Architects & Engineers For 9/11 Truth's Official Presentation Of Scientific Data, 2 Hours of Scientific Evidence Options

[pookzta]

This is the Official Presentation of Scientific Evidence by the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth organization.

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth Presents: Blueprint For 9/11 Truth
http://www.ae911truth.org/flashmov11.htm

(IMG:http://www.ae911truth.org/images/aelogoleft.png)

Long Live PEACE, LOVE, UNITY, RESPECT, TRUTH, JUSTICE, & LIBERTY for Everyone.


Sincerely,


Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M1 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology
University of Illinois College of Medicine

[pookzta]

Dear Friends,


Here are a few of my concerns regarding 9/11:


1. For SEVEN YEARS, the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST), the scientific organization the Bush Administration appointed to research 9/11, claimed that WTC7 never reached free fall acceleration because of all the steel structure that had to bend, twist, and break, as the structure came down. WTC7 was not hit by an airplane, and it collapsed solely due to office fires and exterior debris damage, so there should have been plenty of intact steel structure and support columns that would have to bend, twist, and break, in order for the WTC7 structure to collapse. For this reason, one would expect a slow collapse, at least one that would not reach the free-fall acceleration of gravity. Free fall acceleration of gravity is seen when one drops a ball from the roof of a building, as the only thing slowing that ball down from gravity's downwards acceleration is air resistance, which is negligable. Oddly enough, the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) stated for seven entire years that WTC7 did NOT reach free fall acceleration during its collapse. Then, in 2008, after independent physicists showed that WTC7 actually DID reach free fall acceleration during its collapse, NIST did a 180-degree turn and now admits that free fall acceleration was in fact achieved by WTC7. NIST attempted to explain why they think this free fall acceleration is not a big deal with their '3 Stage Collapse Model', but for those who understand the basic concepts of gravity and acceleration, this is indeed a very concerning issue.


2. This short video (2 minutes, 18 seconds) clearly demonstrates some of my concern regarding WTC7 and its free fall collapse:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk


3. After they were embarassed at their 2008 technical briefing by David Chandler, a high school physics teacher with some common sense, logic, and basic, verifiable physics software analysis, NIST has decided to CHANGE THEIR STORY, after SEVEN whole years of being WRONG, either on accident (incompetance), or on purpose (lying)!


4. Now, NIST admits to free fall acceleration occurring during the collapse of WTC7, but for 7 years before, they did not! Strange, isn't it?


5. As a building collapses, it has to spend energy (i.e. work) on bending and breaking the steel structure that is supporting it and holding it up. This spent energy (work) results in a loss of kinetic energy (i.e. loss of speed), which results in the building accelerating downwards SLOWER than the free fall acceleration of gravity. The only way for a building to achieve free fall acceleration is if there is either NO STRUCTURE BENEATH IT (like dropping a ball through the air), --OR-- if some extra energy is added to the system to break the support structure of the building (via controlled demolition), which would then allow the structure to collapse at the free fall acceleration of gravity as if there was little or no support structure holding it up anymore. Since WTC7 was not hit by an airplane, how were simple office fires and external debris damage able to remove the structural support of the building so completely that it could achieve the free fall acceleration of gravity during its collapse? (This is clear and obvious evidence that NIST is lying, which is why Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth has began raising money to sue the two lead 9/11 investigators of NIST, Shyam Sunder & John Gross.)


6. After denying it for seven whole years, NIST has now admitted that WTC7 did indeed reach the free fall acceleration of gravity, as seen in their official FAQ which I have provided a link to, and now there is finally enough evidence against them to prove they are either incompetant scientists, or liars, and that is why they are getting sued. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

From the official updated 2008 NIST-government FAQ (see link below):

"The analyses of the video (both the estimation of the instant the roofline began to descend and the calculated velocity and acceleration of a point on the roofline) revealed three distinct stages characterizing the 5.4 seconds of collapse:

* Stage 1 (0 to 1.75 seconds): acceleration less than that of gravity (i.e., slower than free fall).
* Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration ([i]free fall)
* Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity."[/i]

[I bolded line 2 for emphasis.]

taken from: http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factshe..._qa_082108.html

DO YOU SEE? NIST NOW ADMITS THAT THE BUILDING FELL AT FREE FALL ACCELERATION, AFTER SEVEN YEARS OF DENYING IT...


7. How come they changed their story after SEVEN YEARS, after that embarassing technical briefing where they were shown that WTC7 did indeed fall at free fall accelerations for several seconds???


8. How can a building collapse at free fall accelerations for several seconds if it has to bend, break, and twist tons and tons of steel structure the entire way down, just due to office fires and exterior debris damage??


9. How come NIST still won't release their computer model for other scientists to verify and replicate their data? Sure they release cute videos of the model in action, but they REFUSE to release the actual model for others to test and verify! WHY?! It is standard scientific protocal to release the model used in scientific analysis, as science models are supposed to be released so they can be TESTED, REPEATED, and VERIFIED by OTHER SCIENTISTS in the SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY... so WHY do they still REFUSE to release their model to this very day??? Why won't they share their computer models with the public???


10. Why were countless FDNY and NYPD first responders' testimonies about the presence of molten steel at ground zero left out of the 9/11 Commission Report?


11. Are 1,060+ licensed & registered architects & engineers, many who are registered with the highly credible American Institute of Architects (AIA), risking their careers, their licenses, their credibility, and their income, just to lie to us? Probably not.... but if you think the organization is just a bunch of liars, then what do you think their purpose for lying is...?

If you think they are lying, then why would all of them be conspiring against the American people by lying to us? Do you think that maybe they all got sick of their architect / engineering income and wanted to start a non-profit organization? Or maybe you would conclude that these architects and engineers may be paid by the terrorists to do this, to confuse us and cause chaos here in America?

Seriously, if you think all 1,060+ of these registered architects and engineers are lying, then what would be their goal with this non-profit organization?

Can someone PLEASE prove to me that all 1,060+ of these licensed & registered architects and engineers that make up this organization are lying. Please??



Thanks,


-Abe


P.S. - I do indeed believe that terrorists attacked us on 9/11, but I also believe that the Bush Administration knew it was coming and let it happen, and possibly even helped it to happen. I try not to "theorize" about these things, because alls that matters is that there is overwhelming evidence which contradicts the official story, but I wanted to tell you that so you don't think I'm one of those crazy people that think that no planes hit the towers. I believe terrorists did indeed crash planes into our towers, but I do not claim to know who planted the explosives to make sure the buildings came down. Also...

I voted for Obama, and I support Obama. I think Obama could very well be another JFK, a young and brave president that is surrounded by CIA, Military, and Government corruption. I believe he very well could be doing his best to be strong and resist the corruption around him, and clean up the messes that previous administrations have left him. He could be another JFK, but he also could be a puppet, but I do not claim to know. In the mean time, I support him, and I hope he does what is right for our country. I voted for him, I support him, I support our troops, I love this country, and I want the best for all living things on earth. Everyone deserves happiness, everyone deserves financial security, and I support Obama because he seems to be pursuing that. I am skeptical, but hopeful, so hopefully in time the truth will come out during Obama's term(s) in office. Who knows though, I sure don't...

Here are a few supplementary videos regarding NIST's recent admitting that WTC7 did indeed reach the free fall acceleration of gravity during its collapse:


NIST Admits Free Fall (Part 1): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA
NIST Admits Free Fall (Part 2): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXTlaqXsm4k
NIST Admits Free Fall (Part 3): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3mudruFzNw
WTC7 In Free Fall; No Longer Controversial: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVCDpL4Ax7I

[albertchampion]

yes, terrorists attacked the usa. and they are the same terrorists that have attacked a number of sovereign nations.

and most of those terrorists have offices in the national security council and the white house and the exec office building and the pentagon.

[SanderO]

There have been so many lies about 9/11 that even the fact that these planes were hijacked and flown by these novice pilots is not credible. It makes more sense that they were set up as patsies, helped along into thinking that one day they might participate in some hijacking, so that they could be blamed for actually doing what they didn't do. If they were on board to hijacked planes they probably had nothing to do with flying them!

And there is reason to believe that the planes which it, or in the case of the pentagon which did not hit were not the flights that we were told they were. No black boxes, no ID of plane parts... yet all the DNA was located and IDed. Gimme a break! It's more than likely that 9/11 was so staged and managed that it more illusion than fact, that the killers who destroyed the towers killed the people and used remote guidance for the two strikes into the twin towers.

The problem is connecting the dots to the perpetrators because aside from NIST's cover up it's almost impossible to connect anyone to planning and execution of the attacks. They were certainly way way way more than AQ could even dream about. Whomever believes AQ of KSM pulled that off is terribly gullible.

[bobcat46]

There have been so many lies about 9/11 that even the fact that these planes were hijacked and flown by these novice pilots is not credible. It makes more sense that they were set up as patsies, helped along into thinking that one day they might participate in some hijacking, so that they could be blamed for actually doing what they didn't do. If they were on board to hijacked planes they probably had nothing to do with flying them!

And there is reason to believe that the planes which it, or in the case of the pentagon which did not hit were not the flights that we were told they were. No black boxes, no ID of plane parts... yet all the DNA was located and IDed. Gimme a break! It's more than likely that 9/11 was so staged and managed that it more illusion than fact, that the killers who destroyed the towers killed the people and used remote guidance for the two strikes into the twin towers.

The problem is connecting the dots to the perpetrators because aside from NIST's cover up it's almost impossible to connect anyone to planning and execution of the attacks. They were certainly way way way more than AQ could even dream about. Whomever believes AQ of KSM pulled that off is terribly gullible.

Excellent post, SanderO. You took the words right out of my mouth that I have said over and over and over for years. I like that statement "No black boxes, no ID of plane parts... yet all the DNA was located and IDed." And all of this was planned and executed from a cave in Afghanistan???

For those who believe the Official Story, I have a bridge across the Grand Canyon that I would like to sell you........cheap!!!

[DoYouEverWonder]

There have been so many lies about 9/11 that even the fact that these planes were hijacked and flown by these novice pilots is not credible. It makes more sense that they were set up as patsies, helped along into thinking that one day they might participate in some hijacking, so that they could be blamed for actually doing what they didn't do. If they were on board to hijacked planes they probably had nothing to do with flying them!

And there is reason to believe that the planes which it, or in the case of the pentagon which did not hit were not the flights that we were told they were. No black boxes, no ID of plane parts... yet all the DNA was located and IDed. Gimme a break! It's more than likely that 9/11 was so staged and managed that it more illusion than fact, that the killers who destroyed the towers killed the people and used remote guidance for the two strikes into the twin towers.

The problem is connecting the dots to the perpetrators because aside from NIST's cover up it's almost impossible to connect anyone to planning and execution of the attacks. They were certainly way way way more than AQ could even dream about. Whomever believes AQ of KSM pulled that off is terribly gullible.

Out of the 19 'hijackers', maybe half of them were really on the 'flights', but they were probably drug runners who thought they were doing another deal. South Florida, learning to fly small planes, the Sun Cruz connection all reeks of drug trafficking.

[Obwon]

Dear Friends,


Here are a few of my concerns regarding 9/11:


<snips>

P.S. - I do indeed believe that terrorists attacked us on 9/11, but I also believe that the Bush Administration knew it was coming and let it happen, and possibly even helped it to happen. I try not to "theorize" about these things, because alls that matters is that there is overwhelming evidence which contradicts the official story, but I wanted to tell you that so you don't think I'm one of those crazy people that think that no planes hit the towers. I believe terrorists did indeed crash planes into our towers, but I do not claim to know who planted the explosives to make sure the buildings came down. Also...

<snips>

P.S. - I do indeed believe that terrorists attacked us on 9/11, but I also believe that the Bush Administration knew it was coming and let it happen, and possibly even helped it to happen. I try not to "theorize" about these things, because alls that matters is that there is overwhelming evidence which contradicts the official story, but I wanted to tell you that so you don't think I'm one of those crazy people that think that no planes hit the towers. I believe terrorists did indeed crash planes into our towers, but I do not claim to know who planted the explosives to make sure the buildings came down. Also...
---------------------------------------

Let's see:

The NIST lies to us for 7 years, then finally admits the truth! I say: "lies", because, it just isn't possible that the "creme de la creme" of scientific investigators, could make errors so large as this, that it was so easily detectable by any other scientist who viewed and examined it. Thus, this blatant and obvious concealment of the truth at the most critical moment in any investigation has to be intentional. One cannot say that they did not know how to investigate properly 7 years ago! They are "credentialed" investigators!

If one believes that the "terrorist attacked us", one has to also believe that the "terrorist" planted the explosives, since the deaths caused by the collapse were supposedly the intent of their mission, unaided by anything other than sheer luck, that they were able to obtain such dramatic and devastating effects.

If anyone "on our side" knew of these impending attacks, long enough in advance, to prepare WTC7, and did so, then they also prepared WTC 1 & 2, because the same basic conditions for those collapses apply. Then they would be guilty of treason, and required to thwart a criminal investigation, if only to cover up their own part of it.

The "OCT" investigators and the 911 commission all agree, that flight 175 hit the face of the south tower, with the nose of the aircraft horizontally displaced from the perpendicular at 3 degrees. The videos I've seen of this, all show that the aircraft maintained this angle, all the way into the building. From nose to wing tips to tail, there was never any change in this angle. This means, that as the fuselage enters the building, it must constantly widen the hole, made by the nose, to fit itself in. In addition to this horizontal displacement, there was also a vertical displacement of the nose of the craft from the perpendicular to the wall face, relative to the tail. This means that as the fuselage enters the building, without changing the angle of the craft as it goes in, it must also widen the hole in a vertical direction as well as the horizontal direction mentioned above.

Oh, and I almost forgot to mention: With the aircraft fuselage off the perpendicular to the wall face, one of the wings touch the wall, before the other, thus adding yet another point of resistance and a powerful source of rotation to boot. Yet the expected rotation never happens! Nor does the fragile wingtip break or even bend.


Now, I'm no scientist or engineer, but I do believe that when the plane hit the wall face, with it's tail up and to one side of the nose, the angle of the plane should have shifted. Not to mention how much deceleration should have been visible, because of this increased resistance, as the fuselage had to constantly widen the hole, both vertically and horizontally, as the plane went into the building.

Of course, everyone is free to believe what they like!

As for me, I'm still searching for the analysis of how the WTC 2 impact, should have proceeded, as done by someone with expertise in doing such work.

Cheers
Obwon

This post has been edited by Obwon: Mar 19 2011, 09:02 PM