9/11 "jumpers"

[superbeets]

NIST Q&A


How did the collapse of WTC 7 differ from the collapses of WTC 1 and WTC 2?

WTC 7 was unlike the WTC towers in many respects. WTC 7 was a more typical tall building in the design of its structural system. It was not struck by an aircraft. The collapse of WTC 7 was caused by a single initiating event-the failure of a northeast building column brought on by fire-induced damage to the adjacent flooring system and connections-which stands in contrast to the WTC 1 and WTC 2 failures, which were brought on by multiple factors, including structural damage caused by the aircraft impact, extensive dislodgement of the sprayed fire-resistive materials or fireproofing in the impacted region, and a weakening of the steel structures created by the fires.
The fires in WTC 7 were quite different from the fires in the WTC towers. Since WTC 7 was not doused with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, large areas of any floor were not ignited simultaneously as they were in the WTC towers. Instead, separate fires in WTC 7 broke out on different floors, most notably on Floors 7 to 9 and 11 to 13. The WTC 7 fires were similar to building contents fires that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present.

 

[superbeets]

NIST Q&A

What is progressive collapse?

Progressive collapse is defined as the spread of local damage from a single initiating event, from structural element to element, eventually resulting in the collapse of an entire structure or a disproportionately large part of it. The failure of WTC 7 was an example of a fire-induced progressive collapse.
Progressive collapse did NOT occur in the WTC towers, for two reasons. First, the collapse of each tower was not triggered by a local damage or a single initiating event. Second, the structures were able to redistribute loads from the impact and fire-damaged structural components and subsystems to undamaged components and to keep the building standing until a sudden, global collapse occurred. Had a hat truss that connected the core columns to the exterior frame not been installed to support a TV antenna atop each WTC tower after the structure had been fully designed, it is likely that the core of the WTC towers would have collapsed sooner, triggering a global collapse. Such a collapse would have some features similar to that of a progressive collapse.

 

[superbeets]

NIST Q & A

Why did WTC 7 collapse, while no other known building in history has collapsed due to fires alone?

The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires. The fires in WTC 7 were similar to those that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present. These other buildings, including Philadelphia's One Meridian Plaza, a 38-story skyscraper that burned for 18 hours in 1991, did not collapse due to differences in the design of the structural system.
Factors contributing to WTC 7's collapse included: the thermal expansion of building elements such as floor beams and girders, which occurred at temperatures hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire-resistance ratings; significant magnification of thermal expansion effects due to the long-span floors in the building; connections between structural elements that were designed to resist the vertical forces of gravity, not the thermally induced horizontal or lateral loads; and an overall structural system not designed to prevent fire-induced progressive collapse.

 

[superbeets]

NIST Q & A

What are the major differences between "typical" major high rise building fires that have occurred in the United States and the fire in the WTC 7 building on September 11, 2001?

There are more similarities than differences between the uncontrolled fires that burned in WTC 7 and those that occurred in the following buildings: First Interstate Bank Building (1988), One Meridian Plaza Building (1981), One New York Plaza (1970), and WTC 51 (2001).
The following factors describe the fire events that occurred in both WTC 7 and the referenced buildings: 1) the fuel for the fires was ordinary office combustibles at ordinary combustible load levels; 2) there was no use of accelerants; 3) the spread of fire from combustible to combustible was governed by ordinary fire physics; 4) fire-induced window breakage provided ventilation for continued fire spread and growth; 5) there were simultaneous fires on multiple floors; 6) the fires on each floor occupied a substantial portion of the floor; 7) the fires on each floor had passed the point of flashover and the structure was subjected to typical post-flashover temperatures; 8) the sprinklers were inoperative or ineffective; and 9) the fires burned for sufficient time to cause significant distortion and/or failure to the building structure.
There were some differences between the fires in WTC 7 and those in the referenced buildings, but these differences were secondary to the fire factors that led to the collapse of WTC 7: 1) Fires in high rise buildings typically have a single point of origin on a single floor, whereas the fires in WTC 7 likely had a single point of origin on multiple (10) floors; 2); fires in other high rise buildings were due to isolated events, whereas the fires in WTC 7 followed the collapse of WTC 1; 3) water was available to fight fires in the other high rise buildings, but the water supply to fight fires in WTC 7 was impaired; and 4) while the fires in the other buildings were actively fought by fire fighters to the extent possible, in WTC 7, no efforts were made to fight the fires.
The differences in the fires were not meaningful for the following reasons. By the time that WTC 7 collapsed, the fires in WTC 7 had advanced well beyond the likely points of origin on multiple floors (i.e., south and west faces) and originating points of fire origin had no bearing on the fire conditions when the building collapsed (i.e., in the northeast quadrant). Additionally, in each of the other referenced buildings, the fires burned out several floors, even with available water and fire fighting activities (except for WTC 5). Thus, whether the fire fighters fought the WTC 7 fires or not is not a meaningful point of dissimilarity from the other cited fires.

 

[superbeets]

The 13 experts of the NIST Investigation would if there had been a conspiracy produced a fraudulant report, and then the same situation a s in JFK CASE,


Apparently, then, such distinguished Americans as these experts got together in some smoky back room and all of them agreed, for some ungodly reason, to do the most dishonourable deed imaginable-give organized crime, the CIA, the military-industrial complex, or whoever was behind the 9/11, a free pass in the murder of citizens of United States.



And in the process, not only risk destroying everything they had worked for-their reputation and legacy to their families-but expose themselves to prosecution for the crime of accessory after the fact to murder. Ask yourself this: would any of these investigators, for instance, risk being remembered as an accessory after the fact to the murder of this nation's citizens, one who disgraced himself his country.




The mere asking of the question demonstrates the absurdity of the thought.


Indeed, why would any of the members of the NIST and their staff stake their good reputation on a report they prepared which they knew to be fraudulent?

 

[superbeets]

NIST Q & A

Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?

Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.
For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.










Is it possible that thermite or thermate contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?

NIST has looked at the application and use of thermite and has determined that its use to sever columns in WTC 7 on 9/11/01 was unlikely.
Thermite is a combination of aluminum powder and a metal oxide that releases a tremendous amount of heat when ignited. It is typically used to weld railroad rails together by melting a small quantity of steel and pouring the melted steel into a form between the two rails.
To apply thermite to a large steel column, approximately 0.13 lb of thermite would be needed to heat and melt each pound of steel. For a steel column that weighs approximately 1,000 lbs. per foot, at least 100 lbs. of thermite would need to be placed around the column, ignited, and remain in contact with the vertical steel surface as the thermite reaction took place. This is for one column . presumably, more than one column would have been prepared with thermite, if this approach were to be used.
It is unlikely that 100 lbs. of thermite, or more, could have been carried into WTC 7 and placed around columns without being detected, either prior to Sept. 11 or during that day.
Given the fires that were observed that day, and the demonstrated structural response to the fires, NIST does not believe that thermite was used to fail any columns in WTC 7.
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 buildings, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard used for interior partitions.










An emergency responder caught in the building between the 6th and 8th floors says he heard two loud booms. Isn't that evidence that there was an explosion?

The sound levels reported by all witnesses do not match the sound level of an explosion that would have been required to cause the collapse of the building. If the two loud booms were due to explosions that were responsible for the collapse of WTC 7, the emergency responder-located somewhere between the 6th and 8th floors in WTC 7-would not have been able to survive the near immediate collapse and provide this witness account.
In June 2009, NIST began releasing documents in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from the International Center for 9/11 Studies for "all of the photographs and videos collected, reviewed, cited or in any other way used by NIST during its investigation of the World Trade Center building collapses." One of the items released, a video obtained from NBC News , shows World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) in the moments before it collapsed, then cuts to the collapse already in progress, with the building's east penthouse "disappearing" from the scene (as it had already fallen in the intervening time). Other videos of the WTC 7 collapse show the penthouse falling first, followed by the rest of the building. Did NIST edit the NBC News video to remove the collapse of the penthouse?

The video footage released under the FOIA request was copied from the original video exactly as it was received fro

 

[superbeets]

Some people have said that a failure at one column should not have produced a symmetrical fall like this one. What's your answer to those assertions?

WTC 7's collapse, viewed from the exterior (most videos were taken from the north), did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit. This occurred because the interior failures that took place did not cause the exterior framing to fail until the final stages of the building collapse. The interior floor framing and columns collapsed downward and pulled away from the exterior frame. There were clues that internal damage was taking place, prior to the downward movement of the exterior frame, such as when the east penthouse fell downward into the building and windows broke out on the north face at the ends of the building core. The symmetric appearance of the downward fall of the WTC 7 was primarily due to the greater stiffness and strength of its exterior frame relative to the interior framing.
In a video, it appears that WTC 7 is descending in free fall, something that would not occur in the structural collapse that you describe. How can you ignore basic laws of physics?

In the draft WTC 7 report (released Aug. 21, 2008; available at http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTAR_1A_for_public_comment.pdf), NIST stated that the north face of the building descended 18 stories (the portion of the collapse visible in the video) in 5.4 seconds, based on video analysis of the building collapse. This time period is 40 percent longer than the 3.9 seconds this process would have taken if the north face of the building had descended solely under free fall conditions. During the public comment period on the draft report, NIST was asked to confirm this time difference and define the reasons for it in greater detail.
To further clarify the descent of the north face, NIST recorded the downward displacement of a point near the center of the roofline from first movement until the north face was no longer visible in the video. Numerical analyses were conducted to calculate the velocity and acceleration of the roofline point from the time-dependent displacement data. The instant at which vertical motion of the roofline first occurred was determined by tracking the numerical value of the brightness of a pixel (a single element in the video image) at the roofline. This pixel became brighter as the roofline began to descend because the color of the pixel started to change from that of the building façade to the lighter color of the sky.
The approach taken by NIST is summarized in Section 3.6 of the final summary report, NCSTAR 1A (released Nov. 20, 2008; available at http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR 1A.pdf) and detailed in Section 12.5.3 of NIST NCSTAR 1-9 (available at http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR 1-9 Vol 2.pdf).
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 (free fall)
• Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity

This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time—compared to the 3.9 second free fall time—was due primarily to Stage 1, which corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acce

 

[TotalRecall]

Can you give an estimate as to how many people would have been involved in the conspiracy/hoax that you assume, and how many people would need therefore ,had to keep this secret from the public.

How many people kept a secret during the Manhatten Project?

 

[TotalRecall]

i'll buy this but then the theorists should really stop posting "missiles with holograms of plane wings hit the building" if you don't have proof. Simple as that. Does a lot of what we've been told not quite add up? yeah, absolutely but then you should all do yourselves a favor and keep pushing back on the evidence available versus concocting stories of missiles, holograms, and 10k+ actors.

You're not reaching people by creating an unbelievable fairy tale. You WILL reach people by disputing evidence...people don't believe the Warren Commission because they disputed the evidence the public was fed not because they were told holograms of Martians were involved.

my $.02

I agree. Both sides need to prove that the objects they purport were involved can be objectively proven.

So that's the tact I'm taking here. Prove that your version is true.

Show me the plane fax please. Otherwise you haven't proved your case that planes hit the WTC, or the Pentagon, or the ground in Shanksville.

 

[superbeets]

How many people kept a secret during the Manhatten Project?

3yrs or thereabouts

it was penetrated by Soviet spies, they wanted the atomic info, and had no wish to tip off Germany or Japan

thats another point, it is amazing, that no other country intelligence gathered any intelligence about a 9/11 conspiracy, Russia and China would have had a field day with any conspiracy that USA had killed its own citizens. All conversations are monitored, other countries listen, the UK is one of the best at tracking and listening and you dont think MI5,MI6 CHQ would have picked up something, then you say UK was in on it as well.

 

[ScottL]

A poster named Omni shredded all this conspiracy crap when it first pooped up in here.

 

[TotalRecall]

it is not possible to keep secrets

In his book, Loving God, former presidential assistant Charles Colson, in writing about Watergate, said, "With the most powerful office in the world at stake, a small band of hand-picked loyalists [of President Richard Nixon] ... could not hold a conspiracy together for more than two weeks.”

Wrong again.

300,000 -thats right SB three hundred thousand people kept there mouth shut for a secret.

It was called The Manhattan Project.

 

[TotalRecall]

TR

'....This was bigger than that. Bush Sr. signed off on a 10 year loan from Goldman Sachs with Cantor Fitzgerald to the tune of 224 billion dollars on 9-12-91.
The interest on that loan had it into the trillions when it would have come due the next day.'

can u elaborate on this, provide specifics


thnks in advance

Sorry that's allI have... I think Tom Flocco . com broke the story.

 

[superbeets]

Try taking 5 truthers on a road trip to meet experts ans see what happens, a brilliant BBC 3 DOCUMENTARY, truthers so upset by their portrail they posted fake road trips on you tube, Zit found 5 of them, and posted them in error

 

[superbeets]

Sorry that's allI have... I think Tom Flocco . com broke the story.

another reason there can be no conspiracy


Note that peripheral figures in any conspiracy would be more likely to come forward because their limited role would not result in serious punishment-in fact, most likely no punishment at all because of a plea bargain in which they'd have to name higher-ups. And their inducement would be considerable financial rewards (books, TV movies based on their disclosures, etc.). And mere informants, who wouldn't be exposed to any legally adverse consequences, would only have financial rewards for coming forward.

 

[texansfan]

I saw plane parts around the Pentagon. Oh wait, maybe the Pentagon had a storage closet for plane parts and afterwards they sprinkled them around the scene.

 

[TotalRecall]

another reason there can be no conspiracy


Note that peripheral figures in any conspiracy would be more likely to come forward because their limited role would not result in serious punishment-in fact, most likely no punishment at all because of a plea bargain in which they'd have to name higher-ups. And their inducement would be considerable financial rewards (books, TV movies based on their disclosures, etc.). And mere informants, who wouldn't be exposed to any legally adverse consequences, would only have financial rewards for coming forward.

You are delusional if you think anyone in the know is afraid of American Justice System, they have as Illuminati members virtual diplomatic immunity, even if judges were not bought off to rule this way or that, whichever best served the interests of their masters.

They fear their own organization more than anything. Money is a not an incentive.
They are paid out of a multi-trillion dollar slush fund.

They only incentive would be that someone finally told us what we already know.

I heard Alex Jones spouting off about the GOVT admitting that those old OBL interviews in which he said he did 9/11 were staged with an imposter playing his part. If he is correct are you suprised? I'm not.

The MEDIA is down to 4 people who control all forms of reported news whether by television, radio, or newspapers.

History is rewritten daily. Terms appear out of nowhere to explain impossible situations i.e., "thermal expansion" to explain BLD 7's collapse. Like slapping a piece of duct tape over a severed artery. They just make this shit up and expect you to believe it.


If someone seeks solace in the offices of the N.Y. Times they won't find it.


Also- coming forward these days would be suicide, since that's how you would probably end up. Ask the NY Madam how it worked out for her. I think she knew too much. None of the major Govt player's she had as clients or info connected with 9/11 ever came out did it?

So the idea that you could whistle blow this secret is ludicrous given that they control all forms of communications in this country, and every country. That's 4 or 5 people controlling the planet, not just the U.S.A.

 

[festeringZit]

You are delusional if you think anyone in the know is afraid of American Justice System, they have as Illuminati members virtual diplomatic immunity, even if judges were not bought off to rule this way or that, whichever best served the interests of their masters.

They fear their own organization more than anything. Money is a not an incentive.
They are paid out of a multi-trillion dollar slush fund.

They only incentive would be that someone finally told us what we already know.

I heard Alex Jones spouting off about the GOVT admitting that those old OBL interviews in which he said he did 9/11 were staged with an imposter playing his part. If he is correct are you suprised? I'm not.

The MEDIA is down to 4 people who control all forms of reported news whether by television, radio, or newspapers.

History is rewritten daily. Terms appear out of nowhere to explain impossible situations i.e., "thermal expansion" to explain BLD 7's collapse. Like slapping a piece of duct tape over a severed artery. They just make this shit up and expect you to believe it.


If someone seeks solace in the offices of the N.Y. Times they won't find it.


Also- coming forward these days would be suicide, since that's how you would probably end up. Ask the NY Madam how it worked out for her. I think she knew too much. None of the major Govt player's she had as clients or info connected with 9/11 ever came out did it?

So the idea that you could whistle blow this secret is ludicrous given that they control all forms of communications in this country, and every country. That's 4 or 5 people controlling the planet, not just the U.S.A.

Everyone on here reads this shit and just laughs at you. I'm not sure
why you bother.

 

[rolltide]

I agree. Both sides need to prove that the objects they purport were involved can be objectively proven.

So that's the tact I'm taking here. Prove that your version is true.

Show me the plane fax please. Otherwise you haven't proved your case that planes hit the WTC, or the Pentagon, or the ground in Shanksville.

cool, and i think that is the right tactic. the problem is when idiots like rosie o'donnell make statements like 9/11 was the first time in recorded history when steel melted. not sure if the dumbass thinks we dig steel beams up out of the ground or exactly how steel gets molded but she clearly never watched a steelers game on monday night in the past 40 years where they inevitably show melted steel

the problem is you have too many factions all with the same purpose. while you and i agree that the onus is on the govt and intelligence agencies to refute truther arguments, the truthers that have set about to create their own story (steel can't melt....hologram wings on missiles...10k actors who've never leaked the real story) only serve to compromise the activities of the rest. Inherently this is what happens to most conspiracy theories is that instead of pushing back on what the govt insists on the truth people try to concoct a new fable based on nothing but a grainy video or some hearsay and we end up with the original story sounding the most plausible even though we all know it's rubbish

 

[barman]

How many people kept a secret during the Manhatten Project?

A few hundred probably and the "secret" was at best concealed for a couple years in an era when information was passed by party-line telephones and local newspaper distribution only.

hth