FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Audio Interview: Richard Gage on 9/11 Demolitions
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 27, 28, 29  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Audios
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
bri



Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Posts: 3218
Location: Capacious Creek

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 3:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

it's all irrelevant, the pencil was a cartoon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bri



Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Posts: 3218
Location: Capacious Creek

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've been reading this over and there is some valuable information within.

Highlights:


Quote:
Do you think it possible (or likely) that these buildings were deliberately targeted BECAUSE it was more likely they would fall down if pierced? What other buildings have similar construction and thus might also be targets?

Young's response: It is possible the buildings were targeted because of their distinctive construction. The buildings were very well known in architectural and engineering circles and were heavily publicized during design and construction. Construction drawings are readily availble to the public.

Modern terrorists are reported to study target buildings very carefuly, and they are known to have highly educated and skilled members, some of whom were educated in the US.


Quote:
Some eyewitness accounts said that they saw or heard explosions on the upper stories just before the whole thing came down. If you knew more about these explosions (e.g. were they in the exterior wall or in the interior of the building?) would this tell you more about the failure mode?

I don't recall seeing explosions, but when the upper floors above the crashes suddenly dropped, that forced balls of flame from the buildings. While it is possible there were pre-positioned explosives in the building, I do not think that was the case due to it being very difficult to assure that a plane would hit the correct location in the building.

A controlled demolition by explosives would have produced the same effect as the actual collapse. The imploding of floors which pulls in the exterior walls as they wall is a technique used by demolition experts to demolish buildings in close proximity to others.


Quote:
The WTC towers had a distinctive structural system which utilized the exterior wall framing for lateral bracing -- a so-called lattice framework. This allowed minimization of internal lateral bracing and opened up the floor plans. You can see the effect of that when the buildings collapsed, with the lattice framework crumbling and the interior imploding. The lattice works so long as it remains intact as a system: if a part of it goes, then the whole system goes.

The planes punched holes in the lattice, one tower punched on two sides, maybe the other too. Portions of the lattice of the second tower briefly remained standing after the collapse, then fell.

The system was considered daring at the time of construction, for it distributed loads more efficiently than legacy column-and-beam-supported systems. Probably the legacy systems would not have totally collapsed due to damage at upper floors, although floors above the damage would have come down if columns were weakened.


Quote:
It would not take a lot of explosives to breakaway an entire floor constructed with steel joists like WTC; it is often done in planned demolitions with a small charge placed at each joist support -- customarily a shelf angle either continuous or segmented.

What would do it though without explosives is the twisting torque and vertical flexing in the tower tubes caused by an aircraft hitting off center of the tower's axis at 300(edit Bri: is this correct?) mph.

Survivors tell of the tower swaying several feet, but they are not likely to have perceived the torque as such. The hit on the South Tower (the second hit) was more off center than that on the North Tower.




And for you LC...

Quote:
The WTC designers claim the buildings were capable of withstanding a 707 hit, asserted at original construction and after the 1993 bombing. But the design criteria for that protection have not been published so it cannot be determined what crash scenario was used for design.



Comments on the Collapse
http://cryptome.org/wtc-collapse.htm


Last edited by bri on Fri Jan 30, 2009 3:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 3:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Keep in mind, as we debate this (thank you very much) new information, that the new theory is that all of these previous claims about the "strength of the twin towers" was in relation to vertical strength, not so much horizontal.

What I'm getting from the audio is this - if in fact the 90ksi steel was that thin in those areas, then you have a tremendously strong sheet of steel - in terms of tensile strength (opposition to stretch and compression), but highly susceptible to lateral forces, such as a plane slamming into them. Yes, a Boeing 707 in level flight would pierce the perimeter and not exert a terminal amount of lateral force on the remaining building. But a tilted (30% or so) aircraft would severely damage several adjacent floors.

Combine that with the endlessly argued debate about the floor joints being the only thing affixing the perimeter columns to the core, and you have a situation wherein any buckled floors would also exert dangerous amounts of lateral stress on those perimeter columns. Picture a large square cone constructed of peanut brittle, in very cold temperatures. You could probably stand on top of it. But tap a big enough hole in a side or two, and it'll start to fail. Then pull a square section of it inward, as a collapsing floor would do, and collapse could easily initiate. And concrete floors, once started downward, would provide the necessary inertial mass to buckle the next floor underneath, I would think. 'Pancaking' (God, I used to hate that word.)

Sorry to be remedial about the audio, but perhaps it's easy to be instantly appalled at the overall suggestions being made, and not really hear the information clearly.

And demolitions were not exactly excluded from the discussion either. Certainly people claim they heard pops, bangs, booms. Real detonations of ordnance? Sonic derivatives of a massive collapse? Deliberately placed "fireworks" to make sure explosions of some kind were heard, to foster belief in CD?

I don't know. But the one thing that has stymied the Truth Movement has been the inability to conclusively prove CD. And an actual CD of WTC7 is not proof of the same in WTC1 and 2. It's just not, yet that has always been implied from the onset.

The only thing I can't buy is that the perps would be able to count on these buildings coming down without help, so - no, there had to be some other factor than planes and fires. Just maybe not as much of which that we've been looking for evidence. But simply hoping for collapse initiation from 2 crashes would not be good planning, and one thing they seem to be experts at is careful planning.

Quote:
Modern terrorists are reported to study target buildings very carefuly, and they are known to have highly educated and skilled members, some of whom were educated in the US.

Yes..... the "Arab hijackers" were smart enough to understand the complex infrastructure and potential collapse dynamic of the twin towers, but too stupid to book slightly later flights in order to do inflict maximum casualties on their "sworn enemies."

Confused

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
aspectus



Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bri wrote:
aspectus wrote:
... was reminded of the videos of what is judged as superheated liquid metal pouring out of a part of the building (just shortly before the collapse, yes?), looking like someone is arc-welding. Another monkey in the wrench...




Quote:
"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."

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


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2I3vRbxMWo

In this video I see a few things...

- a vertical chain of 'thermite' like action, starting higher up than the exit point, finding its way out the nearest exit.

- the cameraperson turing the camera down quickly almost like reflex, as if he hears something like a large foundational detonation

- mere moments after the liquid metal started to flow, the building collapses

EDIT: yea, its been a long while for me on this issue, but in refreshing myself in going through old threads, there was the 'top 10 reasons why you think it was CD' or whatever, which I posted to, where my #1 reason at the time was simply 'just watch them fall'...

So go do that again people, watch as the central core is destroyed at its foundation, and falls first, the core falls and tears itself down into a pile on the ground, severing all those connections to the surrounding structures, leaving them to feather outwards in shreds and bits.

_________________
The larger a society or confederacy, the greater the amalgamation of collective factors - which is typical of every large organization - the more aggravated the moral and spiritual degeneration of the individual. - Carl Gustav Jung
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lord Carpainter



Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Posts: 268
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fintan, how were two 110 story buildings constructed with 425,000 cubic yards of concrete, 200,000 tons of steel, and 60,000 tons of cooling equipment converted into fine dust and small pieces in mid-air at rapid speed?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lord Carpainter



Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Posts: 268
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fintan, why all the NoPlane-hating in this audio? Seriously, you've never properly explained the contradictory flight paths and violations of crash physics. September Clues and 911 Octopus established TV Fakery/NPT a long time ago.

I didn't want to believe it, but I'm starting to realize that this forum is run by the Perps.

This is the truth:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8205707050292695515&ei=cELcSImhB5KYrQLU4pmhCw&q=911+octopus
http://www.plaguepuppy.net/
http://www.911closeup.com/index.shtml
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aspectus



Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lord Carpainter wrote:
Fintan, why all the NoPlane-hating in this audio? Seriously, you've never properly explained the contradictory flight paths and violations of crash physics. September Clues and 911 Octopus established TV Fakery/NPT a long time ago.

I didn't want to believe it, but I'm starting to realize that this forum is run by the Perps.

This is the truth:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8205707050292695515&ei=cELcSImhB5KYrQLU4pmhCw&q=911+octopus
http://www.plaguepuppy.net/
http://www.911closeup.com/index.shtml


I am all for free speech, however this IS a privately operated enterprise, and I think its not an unreasonable assupmtion that this person is disinfo at worst, or just incapable of rational thought at best, no sin there, but this sort of thing is obviously destructive to our goal of finding comprehension. We could just have a vote to ban or something?

Infact I would go further and suggest that at registration, user is warned to not slander, but rather to simply argue, and that slander will result in ban.

"I didn't want to believe it, but I'm starting to realize that this forum is run by the Perps.

I left this place years ago because of all the demonizing of people that was going on here, by users of the forum, and by finton himself.

_________________
The larger a society or confederacy, the greater the amalgamation of collective factors - which is typical of every large organization - the more aggravated the moral and spiritual degeneration of the individual. - Carl Gustav Jung


Last edited by aspectus on Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:17 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8440

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 4:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Lord Carpainter:
I'm just shocked and disappointed to see you
suddenly pushing the official line of the collapses.

What I'm saying is that Controlled Demolition of the towers IS the
official line pushed onto the agenda of the Truth Movement and
adopted by most activists without enough caution.

If the perps could take the Towers down without explosives, and then
have the 9/11 Truth Movement bust a gut trying to figure out how non-
existant explosives had brought down the buildings --they would be
breaking out the bubbly and peeing themselves laughing.

Quote:
John Skilling, in Engineering News Record, 4/2/1964
Quote:
I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of
jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen
door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing
that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.

He's right. The building probably could sustain multiple jet strikes.

But it would still collapse one to two hours later from the FIRES.

That's what Skilling and Leslie Robertson carefully avoid, becasue it
renders their arguments a sick joke. The Empire State ACTUALLY could
sustain a plane strike because it's built like a brick shithouse.

They wanted to build these high-tech structures and weaseled out of
facing the reality of a plane strike fire which --even if it didn't bring down
the building, would have likely trapped everybody above the plane
strike floor. Why? Because they couldn't even be bothered to install
concrete stairwells to ensure the safety of the occupants.


The people in the North Tower who were trapped above the impact
zone due to destroyed stairwells, DIED because of these assholes.

Their claims about a 707 strike are self-serving, self-justifying bullshit.

Quote:
Superheated liquid metal.......


These are the floors where the planes entered.
Is that really "Superheated liquid metal" ?
Or just melted aluminum and carpeting?

Quote:
SQUIBS



if we examine the anomaly closely, we see these [would be] explosives
work in reverse to an explosive blast. They tend to spurt out and then
increase with time. An explosive works in reverse to this. Its strongest
point is the moment the charge is set off. It doesn't increase its explosive
strength with time.....

During the pancake, the floors acted like a plunger in a Syringe. The
towers skin and windows became the tube of the Syringe. The increased
pressure blew the windows out as each massive acre of floor compressed
air between them......

http://www.debunking911.com/overp.htm


Lengthening and deformation of steel beams
from an outdoor gasoline fire alone:
Quote:




http://www.debunking911.com/truck.htm


Quote:
aspectus:
So the wtc towers were built to facilitate a quick take-down......

No. I'm simply saying they were built with reckless disregard for the
predictable consequences of a plane strike. They were uniquely
vulnerable to such a strike.

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.


Last edited by Fintan on Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:44 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
aspectus



Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="Fintan"]
Quote:

These are the floors where the planes entered.
Is that really "Superheated liquid metal" ?
Or just melted aluminum and carpeting?


Yes, I suggested it once, I see a vertical column (in my minds eye) of thermite like action (starting floors ABOVE the impact zone), doing its work, flowing downward, and finding a way out, an exit that the plane ripped open.

A significant part of why I see it that way is because the building collapses right after a massive flow of 'liquid metal' is seen.

_________________
The larger a society or confederacy, the greater the amalgamation of collective factors - which is typical of every large organization - the more aggravated the moral and spiritual degeneration of the individual. - Carl Gustav Jung
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Alfresco



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 183
Location: England

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great audio fintan.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Why would they even need to bring the towers down so soon after impact to
bother with CD? They'd still have got the "show" of two planes flying into NY
signature buildings.

Would anyone even think about repairing them? They surely would have had
to have been demolished anyway? Any simbolism or psyop in them coming
down would still be there, even if it were a week later. Collapsing from the
impact would just be a possible/likely bonus.

It does raise concerns about just how many peolple are in on it and the
depth of the control though.

_________________
If you win the rat race, your still a rat!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J Ruthless



Joined: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 201
Location: The Constitution State

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ahh Geeez!
Here we go!
Laughing
Starting the audio now.....

_________________
Greed is for amateurs. Anarchy, Chaos, now thats fun!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ManAtTheWindow



Joined: 29 Oct 2007
Posts: 253
Location: Inverness, Scotland

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lord Carpainter wrote:

1) What about the eye/ear witnesses to explosions immediately prior and during the collapse?

2) What about the blown out windows on buildings 400ft away, the people/cars knocked down by the force of explosions, and the steel beams that were blown hundreds of feet outwards?

3) How do you explain the "lower floor" explosions?

4) How do you explain the squibs?


It seems to me that all of these questions have essentially the same answer. The explosions do not need to have been caused by proprietary demolition ordnance.
If you throw a pile of logs onto a fire, you will occasionally hear an explosion. If you're unlucky, a piece of burning wood will shoot out of the fire and hit you. Does this mean that there were explosive charges in the wood or does it suggest that the wood itself can burst apart when high temperatures raise the pressure of its internal gasses? I'd say the latter.
Yes, there are explosions. No, they're not necessarily caused by explosive charges.

Everything inside the Twin Towers buildings was under increased pressure, partly through heat and partly through compression as the higher floors fell through the lower ones. Everything inside is under enormous pressure to find a way out and when that happens quickly, there is bound to be a series of explosions. It would be absolutely miraculous if the building collapsed in utter silence without any loud bangs.
Not everything that makes a bang is a bomb.

_________________
My real name is Gerry.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Audios All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 27, 28, 29  Next
Page 4 of 29

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.