes a GPS, digital camera and handheld computer.

* John Harrald, George Washington University, and colleagues aim to study the coordination and communications of emergency, medical, law enforcement and military responders.

* George Lee, State University of New York at Buffalo, and others from the NSF-supported Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research are assessing the damage to buildings surrounding the WTC and the response of hospitals and other emergency services (see http://mceer.buffalo.edu).

* Dennis Mileti, University of Colorado at Boulder, is coordinating the travel of quick response teams from the NSF supported Natural Hazards Research Application and Information Center (see http://www.Colorado.EDU/hazards).

* Frederick W. Mowrer, University of Maryland, is studying the performance of fire protection materials and systems during the fires and collapse of the WTC towers.

* William A. Wallace, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, leads a team studying infrastructure interdependence, such as how power loss affects control systems, and ways to mitigate and respond to failures.

Posted by: engineer Oct 27 2009, 10:26 PM

This is the typical imbecile the government hired to cover up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building and the Oakland ovepass collapse.

Pay him off and he'll parrot back anything you tell him to.

He looks right at damaging evidence and stumbles around bewildered, totally dumbfounded.

Reminds me of Gerald Ford on the Warren Commission, but Ford was in on it.

Posted by: albertchampion Oct 28 2009, 01:05 AM

let's see, would you be agreeing with some of us who assert that no anfo in a ryder truck could do the damage that was done?

in other words, agreeing with general partin that the official conspiracy theory is a hoax?

AND THAT JOE HARTZLER WAS A CONJOB? SELECTED FOR HIS MS AND HIS WHEELCHAIR, so as to harvest juror sympathy?

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)