Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
redhen

911 inside job - for what?

4,447 posts in this topic

Heres some facts and evidence....

Investigators found no evidence of molten steel at ground zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I must be watching the wrong video, because in the video I've seen, Mark comes across as idiotic and out of his place, he soon gave up his debunking after that video. lol

You missed the point. The Association of Architects has discredited Richard Gage and he has been lying on thermite. In addition:

No Molten Steel at Ground Zero

9/11 shill Steven E. Jones fooled the truth movement into believing the false and inadequate thermite and molten metal theories. Jones’ molten metal evidence has been shown to be fabricated.

http://beforeitsnews...al-2439630.html

http://www.debunking...moltensteel.htm

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You missed the point. The Association of Architects has discredited Richard Gage and he has been lying on thermite.

Nothing about Richard Gage here...lol

What Do the Experts Say?

What does the evidence show about the Solomon Brothers Building in Manhattan? Numerous structural engineers – the people who know the most about office building vulnerabilities and accidents – say that the official explanation of why building 7 at the World Trade Center collapsed on 9/11 is “impossible”, “defies common logic” and “violates the law of physics”:

Two professors of structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo Bachmann) said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition (translation here)

John D. Pryor, with more than 30 years experience: The collapse of WTC7 looks like it may have been the result of a controlled demolition. This should have been looked into as part of the original investigation

Robert F. Marceau, with over 30 years of structural engineering experience: From videos of the collapse of building 7, the penthouse drops first prior to the collapse, and it can be noted that windows, in a vertical line, near the location of first interior column line are blown out, and reveal smoke from those explosions. This occurs in a vertical line in symmetrical fashion an equal distance in toward the center of the building from each end. When compared to controlled demolitions, one can see the similarities

Kamal S. Obeid, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Berkeley and 30 years of engineering experience, says: Photos of the steel, evidence about how the buildings collapsed, the unexplainable collapse of WTC 7, evidence of thermite in the debris as well as several other red flags, are quite troubling indications of well planned and controlled demolition

Steven L. Faseler, structural engineer with over 20 years of experience in the design and construction industry: World Trade Center 7 appears to be a controlled demolition. Buildings do not suddenly fall straight down by accident

Alfred Lee Lopez, with 48 years of experience in all types of buildings: I agree the fire did not cause the collapse of the three buildings [please ignore any reference in this essay to the Twin Towers. This essay focuses solely on Building 7]. The most realistic cause of the collapse is that the buildings were imploded.

Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis, writes: Why would all 47 stories of WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven seconds the same day [i.e. on September 11th]? It was not struck by any aircraft or engulfed in any fire. An independent investigation is justified for all three collapses including the surviving steel samples and the composition of the dust.

Graham John Inman points out: WTC 7 Building could not have collapsed as a result of internal fire and external debris. NO plane hit this building. This is the only case of a steel frame building collapsing through fire in the world. The fire on this building was small & localized therefore what is the cause?

Paul W. Mason notes: In my view, the chances of the three buildings collapsing symmetrically into their own footprint, at freefall speed, by any other means than by controlled demolition, are so remote that there is no other plausible explanation

David Scott says: Near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode . . . .

Nathan Lomba states: How did the structures collapse in near symmetrical fashion when the apparent precipitating causes were asymmetrical loading? The collapses defies common logic from an elementary structural engineering perspective.

***

Heat transmission (diffusion) through the steel members would have been irregular owing to differing sizes of the individual members; and, the temperature in the members would have dropped off precipitously the further away the steel was from the flames—just as the handle on a frying pan doesn’t get hot at the same rate as the pan on the burner of the stove. These factors would have resulted in the structural framing furthest from the flames remaining intact and possessing its full structural integrity, i.e., strength and stiffness.

Structural steel is highly ductile, when subjected to compression and bending it buckles and bends long before reaching its tensile or shear capacity. Under the given assumptions, “if” the structure in the vicinity … started to weaken, the superstructure above would begin to lean in the direction of the burning side. The opposite, intact, side of the building would resist toppling until the ultimate capacity of the structure was reached, at which point, a weak-link failure would undoubtedly occur. Nevertheless, the ultimate failure mode would have been a toppling of the upper floors to one side—much like the topping of a tall redwood tree—not a concentric, vertical collapse.

For this reason alone, I rejected the official explanation for the collapse ….

Edward E. Knesl writes: We design and analyze buildings for the overturning stability to resist the lateral loads with the combination of the gravity loads. Any tall structure failure mode would be a fall over to its side. It is impossible that heavy steel columns could collapse at the fraction of the second within each story and subsequently at each floor below.We do not know the phenomenon of the high rise building to disintegrate internally faster than the free fall of the debris coming down from the top.

The engineering science and the law of physics simply doesn’t know such possibility. Only very sophisticated controlled demolition can achieve such result, eliminating the natural dampening effect of the structural framing huge mass that should normally stop the partial collapse. The pancake theory is a fallacy, telling us that more and more energy would be generated to accelerate the collapse. Where would such energy would be coming from?

Antonio Artha with 15+ years of experience in building design: Fire and impact were insignificant in all three buildings [Again, please ignore any reference to the Twin Towers ... this essay focuses solely on WTC7]. Impossible for the three to collapse at free-fall speed. Laws of physics were not suspended on 9/11, unless proven otherwise.

Steven Francis Dusterwald: The symmetrical “collapse” due to asymmetrical damage is at odds with the principles of structural mechanics.

John S. Lovrovich: It is virtually impossible for WTC building 7 to collapse as it did with the influence of sporadic fires. This collapse HAD to be planned.

James Milton Bruner, Major, U.S. Air Force, instructor and assistant professor in the Deptartment of Engineering Mechanics & Materials, USAF Academy, and a technical writer and editor, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Christopher Michael Bradbury: It is very suspicious that fire brought down Building 7 yet the Madrid hotel fire was still standing after 24 hours of fire. This is very suspicious to me because I design buildings for a living.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eyewitness accounts of people at GZ who reported explosions before the tower collapses

Let's take another look.

Testimony of those who heard such sounds but later attributed those sounds other than to explosives. Since it seems that you have forgotten, do a review here.

Explosions

"When we got to about 50 ft from the South Tower, we heard the most eerie sound that you would ever hear. A high-pitched noise and a popping noise made everyone stop. We all looked up. At the point, it all let go.The way I see it, it had to be the rivets. The building let go, there was an explosion and the whole top leaned toward us and started coming down."

He also says he thinks the rivets caused the building to fall and not bombs. Interestingly, the NIST said most of the failures were at the bolts and connections.

http://www.debunking.../explosions.htm

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Louie Cacchioli, 51, is a firefighter assigned to Engine 47 in Harlem

Originally, on September 12, 2001, People Magazine ran a few short paragraphs about the 20-year veteran New York fireman hearing what sounded like bombs exploding in the north tower.

Short and sweet, that was it. A few short words about bombs exploding, but words that were repeated over and over again in story after story by writers and broadcasters who never even bothered to talk to him in the first place.

Furthermore, Cacchioli was upset that People Magazine misquoted him, saying "there were bombs" in the building when all he said was he heard "what sounded like bombs" without having definitive proof bombs were actually detonated.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jay Swithers

An ambulance pulled up which was very clean, S0 I assumed that the vehicle had not been in the what I thought was an explosion at the time, but was the first collapse.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dominick Derubbio

t was weird how it started to come down. It looked like it was a timed explosion, but I guess it was just the floors starting to pancake one on top of the other.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FDNY Batallion Chief Brian Dixon

I looked up and you could actually see everything blew out on the one floor. I thought, geez, this looks like an explosion up there, it blew out. Then I guess in some sense of time we looked at it and realized, no, actually it just collapsed. That ís what blew out the windows, not that there was an explosion there but that windows blew out.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Craig Carlsen said that he and other firefighters “heard explosions coming from . . . the south tower

...there were about ten explosions. At the time I didn't realize what it was. We realized later after talking and finding out that it was the floors collapsing to where the plane had hit.

http://www.911myths....uote_abuse.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------

So once again, just because someone heard the sound of explosions, is not evidence that bombs were involved.

And just because someone heard...

  • Rivets popping.
  • Floors Collapsing.
  • An explosion that blew out the floors which wasn't an explosions.

Nothing there indicating the use of explosives. There is no video of bomb explosions and no audio of bomb explosions and no evidence of bombs within the rubble of the WTC buildings and no seismic data of bomb explosions.

Verdict!! No bombs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Nothing about Richard Gage here...lol

Let's take another look because no evidence of explosives nor thermite were ever found..

ARCHITECT Magazine

The Magzine of the American Institute of Architects

All of Gage’s so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers, by the 9/11 Commission Report, and, perhaps most memorably, by the 110-year-old engineering journal Popular Mechanics.

Aside from Gage, though, there was not a single other architect in the room, much less an official from AIA, or even another member. The 80-strong crowd was made up largely of members of the local 9/11 Truth movement and other political activists.

In other words, Richard Gage has no real credibility within the Association of Architects, which represents thousands of members.

In addition:

'A Critical Analysis of the Collapse of WTC Towers, 1, 2 & 7 From an Explosives and Demolition Industry Viewpoint'

http://www.implosion... of 9-8-06 .pdf

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy theories and Controlled Demolition Myths

Photographic evidence proves beyond a doubt that floors sagged, pulling perimeter columns in. An event some conspiracy sites suggest never happened.

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

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's take another look.

Yes, lets look at what the firefighters had to say, who were at GZ....
Rich Banaciski -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 22]

... and then I just remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.

Brian Becker -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 28]

The collapse hadn't begun, but it was not a fire any more up there. It was like -- it was like that -- like smoke explosion on a tremendous scale going on up there.

Greg Brady -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.) [battalion 6]

We were standing underneath and Captain Stone was speaking again. We heard -- I heard 3 loud explosions. I look up and the north tower is coming down now, 1 World Trade Center.

Timothy Burke -- Firefigter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 202]

But it seemed like I was going oh, my god, there is a secondary device because the way the building popped. I thought it was an explosion.

Ed Cachia -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 53]

we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.

Frank Campagna -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 11]

You see three explosions and then the whole thing coming down.

Craig Carlsen -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 8]

... you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions.

Jason Charles -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.)

... and then I heard an explosion from up, from up above, and I froze and I was like, oh, s___, I'm dead because I thought the debris was going to hit me in the head and that was it.

...

I look over my shoulder and I says, oh, s___, and then I turned around and looked up and that's when I saw the tower coming down.

Frank Cruthers -- Chief (F.D.N.Y.) [Citywide Tour Commander]

.. there was what appeared to be at first an explosion. It appeared at the very top, simultaneously from all four sides, materials shot out horizontally. And then there seemed to be a momentary delay before you could see the beginning of the collapse.

Kevin Darnowski -- Paramedic (E.M.S.)

I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and tower two started to come down.

Dominick Derubbio -- Battalion Chief (F.D.N.Y.) [Division 8]

It was weird how it started to come down. It looked like it was a timed explosion ...

Karin Deshore -- Captain (E.M.S.)

Somewhere around the middle of the World Trade Center, there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode.

Brian Dixon -- Battalion Chief (F.D.N.Y.)

... the lowest floor of fire in the south tower actually looked like someone had planted explosives around it because the whole bottom I could see -- I could see two sides of it and the other side -- it just looked like that floor blew out. I looked up and you could actually see everything blew out on the one floor. I thought, geez, this looks like an explosion up there, it blew out.

Michael Donovan -- Captain (F.D.N.Y.)

I thought there had been an explosion or a bomb that they had blown up there.

James Drury -- Assistant Commissioner (F.D.N.Y.)

I should say that people in the street and myself included thought that the roar was so loud that the explosive - bombs were going off inside the building.

Thomas Fitzpatrick -- Deputy Commissioner for Administration (F.D.N.Y.)

Some people thought it was an explosion. I don't think I remember that. I remember seeing it, it looked like sparkling around one specific layer of the building.

...

My initial reaction was that this was exactly the way it looks when they show you those implosions on TV.

Gary Gates -- Lieutenant (F.D.N.Y.)

So the explosion, what I realized later, had to be the start of the collapse. It was the way the building appeared to blowout from both sides. I'm looking at the face of it, and all we see is the two sides of the building just blowing out and coming apart like this, as I said, like the top of a volcano.

Kevin Gorman -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 22]

... I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes.

Gregg Hansson -- Lieutenant (F.D.N.Y.)

Then a large explosion took place. In my estimation that was the tower coming down, but at that time I did not know what that was. I thought some type of bomb had gone off.

Timothy Julian -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 118]

You know, and I just heard like an explosion and then cracking type of noise, and then it sounded like a freight train, rumbling and picking up speed, and I remember I looked up, and I saw it coming down.

John Malley -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 22]

I felt the rumbling, and then I felt the force coming at me. I was like, what the hell is that? In my mind it was a bomb going off.

James McKinley -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.)

After that I heard this huge explosion, I thought it was a boiler exploding or something. Next thing you know this huge cloud of smoke is coming at us, so we're running.

Joseph Meola -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 91]

As we are looking up at the building, what I saw was, it looked like the building was blowing out on all four sides. We actually heard the pops. Didn't realize it was the falling -- you know, you heard the pops of the building. You thought it was just blowing out.

Kevin Murray -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 18]

When the tower started -- there was a big explosion that I heard and someone screamed that it was coming down and I looked away and I saw all the windows domino

Janice Olszewski -- Captain (E.M.S.)

I thought it was an explosion or a secondary device, a bomb, the jet -- plane exploding, whatever.

Daniel Rivera -- Paramedic (E.M.S.) [battalion 31]

At first I thought it was -- do you ever see professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear "Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop"? That's exactly what -- because I thought it was that.

Angel Rivera -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.)

That's when hell came down. It was like a huge, enormous explosion. I still can hear it. Everything shook.

Kennith Rogers -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.)

I figured it was a bomb, because it looked like a synchronized deliberate kind of thing. I was there in '93.

Patrick Scaringello -- Lieutenant (E.M.S.)

I started to treat patients on my own when I heard the explosion from up above.

Mark Steffens -- Division Chief (E.M.S.)

Then there was another it sounded like an explosion and heavy white powder ...

John Sudnik -- Battalion Chief (F.D.N.Y.)

Then we heard a loud explosion or what sounded like a loud explosion and looked up and I saw tower two start coming down. Crazy.

Jay Swithers -- Captain (E.M.S.)

I took a quick glance at the building and while I didn't see it falling, I saw a large section of it blasting out, which led me to believe it was just an explosion. I thought it was a secondary device, but I knew that we had to go.

David Timothy -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.)

The next thing I knew, you started hearing more explosions. I guess this is when the second tower started coming down.

Albert Turi -- Deputy Assistant Chief (F.D.N.Y.)

And as my eyes traveled up the building, and I was looking at the south tower, somewhere about halfway up, my initial reaction was there was a secondary explosion, and the entire floor area, a ring right around the building blew out.

Thomas Turilli -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.)

... it almost actually that day sounded like bombs going off, like boom, boom, boom, like seven or eight, and then just a huge wind gust just came.

Stephen Viola -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.)

... that's when the south tower collapsed, and it sounded like a bunch of explosions.

William Wall -- Lieutenant (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 47]

At that time, we heard an explosion. We looked up and the building was coming down right on top of us ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Yes, lets look at what the firefighters had to say, who were at GZ....

Nothing there that suggest bomb explosions. :no: So where is the evidence of bombs?

* No bomb explosions on video

* No bomb explosions on audio

* No bomb explosions on seismic monitons

* No evidence of explosives found nor recovered from ground zerio

Question is, with no evidence of explosives,where did you get the idea that bombs were responsible? It has been over 11 years and yet,not one shred of bomb-related evidence to be found.

I might add that demolition experts were also at ground zero but heard no bomb explosions.

2.7 Eyewitness Accounts of Flashes and Loud Explosions

The CD theorists draw a lot on eyewitness testimony from non-experts.

Jones
: ‘Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were heard and reported by numerous observers in and near the WTC Towers, consistent with explosive demolition. Firemen and others described flashes and explosions in upper floors near where the plane entered, and in lower floors of WTC 2 just prior to its collapse, far below the region where the plane had struck the tower (Dwyer, 2005). For instance, at the start of the collapse of the South Tower a Fox News anchor reported: “There is an explosion at the base of the building… white smoke from the bottom… something happened at the base of the building! Then another explosion.” (De Grand Pre, 2002, emphasis added.)’

When Jones says that ‘explosions’ were heard, he is, like with the word ‘squib,’ using language that implies a pre-judgement. A more neutral and scientific term would be ‘loud report’ possibly consistent with explosions. To say that these reports were ‘multiple loud explosions consistent with explosive demolition’ (my italics) is to further lead the reader. But has Jones taken the trouble to play the interviewees audio tapes of controlled demolition to see how closely the reports resemble the detonation of typical explosives used in demolition? Such explosives detonate with a signature ‘crack’ quite different to the loud reports that can be generated from a host of other phenomenon. Aviation fuel, spilling through the building and building up pockets of fuel-air mixtures in confined spaces, would detonate as a stray spark reached them from the fires above. It is known that floors collapsed prior to the main descent of the buildings: the sounds of steel buckling and breaking, and of concrete smashing onto lower floors, would all emit loud reports. Many other objects and devices commonly found in skyscrapers would explode when exposed to fires of up to an hour and a half: has Jones made any study of this in connection with conventional fires?

The issue of loud reports issuing from ground or lower floors is in fact inconsistent with the CD theory. This is because the building collapsed from the top, not the bottom, and hence the CD theory itself would rule out the placing of charges at the lower floors. The CD theory of the twin towers collapse has to be a theory of top-down demolition. This is recognised by 911 Review (which promotes the CD theory) in a webpage called “DISTRACTION: 'Explosions in the Towers' Basements Preceded Collapses'” The pages states:

125]The idea that powerful explosions in the Towers' basements initiated the collapses is not supported by credible evidence, but is contradicted by large bodies of evidence. We note:

025]· The conclusions that seismic spikes preceded the collapses is based on flawed analysis.

025]· The body photographic and video evidence contradicts the idea that large explosions in the Towers' bases precipitated the collapses.

025]· The testimonies of emergency responders do not include descriptions of large-scale explosions low in the towers preceding the descent of the dust clouds. (
)

Brent Blanchard devotes section 4 of his paper to refuting the claim that eye-witness heard the sound of explosives. He says: 'Simply put, there are countless causes of sharp, loud noices that have no relation to explosives. The only scientifically legitimate way to ascertain if explosives were used is to cross reference the fundamental characteristics of an explosive detonation with independed ground vibration data recorded near Ground Zero on 9/11.' I’ll return to the issue of seismic spikes, and why these eliminate the possibility of explosives, in section 3.3.

http://www.jnani.org...911/king911.htm

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3.3 Seismic Recordings

Many CD theorists draw attention to seismic recordings as evidence of the CD theory. Griffin (for example), drawing on Hufschmid, cites seismic data from Columbia University to support the CD theory:

‘In each case, “the shocks increased during the first 5 seconds then dropped abruptly to a lower level for about 3 seconds, and then slowly tapered off.” This pattern, Hufschmid suggests, reflects the fact that the first explosives detonated were those near the tops of the towers, where the steel columns were the thinnest. The shocks get stronger as the detonation pattern, controlled by a computer programme worked its way down.’ (Griffin TNPH, p.19)

This is easily shown to be fallacious. Firstly, as the one of Columbia authors confirmed in a later email, their seismic data “are far too weak in signal-to-noise ratio and far too speculative in terms of signal source to be used as a means of contradicting the impact times …” (Commission, p.462) But the key mistake however, is the idea that any building is demolished by a progressive wave of explosions either working its way up or down a building.

Popular Mechanics gives a good account of why the seismic spikes do not support the CD theory: www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=5&c=y.

Brent Blanchard devotes section 4 of his paper to the issue of seismic recordings on 9/11. Blanchard is Senior Editor of ImplosionWorld, a website which posts details of explosive demolitions, and also Director of Field Operations at Protec Documentation Services, Inc. Protec works in the field of vibration monitoring and structure inspection, a key service to both the construction and demolition industries. Vibration monitoring performed by independent experts has long been considered crucial for companies carrying out explosive demolition, because owners of nearby buildings are keen to sue if any cracks or other structural damage appears. The field seismographs used by Protec and others provide the key scientific evidence for disturbances that may have caused damage, and there were a number of such seismographs operated by Protec on 9/11 in the vicinity of Ground Zero, for monitoring construction sites. Blanchard tells us that data from these machines, and seismographs operated elsewhere, all confirm single vibration events recording the collapse. None of them record the tell-tale 'spikes' that would indicate explosive detonations prior to collapse. In his words:

This evidence makes a compelling argument against explosive demolition. The laws of physics dictate that any detonation powerful enough to defeat steel columns would have transferred excess energy through those same columns into the ground, and would certainly have been detected by at least one of the monitors that were sensitive enough to record the structural collapses. However, a detailed analysis of all available data reveals no presence of any unusual or abnormal vibration events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's take another look because no evidence of explosives nor thermite were ever found..

In other words, Richard Gage has no real credibility within the Association of Architects, which represents thousands of members.

In addition:

You seem obessed by Richard Gage as you keep bringing him up. Did he spurn your advances?? lol

Anyway, here is some experts who aren't Richard Gage.

The top European expert on controlled building demolition, Danny Jowenko (

,
,
) WTC 7 was a controlled demolition.

A demolition loader for the world’s top demolition company (which is based in the United States), Tom Sullivan

I have professional experience with implosions and CDI (a quoted expert) and have no doubt that this was a timed explosive implosion event and certainly not due to fire as reported.

Harry G. Robinson, III – Professor and Dean Emeritus, School of Architecture and Design, Howard University. Past President of two major national architectural organizations – National Architectural Accrediting Board, 1996, and National Council of Architectural Registration Boards, 1992. In 2003 he was awarded the highest honor bestowed by the Washington Chapter of the American Institute of Architects, the Centennial Medal. In 2004 he was awarded the District of Columbia Council of Engineering and Architecture Societies Architect of the Year award. Principal, TRG Consulting Global / Architecture, Urban Design, Planning, Project Strategies. Veteran U.S. Army, awarded the Bronze Star for bravery and the Purple Heart for injuries sustained in Viet Nam – says: The collapse was too symmetrical to have been eccentrically generated. The destruction was symmetrically initiated to cause the buildings to implode as they didA prominent physicist with 33 years of service for the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, DC

(Dr. David L. Griscom) said that the official theory for why Building 7 collapsed “does not match the available facts” and supports the theory that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition

(Torin Wolf) Building construction contractor, certified structural welder, certified asbestos and hazardous materials worker, demolitions expert with long experience - WTC7 was demolished.

Dennis A Thompson Commercial Blaster's License, Calif., General Lic: No. 2158 (Rtrd), Eureka, CA

Having participated in many blasting operations in the past, from less than 1 lb. to many thousands of lbs. I have cut steel and concrete with explosives and I know how well explosives work. I believe now as I did when I first saw the event live on TV the day it happened, that the WTC collapse was due to Controlled Detonation.

Tim Erney A & P. A.S. Aviation Maintenance Technology.

Bio: Licensed A & P mechanic. U.S. Army Reserve, Combat Engineer, Specialized in Demolitions, Honorable Discharge.

"In the Army Reserves I was trained in demolitions so I know what it takes to bring down a building in a controlled symmetrical fashion and what it looks like when it happens. As an aircraft mechanic, my knowledge of the properties of fuels, specifically Jet fuel (or highly refined kerosene), brings the conclusion that fires couldn't be hot enough to cause symmetrical structural collapse. Based on what I know, looking at it from various disciplines, it's obvious that all three WTC buildings collapsed due to pre-planned, well placed, precisely timed controlled demolitions."

John Suffoletta: Journeymen Operating Engineer

I have worked in the construction and demolition industry for 23 years. I run heavy equipment and help in the planning of demolition of building and factories around the country and in Buffalo, NY. I know what it takes to bring a building down, I am a 20 year member of local #17 of the Operating Engineers and often work for a national demolition company. I have worked at several nuclear facilities around the country including Connecticut Yankee, West Valley Demonstration Project and Rocky Flats."

I am 100% sure the official story is a planned made up fantasy! There is no way any of those buildings fell because of fires, it would take a lot bigger fires and a lot more time to drop one of those buildings -- like "days" not hours then when they did fall they would have dropped and contorted, not imploded. This was a planned demolition in all aspects, the planes were just a nice diversion from the "truth" and that is what these people fear the most!

All without a single mention of Gage..lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing there that suggest bomb explosions. :no: So where is the evidence of bombs?

* No bomb explosions on video

* No bomb explosions on audio

* No bomb explosions on seismic monitons

* No evidence of explosives found nor recovered from ground zerio

Question is, with no evidence of explosives,where did you get the idea that bombs were responsible? It has been over 11 years and yet,not one shred of bomb-related evidence to be found.

I might add that demolition experts were also at ground zero but heard no bomb explosions.

Wrong....
Rich Banaciski -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 22]

... and then I just remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.

Brian Becker -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 28]

The collapse hadn't begun, but it was not a fire any more up there. It was like -- it was like that -- like smoke explosion on a tremendous scale going on up there.

Greg Brady -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.) [battalion 6]

We were standing underneath and Captain Stone was speaking again. We heard -- I heard 3 loud explosions. I look up and the north tower is coming down now, 1 World Trade Center.

Timothy Burke -- Firefigter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 202]

But it seemed like I was going oh, my god, there is a secondary device because the way the building popped. I thought it was an explosion.

Ed Cachia -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 53]

we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.

Frank Campagna -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 11]

You see three explosions and then the whole thing coming down.

Craig Carlsen -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 8]

... you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions.

Jason Charles -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.)

... and then I heard an explosion from up, from up above, and I froze and I was like, oh, s___, I'm dead because I thought the debris was going to hit me in the head and that was it.

...

I look over my shoulder and I says, oh, s___, and then I turned around and looked up and that's when I saw the tower coming down.

Frank Cruthers -- Chief (F.D.N.Y.) [Citywide Tour Commander]

.. there was what appeared to be at first an explosion. It appeared at the very top, simultaneously from all four sides, materials shot out horizontally. And then there seemed to be a momentary delay before you could see the beginning of the collapse.

Kevin Darnowski -- Paramedic (E.M.S.)

I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and tower two started to come down.

Dominick Derubbio -- Battalion Chief (F.D.N.Y.) [Division 8]

It was weird how it started to come down. It looked like it was a timed explosion ...

Karin Deshore -- Captain (E.M.S.)

Somewhere around the middle of the World Trade Center, there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode.

Brian Dixon -- Battalion Chief (F.D.N.Y.)

... the lowest floor of fire in the south tower actually looked like someone had planted explosives around it because the whole bottom I could see -- I could see two sides of it and the other side -- it just looked like that floor blew out. I looked up and you could actually see everything blew out on the one floor. I thought, geez, this looks like an explosion up there, it blew out.

Michael Donovan -- Captain (F.D.N.Y.)

I thought there had been an explosion or a bomb that they had blown up there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem obessed by Richard Gage as you keep bringing him up. Did he spurn your advances?? lol

Anyway, here is some experts who aren't Richard Gage.

All without a single mention of Gage..lol

But, Richard Gage's papers have failed peer reviews. In other words, his claims were unfounded by peer review and he has been caught lying, which didn't help his case either. You posted the following:

he top European expert on controlled building demolition, Danny Jowenko (

,
,
) WTC 7 was a controlled demolition.

.

I guess you were unaware that investigators at ground zero have trashed his claim as well. Fire was found to have been responsible for the demise of WTC7, not explosives. Another things he failed to notice is that demolition explosions make a lot of noise, and yet there were no explosions as WTC7 collapse, which once again, proves Danny Jowenko wrong as well. As proof, let's do a review on WTC7.

As you can see, or should I say, don't see, are explosions as WTC7 collapsed, and the what you don't hear is the sound of explosions as WTC7 collapsed, which is by no means, indicative of an explosive demolition process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, Richard Gage's papers have failed peer reviews. In other words, his claims were unfounded by peer review and he has been caught lying, which didn't help his case either.

Yes, you appear to be obsessed with Gage....lol It looks like he broke your heart..lol
You posted the following:.

I guess you were unaware that investigators at ground zero have trashed his claim as well. Fire was found to have been responsible for the demise of WTC7, not explosives. Another things he failed to notice is that demolition explosions make a lot of noise, and yet there were no explosions as WTC7 collapse, which once again, proves Danny Jowenko wrong as well. As proof, let's do a review on WTC7.

[media=]

[/media]

As you can see, or should I say, don't see, are explosions as WTC7 collapsed, and the what you don't hear is the sound of explosions as WTC7 collapsed, which is by no means, indicative of an explosive demolition process.

Sorry that Danny actually has demolition experience unlike Blanchard, therefore he has hands on experience and said that WTC7 was demolished, but he's not the only demolition expert to say that is he?? lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong....

Nothing there to suggest the use of explosions. Firefighters later confirmed that the sounds they heard were attributed to things and events than explosives and to underline that fact, no evidence of explosives were found at ground zerio,and again, not seen on video, nor heard on audio nor detected on seismic monitors, and I have to say it again; no evidence of explosives means explosives were not used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Sorry that Danny actually has demolition experience unlike Blanchard, therefore he has hands on experience and said that WTC7 was demolished, but he's not the only demolition expert to say that is he?? lol

But, Brent Blanchard was in the area. Investigations later determined that fire, not explosives, was responsible. You didn't hear the sound of explosions as WTC7 collapsed, so just consider the remarks of Danny Jowenko debunked because he said that the collapse of WTC7 was indicative of a controlled demolition when in fact, no such evidence existed because WTC7 collapsed rather silently in the absence of explosions.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing there to suggest the use of explosions.

Wrong....
Daniel Rivera -- Paramedic (E.M.S.) [battalion 31]

At first I thought it was -- do you ever see professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear "Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop"? That's exactly what -- because I thought it was that.

Angel Rivera -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.)

That's when hell came down. It was like a huge, enormous explosion. I still can hear it. Everything shook.

Kennith Rogers -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.)

I figured it was a bomb, because it looked like a synchronized deliberate kind of thing. I was there in '93.

Firefighters later confirmed that the sounds they heard were attributed to things and events than explosives and to underline that fact, no evidence of explosives were found at ground zerio,and again, not seen on video, nor heard on audio nor detected on seismic monitors, and I have to say it again; no evidence of explosives means explosives were not used.
These firefighter didn't confirm anything later on...lol
Frank Campagna -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 11]

You see three explosions and then the whole thing coming down.

Kevin Darnowski -- Paramedic (E.M.S.)[

I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and tower two started to come down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, Brent Blanchard was in the area.

No he wasn't. lol
Investigations later determined that fire, not explosives, was responsible.
Investigation determined what initiated the collapse and that is flawed.
You didn't hear the sound of explosions as WTC7 collapsed, so just consider the remarks of Danny Jowenko debunked because he said that the collapse of WTC7 was indicative of a controlled demolition when in fact, no such evidence existed because WTC7 collapsed rather silently in the absence of explosions.
Sorry but you can't discount the opinion of an expert who actually demolished buildings while trusting the opinion of someone whose a demolition virgin, although he's watched other doing it lots of times. ;) lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The World Trade Center Collapse

WHY DID THEY COLLAPSE?

Each 110-story tower contained a central steel core surrounded by open office space, with 18-inch steel tubes running vertically along the outside of the building. These structural elements provided the support for the building, and most experts agree that the planes impacting the buildings alone would not have caused them to collapse. The intense heat from the burning jet fuel, however, gradually softened the steel core and redistributed the weight to the outer tubes, which were slowly deformed by the added weight and the heat of the fire. Eventually, the integrity of these tubes was compromised to the point where they buckled under the weight of the higher floors, causing a gravitational chain reaction that continued until all of the floors were at ground level.

http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/2007/04/brent-blanchard.html

No he wasn't.

He was one of the investigators and look what you posted! :w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong....

These firefighter didn't confirm anything later on...lol

No firefighter confirmed finding bomb evidence at ground zero! :no:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The World Trade Center Collapse

WHY DID THEY COLLAPSE?

Each 110-story tower contained a central steel core surrounded by open office space, with 18-inch steel tubes running vertically along the outside of the building. These structural elements provided the support for the building, and most experts agree that the planes impacting the buildings alone would not have caused them to collapse. The intense heat from the burning jet fuel, however, gradually softened the steel core and redistributed the weight to the outer tubes, which were slowly deformed by the added weight and the heat of the fire. Eventually, the integrity of these tubes was compromised to the point where they buckled under the weight of the higher floors, causing a gravitational chain reaction that continued until all of the floors were at ground level.

http://911-engineers...-blanchard.html

Sorry but I have an expert whose ACTUALLY demolished buildings.

John Suffoletta: Journeymen Operating Engineer

I have worked in the construction and demolition industry for 23 years. I run heavy equipment and help in the planning of demolition of building and factories around the country and in Buffalo, NY. I know what it takes to bring a building down, I am a 20 year member of local #17 of the Operating Engineers and often work for a national demolition company. I have worked at several nuclear facilities around the country including Connecticut Yankee, West Valley Demonstration Project and Rocky Flats."

I am 100% sure the official story is a planned made up fantasy! There is no way any of those buildings fell because of fires, it would take a lot bigger fires and a lot more time to drop one of those buildings -- like "days" not hours then when they did fall they would have dropped and contorted, not imploded. This was a planned demolition in all aspects, the planes were just a nice diversion from the "truth" and that is what these people fear the most!

Edited by Stundie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No firefighter confirmed finding bomb evidence at ground zero! :no:

Firefighters were not at GZ to find bomb evidence. :no:

Another pointless post..lol

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firefighters were not at GZ to find bomb evidence. :no:

Another pointless post..l

Where is the evidence of explosives at ground zero? Just a simple question to ask. If you can't produce such evidence, then it is all very simple; you have no case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the evidence of explosives at ground zero? Just a simple question to ask. If you can't produce such evidence, then it is all very simple; you have no case.

You keep asking for it and you have said that you it would take an eternity, so why are you continually asking? lol

If you were that confident there was no evidence, you wouldn't be posting here..lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep asking for it and you have said that you it would take an eternity, so why are you continually asking?

In other words, you cannot produce evidence of explosives at ground zero, which makes it all very simple; explosives were not responsible for the collapse of WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other words, you cannot produce evidence of explosives at ground zero, which makes it all very simple; explosives were not responsible for the collapse of WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7.

I can produce evidence, there is plenty of it, but how can I produce evidence to you, when you do not understand what constitute as evidence and suffer from denial, ignorance and pure delusions...lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I can produce evidence, there is plenty of it, but how can I produce evidence to you, when you do not understand what constitute as evidence and suffer from denial, ignorance and pure delusions...lol

Where is that evidence?

Considering that no bomb explosions were seen on video, nor heard on audio, nor detected on seismic monitors and no evidence of explosives was ever found at ground zero, then it is apparent that no such exvidence exist especially in light of the fact that investigations have concluded that fire, not explosives, was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.