DEMOLITION OF WTC TOWERS:Free fall & Pulverization Explained.

[Christophera]

Two profound things happened to towers in New York on 9-11, first, they fell almost at the rate of free fall, then, what hit the ground was completely pulverized except for heavy steel.

The wrong building fell first, the wrong way (so did the other) and there was an impossible seismic spike at plane impact coincident with explosions in the basement, from multiple witnesses.

It was a demolition, and ........ if you can't explain the free fall & pulverization, your explanation just isn't comprehensive.

Here's my explanation.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

[LARED]

1. Explaining free fall & pulverization is the same

thing as explaining old wives tales, both sound interesting on the surface, but at the end of the day it is pointless to explain myths.

[StrafingMoose]

10. Pulverization?

I've never heard any explanation about this issue yet. Was this cloud of dust (powder) just dust that you usually pick up with your vacuum cleaner (that was pushed out of the tower when the collapse happened) or really construction materials?

Would a natural collapse produce such powder, in that given quantity?

[LARED]

14. Re

The large dust cloud generated in the collapse was a combination of the following friable materials. Acres of wallboard and ceiling tiles, tons of insulation on the steel. Each stairway and elevator shaft had 2.5 inches of wallboard as fireproofing. I believe there was 80 tons of vermiculite packed around the outer columns between the facade and the column, glass, regular dust you find in a vacuum cleaner, concrete and other materials in lesser quantities.

All the materials I just listed are easily broken into very small particles (except the concrete)

Everything being pulverized is hokum used by the CT'er to have people believe all the concrete was pulverized into micro sized particles. It's nonsense.

[Christophera]

18. No One Said ALL The Concrete; What happened To Desks, Computers & Chairs

It would be a cognitive distortion to say that ALL the concrete was pulverized into micron sized particles, I've not actually heard anyone say that.

Only you, ......... trying to get the public to participate in "all or nothing thinking".

The firefighters were very clear, almost pleading with their testimony about the pulverization, trying to get the public to realize how unusual, how unlikely it was that NOTHING was found intact at all, unlike all the collapses they had seen a number of times.

Here is an excerpt from a researcher (dancing Dave) that has compiled some facts about the dust.

As to studies of the special chemical and physical properties of the
dust, one of the most interesting is here:
http://www.nyenvirolaw.org/WTC/130%20Liberty%20Street/Mike%20Davis%20LMDC%20130%20Liberty%20Documents/Signature%20of%20WTC%20dust/WTCDustSignature_ExpertReport.051304.1646.mp.pdf

Here's an interesting quote from it "WTC Dust Markers exhibit
characteristics of particles that have undergone high
stress and high temperture... Lead was present as ultra-fine spherical
particles. Some particles show evidence of
having been exposed to a conflageration, such as spherical metals and
silicates, and vesticular structures (round open
porous structures having a swiss cheese structure as a result of boiling
and evaporation)."

The article gives some other examples of these formations, some even
suggesting passing temperatures high enough
to vaporize metal(!)...which in turned condensed as a toxic coating on
some of the dust. Not all of the dust was
especially hot though, it's more this condensed metal coating on some of
it that gives the extremely high temperature
event away.

[hack89]

2. Still pushing the non-existent concrete core, I see n/t

[Christophera]

4. Proof Of Concrete Core: What Else can It Be???

Faith based physics might help you to prove this is not the rectangular, tubular steel reinforced cast concrete core.

The official story won't help a bit, it is blatantly wrong, there are no "multiple steel core columns" in the photo where they must be as the strongest elements in the building. What we see is the tubular concrete core standing at around 400 feet momentarily in the demolition sequence after the steel structure has fallen away.



What else can it be?

What evidence do we have of materials at ground zero?

A basement full of sand and gravel, at least 3 times more than should be there. Oh, ............... and there shouldn't be any gravel at all.

[Kevin Fenton]

5. West side

I think it's the west side of the South Tower (or part of it). When the east side broke away, the west side remained upright for a short time and then started to fall, going down, rather than east. I think the picture shows the west side (or part of it) while it is falling. The east side fell first and is thus out of the picture.

Surely, if the towers had concrete cores, then it is these cores that should have been destroyed by explosives.

[Christophera]

8. Not Structural Steel, "side" Implies Stee As Outside Was Steel..

The symetrical shape and proportions of the WTC 2 standing core defy identification as any structural steel element.



Here is a structural steel element of WTC 1.



It is an interior box column outside and near the core corner as can be seen by the floor beams connected to it.

[Kevin Fenton]

9. Why does side imply that?

(1) It's obviously not the whole WTC building.
(2) It's not just a structural steel member - it's too bulky.

However, why does side imply steel? I'm suggesting that the east side fell first (in a different direction to the west side), then the west side fell. So the object on your photo could be the west side. If it were more or less intact, it would not look like a group of steel members.

If you look at this picture:

You can see that the east side of the tower is clearly leaning to the east, from about the 80th floor. However, if you look at the west side (northwest corner) at around the 85-90th floor (the tower is obscured by dust/smoke from around the 90th floor), you can see from the outline that it is not tiling, but is still at right angles to the ground, the way it should be. This shows that the east and west sides separated at the outset of the collapse.

Again, if the tower was destroyed by explosives, shouldn't the concrete core (if any, I don't have any opinion on whether there was a concrete core or not) have been one of the bombers' targets?

[Christophera]

11. "side" Implies Steel As Outside Of Tower Was Steel.

"side" Implies Steel As Outside Of Tower Was Steel.

Posted by Kevin Fenton

However, why does side imply steel?

In addition the proportions and position of the WTC 2 core is fully represented by the photo.



You are talking about what fell first I am talking about the above image of the core, at a point when ALL the steel has fallen exposing it standing at an elevation of perhaps 400 feet.

Notice the symmetry of the core, the rounded, eroded top of the tubular, cast concrete core, as if hundreds of thousands of tons of steel had crashed over it. Notice the complete absence of ANY structural steel protruding in ANY way, let alone the multiple steel cores.

I have a full analysis of the tower toppling/directions etc. at,

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html#anchor1207667

I'm interested in what you are trying to say and understand it. Examine the series of images and descriptions that start with flight 93 at the above link. It is a very comprehensive look at what hit when and which way what fell in what order and from that develops a very solid line of logic that says there was NO remote control with the main demolition. This does not rule out a separate political faction having their own, smaller events to add to the whole.

Your analysis of sequence of wall failure and relative position at the moment of initiation could be very revealing as an extended, and similar break down to what is on my page linked above.

[Kevin Fenton]

12. Longways?

"Notice the symmetry of the core, the rounded, eroded top of the tubular, cast concrete core, as if hundreds of thousands of tons of steel had crashed over it."
I don't understand why the core top would be rounded - are you saying that the upper part of the core was destroyed and that it fell on this part?

"Notice the complete absence of ANY structural steel protruding in ANY way, let alone the multiple steel cores."
I agree - it's not a close-up, but I certainly can't see any structural steel protruding. My suggestion is that this is because this is basically the NW corner viewed from the NW, so there shouldn't be any steel visible.

This is not a very good picture (best I could find at short notice) taken from roughly the same angle:

I think it shows the relative positions of the towers and indicates that the part of the building collapsing in your photo is right of centre. Do you have any better photos?

I agree that the planes were not remote controlled, but I find it hard to beleive that the demolitions weren't either. Surely, this would be relatively simple to arrange. My explanation for the sequence is that it is in response to the bowing. Both towers collapsed roughly the same amount of time after they started bowing, which may have been interpreted as indicating they would collapse, how could I put this, longways (not straight down) causing more death and destruction than a vertical collapse.

[Christophera]

13. Super Strong Lower Core Survived Fall Of Steel & DEMO/Fall Of Core Above.

The lower portion of the core was thicker and survived, until it too was detonated.



The small photo you posted shows the demolition at an earlier phase by a few seconds.

[Christophera]

17. Another Reason For No Remote

Autonomy.

If there are people on the ground taking action at the time, they can be caught, they can be interrogated, investigated. Timers and vibrations sensors leave it to the people in the planes to fit in and they'll be dead, if they don't execute the plan right, vibration detectors use the impacts to detonate walls and other areas of the basements to reduce the final seismic signature when the core foundation is popped on a timer with a predetermined sequence. In this case made illogical by an Arab perhaps.

The power of media deception made the potential for damage from the above type errors something easy to recover from.

Fires can be counted on to provide some disguise/explanation along with later artifice/deception of strcutural and or investigation, oh, lets not forget misinformation and disinformation.

[LARED]

6. How do you explain the lack of concrete core columns in these photos

[Christophera]

7. Lack Of Public Experience Makes Explanations Tedious

but I'll give it a try.

The upper photo is looking past the interior box columns as they advance upwards.

The lower photo looks across the core area.

The core is formed inside the advancing steel and will not be seen without looking down the core shaft formed by the steel. Even then it's too dark to see well. The videographers mentioned this in the narration and when photos of the core, where it was well lit were shown, the narrator made special note of what the viewer was looking at.

My question was "What else could the silouetted core in the photo I posted be?"

[Christophera]

22. Typical Message: No Reference. I Post Proof No Steel Core Columns Existed

Typically those supporting secret murder of innocents, post grossly erroneous statements with regard to evidence (unmentioned, as if it never was) they've seen many times, and then post no reference whatsoever to thei rclaim, and often there is no text in the post!!

Here at least I offer a photo of WTC 2 standing slightly lower than 1/2 height. The narrowness of what stands shows us that the exterior steel frame work has completely fallen away, and only the core structure stands momentarily.



The poster I reply to has labelled my information that the towers had tubular, rectangular, steel reinforced cast concrete core structures, "non existant". This is to say they promote the officially identified structure of the tower which that multiple steel core columns in in a rectangular (80 x 120) pattern at the center of the 200 foor square buildings. Core columns are full length. If they existed they would be protruding out the top of the core area.

The supporters of secrecy say "blurry photo", or "too much dust". That is nonsense. Silouetting would show heavy vertical structures if they were there.
Here is another at about the same distance and the interior box columns that mated with the exterior of the cast concrete core are clearly seen standing. The supposed "steel core columns" would be even large and easier seen if they existed, they did not.

[pox americana]

3. Faith-based physics

tells me that it was a certified U.S. grade A progressive collapse.

[VTMechEngr]

15. I like the name. Good description of CT'er views /nt

[petgoat]

16. Faith-Based Physics

You're the one waves a fat report you won't cite, who claims that the
physical evidence that was destroyed supports your thesis, and claims
you have the arguments but you're just too lazy to recap them.

[Christophera]

21. Perceptions Are Controlled By Attitude

Yes ............ controlled.

pox americana wrote

Faith-based physics
tells me that it was a certified U.S. grade A progressive collapse.

pox americana brings welcomed comic relief to this paradox of attitudes controlling perceptions.

VTMechEngr wrote

I like the name. Good description of CT'er views /nt

We've seen VTMechEngr's calculations on ferrous/thermal stress and strain, but has he ever picked up a cutting torch and tried to heat a piece of steel enough to make a bend? I have and I've also tried to use petroleum fire with forced air for forging and that's a waste of time. Coal and coke work, with forced air in very proximal conditions.

Notice, there is no description forthcoming of HOW free fall is created or HOW pulverization IS effected. Those 2 things, very basically happened. What we see instead is labeling, a rudimentary cognitive distortion implying that faith in photo graphic evidence makes one a conspiracy theorist.

Notice my other current thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x49791

has no scientific data posted by VTMechEngr about high explosives and steel. Steel, heat and loss of strength are not rocket science. High explosives and their effects on materials are not rocket science. Common sense will do just fine.

[Catholic Sensation]

19. Are you a civil engineer

or a physicist, or even studying to be either?

[Christophera]

20. "Are You An American?"

that believes in a rightful and lawful government?

I've worked with high explosives doing above ground blasting, studied demolition and have welded for many years. As a surveyor I've encounterd layout for quite a bit of concrete, and steel structures.

Right now I am making a grading plan for a civil engineer, working as a civil engineer. I am not a civil engineer. How many physicists know about high explosives and their effects, their practical applications, the configuration of steel reinforced concrete, construction processes etc.? And if they did, would the be here helping Americans to understand what did happen on 9-11 at the WTC.

How about you tell me how to make a tower fall at free fall and be pulverized when it hits the ground like the topic of the thread suggests in order to remain on topic.

I do explain free fall and pulverization and I do it with fully practical, available methods that WERE employed during construction. You don't know that because you didn't see the video I did in 1990, but ,............. if you are an American who needs a rightful and lawful government, you WILL consider what is proposed here,

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

because it DOES explain free fall and pulverization.