IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

Controlled Demo Evidence

rob balsamo
post Aug 25 2006, 09:15 PM
Post #1



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,266
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



The following thread shows flashes from the facade prior to explosive force being ejected, "pancaking" skipping floors, possiblities for flash and explosion suppression.. etc. Please also review 911eyewitness.com to hear the deep "boom.. booms" recorded from across the river in NJ. Be sure to have a stereo set up to hear it as you will not hear it on laptop speakers. Best audio from 5.1 speakers. It will shake your house.

Top picture courtesy of http://www.explosive911analysis.com/

(IMG:http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f178/myphotos1960/WTC2squibline2.jpg)



I took the above right picture and blew it up. (no pun intended) (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

(IMG:http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f178/myphotos1960/WTC2smokinggunpaint.jpg)

And the video...

You can see the line of explosion wave starting downward. If anyone knows how to create a still of each frame, i'd love to analyze it. I bet we will see clearly the facade intact above each line of exploding floors.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...=WTC+2+collapse
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
Wibble
post May 3 2008, 03:19 PM
Post #2





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 69
Joined: 3-May 08
Member No.: 3,271



From:

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

CODE
4. Weren't the puffs of smoke that were seen, as the collapse of each WTC tower starts, evidence of controlled demolition explosions?

No. As stated in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, the falling mass of the building compressed the air ahead of it—much like the action of a piston—forcing smoke and debris out the windows as the stories below failed sequentially.

These puffs were observed at many locations as the towers collapsed. In all cases, they had the appearance of jets of gas being pushed from the building through windows or between columns on the mechanical floors. Such jets are expected since the air inside the building is compressed as the tower falls and must flow somewhere as the pressure builds. It is significant that similar “puffs” were observed numerous times on the fire floors in both towers prior to their collapses, perhaps due to falling walls or portions of a floor.  Puffs from WTC 1 were even observed when WTC 2 was struck by the aircraft. These observations confirm that even minor overpressures were transmitted through the towers and forced smoke and debris from the building.

5. Why were two distinct spikes—one for each tower—seen in seismic records before the towers collapsed? Isn't this indicative of an explosion


CODE
11. Why do some photographs show a yellow stream of molten metal pouring down the side of WTC2 that NIST claims was aluminum from the crashed plane although aluminum burns with a white glow?

NIST reported (NCSTAR 1-5A) that just before 9:52 a.m., a bright spot appeared at the top of a window on the 80th floor of WTC 2, four windows removed from the east edge on the north face, followed by the flow of a glowing liquid. This flow lasted approximately four seconds before subsiding. Many such liquid flows were observed from near this location in the seven minutes leading up to the collapse of this tower. There is no evidence of similar molten liquid pouring out from another location in WTC 2 or from anywhere within WTC 1.  

Photographs, and NIST simulations of the aircraft impact, show large piles of debris in the 80th and 81st floors of WTC 2 near the site where the glowing liquid eventually appeared. Much of this debris came from the aircraft itself and from the office furnishings that the aircraft pushed forward as it tunneled to this far end of the building. Large fires developed on these piles shortly after the aircraft impact and continued to burn in the area until the tower collapsed.  

NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius and 640 degrees Celsius (depending on the particular alloy), well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.  

Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface.


And in answer to this

CODE
Interestingly some of the steel members tested by FEMA exhibited corrosion consistent with thermite arson:


CODE
12. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? The combination of thermite and sulfur (called thermate) "slices through steel like a hot knife through butter."

NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.

The responses to questions number 2, 4, 5 and 11 demonstrate why NIST concluded that there were no explosives or controlled demolition involved in the collapses of the WTC towers.  

Furthermore, a very large quantity of thermite (a mixture of powdered or granular aluminum metal and powdered iron oxide that burns at extremely high temperatures when ignited) or another incendiary compound would have had to be placed on at least the number of columns damaged by the aircraft impact and weakened by the subsequent fires to bring down a tower. Thermite burns slowly relative to explosive materials and can require several minutes in contact with a massive steel section to heat it to a temperature that would result in substantial weakening. Separate from the WTC towers investigation, NIST researchers estimated that at least 0.13 pounds of thermite would be required to heat each pound of a steel section to approximately 700 degrees Celsius (the temperature at which steel weakens substantially). Therefore, while a thermite reaction can cut through large steel columns, many thousands of pounds of thermite would need to have been placed inconspicuously ahead of time, remotely ignited, and somehow held in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building. This makes it an unlikely substance for achieving a controlled demolition.

Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC towers, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- johndoeX   Controlled Demo Evidence   Aug 25 2006, 09:15 PM
- - johndoeX   In the above video i pause/play/pause/play, the se...   Aug 25 2006, 09:15 PM
- - johndoeX   Extremly noticable in this one... http://video.go...   Aug 25 2006, 09:16 PM
- - johndoeX   Its on all videos... In this video, you can see ...   Aug 25 2006, 09:16 PM
- - johndoeX   You guys need to check this out in google video pl...   Aug 25 2006, 09:18 PM
- - johndoeX   Watch the whole video while focusing your eyes on ...   Aug 25 2006, 09:19 PM
- - johndoeX   Explosion Suppression. Although many people did h...   Aug 25 2006, 09:20 PM
- - johndoeX   QUOTE (FromTheBalcony @ Jul 6 2006, 03:15 AM)...   Aug 25 2006, 09:21 PM
- - driver   Note the diagonal cut on the steel column. It wou...   Sep 1 2006, 09:04 AM
|- - BADBURD   QUOTE (driver @ Sep 1 2006, 07:04 AM) No...   Feb 11 2010, 04:31 PM
|- - BADBURD   QUOTE (BADBURD @ Feb 11 2010, 02:31 PM) I...   Feb 12 2010, 10:32 AM
- - Lights   I am no expert in controlled demolition but from w...   Oct 24 2006, 12:58 PM
- - broorno   Hey John Doe a couple of the links you posted are ...   Oct 25 2006, 09:45 PM
- - johndoeX   QUOTE (broorno @ Oct 25 2006, 09:45 PM)Hey Jo...   Oct 25 2006, 09:56 PM
- - broorno   I can't access the LC thread you linked for so...   Oct 25 2006, 10:50 PM
- - johndoeX   QUOTE (broorno @ Oct 25 2006, 10:50 PM)I can...   Oct 26 2006, 01:46 AM
- - Havey   Hi. I agree with you guys that the towers were dem...   Nov 3 2006, 01:32 PM
- - lederhosn   Hello Havey. Because the floors DID NOT pancake o...   Nov 3 2006, 06:51 PM
- - Havey   QUOTE (lederhosn @ Nov 3 2006, 05:51 PM)Hello...   Nov 4 2006, 04:57 AM
- - Havey   Hi again lederhosn, your links are both to same do...   Nov 4 2006, 05:04 AM
- - lederhosn   Havey, sorry, here`s the right link: http://vi...   Nov 4 2006, 05:36 AM
- - Havey   QUOTE (lederhosn @ Nov 4 2006, 04:36 AM)Havey...   Nov 4 2006, 07:05 AM
- - e-dog   Check this one out. you can see Molten metal poori...   Nov 4 2006, 12:57 PM
- - JerryB9105   And let's not forget this short clip of all th...   Nov 4 2006, 02:23 PM
- - Havey   I red this paper .. or just skimmed true it, it su...   Nov 4 2006, 03:50 PM
- - lederhosn   I`ve found not one, Havey. Seems because reali...   Nov 4 2006, 04:16 PM
- - Havey   QUOTE (lederhosn @ Nov 4 2006, 03:16 PM)I...   Nov 4 2006, 05:34 PM
- - waterdancer   He cites Blanchard, so this thread at the new LC f...   Nov 4 2006, 09:57 PM
- - lederhosn   As "Beached" writes on LC-Forum: Blancha...   Nov 5 2006, 05:14 AM
- - Havey   QUOTE (lederhosn @ Nov 5 2006, 04:14 AM)Yeste...   Nov 5 2006, 07:40 AM
- - waterdancer   http://www.terrorize.dk/911/wtc2dem12/911....south...   Nov 6 2006, 09:49 PM
- - Havey   QUOTE (waterdancer @ Nov 6 2006, 08:49 PM)htt...   Nov 7 2006, 05:33 AM
- - Beached   QUOTE (waterdancer @ Nov 5 2006, 01:57 AM)He ...   Nov 7 2006, 02:02 PM
- - Wibble   From: http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_...   May 3 2008, 03:19 PM
- - Oceans Flow   We already know about the NIST FAQs Wibble. LOL...   May 3 2008, 03:25 PM
|- - Wibble   QUOTE (Oceans Flow @ May 3 2008, 03:25 PM...   May 3 2008, 03:51 PM
|- - Sanders   QUOTE (Wibble @ May 7 2008, 02:51 PM) I m...   May 4 2008, 06:47 PM
|- - Paul   QUOTE (Wibble @ May 4 2008, 06:21 AM) I m...   Nov 8 2008, 01:30 PM
- - Oceans Flow   Did you wish to debunk Dr Jones' new paper, wh...   May 4 2008, 04:45 AM
- - KP50   Dear Wibble, You missed this gem from the very sa...   May 4 2008, 06:25 AM
- - rob balsamo   Most important part of the NIST FAQ's in my op...   May 4 2008, 12:48 PM
- - Leslie Landry   This is of the south tower right before it collaps...   Sep 10 2008, 07:21 PM
- - dMole   Related threads are at: http://pilotsfor911truth....   Sep 10 2008, 09:24 PM
- - Leslie Landry   http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/   Oct 21 2008, 10:03 PM
- - dMole   Wibble is a troll Paul. He/it probably won't ...   Nov 11 2008, 07:24 PM


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd May 2013 - 09:43 AM