LDS Freedom Forum

[I posted the links earlier.
The Carpenter's Assistant who was in the service elevator when a bomb went off, blowing away the doors, etc. She had been working in the tower for 15 years and survived the first attack in '93. She was the first to be evacuated to a hospital and the first to be interviewed by Jennings . The carpenter she was assisting was also in the hospital at the time and had been with her in the elevator. This explosion happened before the planes hit.
The videos of firemen and their accounts of hearing the explosions and seeing the results of those explosions, before the planes hit were also recorded before the videos were doctored and the gag orders were sent out. ]

Could transformers or other electrical equipment explain some of what the firemen saw and heard? What about an acre of concrete floor slamming into another? Would steel bolts snapping under tremendous tension make a pop or explosive sound? Assuming the towers weren't in the vacuum of space, we can be fairly safe to say these things are good candidates to explain what the firemen and others heard. Even they think so. Several firefighters mention “electrical explosions”. Here is another quote,” “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.
One firefighter on the street witnessed the bodies falling from the Tower. He described it as “explosions” as they hit.(Sorry but his account is even more graphic). All of the other large chunks of concrete and steel falling off the building would have been louder.
Before he became a media star and sued the government, William Rodriguez, a worker at the towers describes hearing rumbles, not explosions.”We heard a loud rumble, then all of a sudden we heard another rumble like someone moving a whole lot of furniture," Rodriguez said. "And then the elevator opened and a man came into our office and all of his skin was off."

Robert, I can show you news articles that have witnesses hearing “explosions”. Were they bombs? NO. They were; exploding transformers, cars/trees hitting buildings, collapsing buildings during earthquakes AND FIRES, etc. None of these event had to do with demolitions.

Questions, Robert;
How were there heard explosions coming from the basement 30 or more minuets before the building collapsed from TOP down?
What would an acre of concrete with 1000s of tons of rubble sound as it fell on each lower floor, like a pillow fight or “explosions?
Is it even conceivable in your world that transformers exploding, car sized debris fall all around the building, rivets breaking free as steel members twisted, floors collapsing on each other, etc would sound like explosions?

[Not one of the so-called "explanations" can explain away the thermite found in the remains of the buildings]

As for the “evidence” of thermite found at the site there are many problems.
!. Where did the samples come from and is there a possibility of contamination?
2. How pure are they?
3. Was there even enough to leave a trace? (20 lbs of sulfur out of 1million tons of dust)
4. Were there other sources of these chemicals in the buildings besides thermite? (All of these elements were found at the TT)
5. Research tells us more about the structural steel specifications at the time the WTC was constructed, and throughout their tables it’s very obvious that Chromium (CR, highlighted yellow) is rarely included, while Manganese (MN, highlighted blue) is much more common
http://www.911myths.com/html/low_chromi ... ngane.html

[And bodies of people don't evaporate into nothingness and small unrecognizable pieces in a building collapse or land on other buildings as small parts. Bodies pretty much stay intact in a fire as well. They do not in an explosion]

Richard, how much of a body do you expect to find after 1000s of tons of concrete and steel fall on top of and around?
I thought that the “thermite” were some how planted around the columns? How would these “thermite CUTTING charges” evaporate the bodies? Were all the victims hugging the columns when they went off?

[There is also the recent interview of a detective from New Jersey who saw and heard certain things going on at a command center including pre-printed badges, etc. before the "event". I think the interview aired last Saturday on the Alex Jones show. The guy was extremely nervous, knowing his job was on the line for speaking out. He knew he would have to go in for "psychiatric treatment" after word of his interview aired and he expected he too would disappear.
You see, the aftershock and effects have not gone away. Those at ground zero are being harassed by federal agents even today.]

What did the Detective say, Robert?

[If this were "just a building collapse", why all the government hushup/shutup activities? ]

Please be specific, Robert. What were they told not to say?
I don't have much confidence in the Government either, Robert. I just don't think that there were demolitions in the buildings.

[Where there is smoke, there is fire. The blood of the 3,000 cries from the ground. Those who were paid hush money wonder why. Those who lost loved ones, want to know the truth.
Debating on whether the planes downed the towers or other things worked in concert with the collapse, doesn't really get us any closer to the truth. ]

Hey Robert, here is something we can agree on!
OMD

Welcome Mosby to the discussion. The more the merrier.

[Yeah - the twin towers wasn't a "False flag" event- steel buildings catch fire and melt-down all the time- just like when that uh...........building, and that other....uh skyscraper..........and then there was that one time when that uh.........]

Interesting about facts;
Steel DOES burn and melt and weaken when subjected to heat.
Before the collapse the steel neither burned nor melted. They burned AND melted during the weeks under the rubble which acted as a furnace.


[and other buildings like bulding # 7 over a football field away just implode- that happens all the time as well- like that one one time when ....uh..........yeah that one building........uh..........yeah..........happens all the time- just ask any fireman about that..............
Buildings also implode and fall on their own footprint all the time- just like when they demolished that old casino in Las Vegas- wait a minute, wasn't that a controlled demolition- or did they get an airplane to fly into the side of it?]

Living in Las Vegas I have witnessed 3 emplosions. They all sounded and looked different than when the Towers fell.

The fires were not fought in the Towers as is normally done. They burned for 50+ minuets thus weakening the steel supports.

BTW they were designed in a way so as to fall into it’s own footprint in an earthquake.

OMB

Oldemandalton wrote:Welcome Mosby to the discussion. The more the merrier.
Interesting about facts;
Steel DOES burn and melt and weaken when subjected to heat.
Before the collapse the steel neither burned nor melted. They burned AND melted during the weeks under the rubble which acted as a furnace.

Living in Las Vegas I have witnessed 3 emplosions. They all sounded and looked different than when the Towers fell.

The fires were not fought in the Towers as is normally done. They burned for 50+ minuets thus weakening the steel supports.

OMD, please read my post. The question is melting the girders to the point of failure, causing the collapse in the first place. This is impossible. There was a case of a high-rise hotel burning for even longer and just as intense and never collapsed. There just can't be enough sustained, uniform heat to cause enough girders to fails to collapse.

Don't forget the asbestos. All girders were coated with it.

BTW they were designed in a way so as to fall into it’s own footprint in an earthquake.

Em, this wasn't an earthquake, OMD. Planes struck them from the side. They did not burn uniformly. Thus the building - if enough girders lost integrity (big IF) - it would not be uniform and eventually would've fallen to one side.

Oldemandalton wrote: Questions, Robert;
How were there heard explosions coming from the basement 30 or more minuets before the building collapsed from TOP down?
OMD

Seismic devices registered a large underground explosion shortly before the planes hit. This would weaken the foundation underpinning the towers. There were also multiple witnesses that confirmed this.

[Flagg and others have given darn good answers as to 'why']


If I have your “why” correct it was to cause Bush/Chaney to take our freedoms from us, to feed the industrial war complex, and to save money.
Actually I have punched holes into all of the above reasons.
Everything that our government did to react to this terrorist attack would have been accomplished by the four planes hitting their targets if not more. (please read my above post for more elaboration)
The Port Authority would have got their wish without the collapse. The building would have been condemned, insurance cashed in on, plus some more moola from the City, State, and Federal Government.
I don't buy any of these reasons, they are silly.
Did I miss any other “whys”?

[. But what you are up against Oldeman, are real scientific problems, some of which are very well synopsized by Truthseeds. Unfortunately for your position, the questions of 'why' and 'who' do not trump the question of how, especially if your 'why/who' is mixed up with a 'how' that could not possibly happen. Sherlock Holmes has something to say about this in his famous dictum about eliminating the impossible and what is left, no matter how improbable, is the truth.]

Well, larsenb (you are welcome too in the Old Man Pile On ), I have not seen any compelling science that has not been explained.

[I have been waiting a very long time to see refutations of these scientific problems from the 'tons of scientists and engineers' you mention, and please show me the peer reviewed journals where they do it, not Popular Mechanics, thank you.]

I did that before and was accused of delivering "FIRE HOSE" posts. It is easy to find the scientific articles. Just Google it, I did.

[ The very few attempts at a plausible refutation I've seen that try to account for the free-fall to near free-fall collapse times, etc., etc., don't cut the scientific mustard and drastically fail to address the issues that Truthseed has raised.]

You would be surprised what you can find, larsned. Of course you need an open mind first. See;
http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm

http://www.911myths.com/html/freefall.html

[There really isn't 'my science', 'your science' and then many other sciences regarding a single problem amenable to scientific study, especially if some of these 'sciences' keep ignoring fundamental laws of physics, such as conservation of energy and momentum (and angular momentum), etc.]

All ready answered this WITH science. See my above posts.

[Regarding your presentation of some of the claims of the latest NIST go-around at the collapse of Building 7. Most of what they say about damage to this and damage to that is not supported by direct evidence. They are mostly unsubstantiated assertions and claims. Assertions and claims are simply starting points for scientific investigation. You need to develop evidence and experiments to back them up. The latest NIST report is very short on these niggling little items and very long on claims that could be better described as conjecture.]

Arent your claims of "thermite explosives" just educated guesses and” unsubstantiated assertions and claims’?

[I for one, won't have to wait for the millenium to make up my mind. Others, including Dr. Jones, HAVE developed and collected not only smoking gun evidence but remnants of some of the actual 'bullets'.]

All this “evidence” has been refuted by others. Don’t be afraid and Goggle the info.

Old Man

[Truthseeds, excellent summary of so many of the problems with official story! That was a LOT of work! Loved your 'freshly-anthraxed' comment, which raises a whole other issue. If the story of Al Queda pulling off 9/11 wasnt enough to convince Congress to go along with the 'War on Terra', the Ft. Detrix-connected, weaponized anthrax certainly tipped them over the edge. After that, why bother reading Patriot Act I at all? Absolutely no need. Dismantle the Constitution in a trice, and the sooner the better. Fear really works!]

Just curious, larsenb, I would very much have your ideas on the following questions. Just to see if we have any common ground.

Who flew the planes into the Towers?

Where did these guys train before interring flight school here in the US?

Did they belong to a larger group or were they just the 19?

Are the Islamic Radicals in the Middle East pose a danger to the US or Western Civilization.

I am asking you these things just to get your perspective.

Thank You

OMD

Oldmandalton evidently ignores my post, but I will respond nevertheless to his (as it relates to my research):

As for the “evidence” of thermite found at the site there are many problems.
!. Where did the samples come from and is there a possibility of contamination?
2. How pure are they?
3. Was there even enough to leave a trace? (20 lbs of sulfur out of 1million tons of dust)
4. Were there other sources of these chemicals in the buildings besides thermite? (All of these elements were found at the TT)
5. Research tells us more about the structural steel specifications at the time the WTC was constructed, and throughout their tables it’s very obvious that Chromium (CR, highlighted yellow) is rarely included, while Manganese (MN, highlighted blue) is much more common
http://www.911myths.com/html/low_chromi ... ngane.html

1 and 2: The earliest-collected sample in our in-depth study came from Frank Delessio who, according to his videotaped testimony,[ was on the Manhattan side of the Brooklyn Bridge about the time the second tower, the North Tower, fell to the ground. He saw the tower fall and was enveloped by the resulting thick dust which settled throughout the area. He swept a handful of the dust from a rail on the pedestrian walkway near the end of the bridge, about ten minutes after the fall of the North Tower. He then went to visit his friend, Tom Breidenbach, carrying the dust in his hand, and the two of them discussed the dust and decided to save it in a plastic bag. On 15 November 2007, Breidenbach sent a portion of this dust to Dr. Jones for analysis. Breidenbach has also recorded his testimony about the collection of this dust sample on videotape. [17] Thus, the Delessio/Breidenbach sample was collected about ten minutes after the second tower collapsed. It was, therefore, definitely not contaminated by the steel-cutting or clean-up operations at Ground Zero, which began later.

There are several other samples of WTC dust, from independent collectors, and sent independently to researchers at FIVE laboratories for analysis so far (that I know of). ALL of these labs observe the red/gray chips which we have reported, the strongest evidence yet for unignited energetic (explosive) material.

"3. Was there even enough to leave a trace? (20 lbs of sulfur out of 1million tons of dust)"

Yes, there is a fairly large amount of the energetic unignited material in the WTC dust, easily observable with a small loop. Dr. J. Farrer found ten good examples of the material in a small sample of the WTC dust, which was sent directly to him, approximately 3g. I can get the exact figures if anyone needs the detail.

"4. Were there other sources of these chemicals in the buildings besides thermite? (All of these elements were found at the TT)"
This material is highly energetic; in the words of Dr. Farrer "It blows up." The detailed DSC experiments that he performed prove his point; you will have to wait for publication for more detail on these.

"5. Research tells us more about the structural steel specifications at the time the WTC was constructed, and throughout their tables it’s very obvious that Chromium (CR, highlighted yellow) is rarely included, while Manganese (MN, highlighted blue) is much more common
http://www.911myths.com/html/low_chromi ... ngane.html"

So what? you will have to explain the relevance of these comments if you want a reply. I do not see how these relate to the unignited red material, which demonstrably contains aluminum and iron oxide (the ingredients of thermite).

OMD: "Arent your claims of "thermite explosives" just educated guesses and” unsubstantiated assertions and claims’?"

Not at all -- we have results from electron microscopy, X-ray EDS analysis, Fourier Transform Infrared analysis, and Differential Scanning Calorimetry, all confirming the presence of unignited thermitic material. Confirmed also in independent laboratories. These are experimental data obtained using state-of-the art methods.

Now, in view of these facts, have not YOU made ” unsubstantiated assertions and claims’, Oldmandalton?

Why the devil's advocate stance? I spent all day getting links that all discussed explosions and bombs going off, vehicles also blew up (I didn't know that until today), more than 2 buildings were bombed. I learned that BOTH Buildings 6 and 7 were also blown up. I showed links to pictures of Building 6 being gutted 10 stories down to the lower basement.

LOTs of witnesses were also shown in the links.

I do not need to be explaining the obvious. People died who warned others (read my earlier posts) in a diabolic attempt to hide the truth.

Frankly, I never think questions are stupid, just stupid answers, but some of your questions are right up there as being really, really dumb. I'm rather tired of having to present things that are as plain as the nose on your face. Though in the process, I have been learning more than I care to.

Please read and watch the darned links before trying to explain away the obvious. I'm a patient man, but you are wearing my patience rather thin. I don't think you really want to know truth when it has been presented plainly and simply.

The buildings were bombed. That is an obvious fact. No manner of coverup or doctoring of evidence is going to change that.

Today I learned that those within the system who wanted to discover the truth were fired from their NIST jobs as a result of asking direct questions on bombings. THAT alone should be enough, if it were not for the volumes of testimonies by witnesses that is precisely what happened.

God only requires 2 witnesses, so why should you be any different? I presented you with many.

Anciently, the people only had to look upon the serpent on the pole in order to be cured. Many died because they refused to believe something so simple would cure them.

Today we not only have pictures and testimonies of those who sealed their testimonies in blood regarding this event. We but have to look to see. If we refuse to see what is going on, we too will be put to death. Maybe soon.

Stop trying my patience. What is done is done.

Dr. Jones is more patient than I am.

[I'm just winding my way through this thread from beginning and have been responding to a few things as I encounter them, which probably others have adequately addressed already. But Oldeman, you need to go to Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice (http://stj911.org/) and the Journal of 9/11 Studies (http://www.journalof911studies.com/) to find scientifc rebuttals to most of your questions]

There is a lot here, Larsenb, could you be more specific?, Thanks.

[Just looking at your assertion above, it violates Newton's 3rd Law AND violates the law of the Conservation of Momentum (related to Newton's 2nd Law) in view of the near free-fall speeds of all the collapses (WTC 1, 2 and Bldg 7). The impulse of an upper block falling on the lower, intact building would involve first elastic then inelastic deformation until breakage, if lower stages would break at all. Further more, the breakage (if it happened) would not propogate all the way down to bottom of the lower block, but would be maximized close to the initial impact point. Think of a car plowing into a building. Where is maximum damage? Yes, you're right, closest to the impact point. And THEN, you would have to start the process all over again. It would also involve kinetic energy transformation into heat. All of this would subtract from the original downward momentum/kinetic energy of the upper block and would take much more time than the free-fall times that would be registered if the upper block encountered no resistance. You CANNOT have the upper block arriving at the bottom in near free-fall time under these kinds of conditions.]

The Towers did not fall at freefall speeds, that would be 9 secs. Depending on who you believe the time has been reported anywhere from 8-18 seconds.

For explanations on Conservation of Momentum see;
tp://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf;
http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm


[Restated another way, and mentioned I think multiple times by several others in this thread, you can't expect the upper blocks to plough through the path of maximum resistence (including the 47 massive block columns in the core), all the way to the bottom in the same time you would get if you suspended the upper blocks over thin air and let them drop. This CANNOT happen. Oldeman, you can use all the adductive logic you can dream up, but it will fail if you don't take into consideration these scientific principles.]

I agree that it couldn’t and didn’t happen as you stated it.

[This is the 'impossible' as per Sherlock Holmes' dictum I mentioned earlier.
Also, when you consider the energy of turning much of the concrete floors into dust, you would have a further subtraction of total energy provided by the fall of the upper block and further increase in the time involved.]

Again the concrete didn’t turn to dust. Didn’t you see the pictures of the wreckage pile?

[Finally, Newtons 3rd Law (synopsized by: for every action their is an equal and opposite reaction), would assure that the upper block would equally disintegrate along with the upper portions of the lower block. For the North tower, which was hit higher up, the upper block would have disintegrated by the time the top 10 or so floors of the lower block had disintegrated. You would then be left with myriad fragments, many of which were clearly flung outside of the perimeter of the building, losing their coherency, much of their mass, and thus their ability to act as a single 'pile-driver'.]

Nothing was “disintegrated”. It all collapsed on itself as described previously and the building was crushed to rubble not dust. It still had an enormous mass.

[ It doesn't wash that this incorent and dissipated mass could continue on to crush lower floors all the way to the bottom. And you still have the time issue, even if it could.]

It did but not in the 8 or 9 seconds of free fall.


[Does this help??]

Yes, thank you larsenb.

OMD

Oldemandalton wrote:
1) Who flew the planes into the Towers?

2) Where did these guys train before interring flight school here in the US?

3) Did they belong to a larger group or were they just the 19?

4) Are the Islamic Radicals in the Middle East pose a danger to the US or Western Civilization.

1) Brainwashed and conditioned Idiots. Verified.
2) The CIA trained them. Al Qaeda (The Network) was trained by our forces. Verified.
3) A Larger Group. That is why many other planes were grounded. Verified.
4) The Islamic Radicals located here are a danger to the US and the church. They keep being interdicted by intelligence groups. They keep the FBI very busy. When it is time for establishing Martial Law, they will be allowed to do further damage.

Just remember that the planes were a diversion to direct our attention away from the real purpose destroying damning evidence located in buildings 6 and 7.

[Come on Mark, there are numerous articles by so called experts on junk science like global warming as well. You must not know how the game is played. A lot of these guys go along to get along. It's good for their career to be in the politically correct camp.
It gets even better though. Some are on the payroll to write the "correct version" of events. They are rewarded for their loyalty. Others are threatened or bribed off the scent. I know this for a fact. The world is much more complicated than you think it is.
You keep acting like Dalton has posted the Ten Commandments and wondering when all these disobedient children of Israel will start to pay attention.
As Larsenb (and many many many others) have correctly pointed out, nothing, so far, from your camp can CORRECTLY explain the lapses in the laws of physics that the official government conspiracy theory espouses.]

Red Pill, My scientists can beat up your scientists.

OMD

Robert Pritchett -- I appreciate your references regarding the eyewitness testimonies. I found a number of sites from your links that I had not seen before. Well done.

(You understand that my research focusses on "hard" physical evidence, using scientific instruments like the scanning electron microscope to examine WTC dust particles.)

OMD -- will you ever respond to me?

.[ Thanks to one of you for calling this thread to my attention -- just saw these posts today.
Thanks to a number of you who have raised evidence-based answers to OMD and Mark.
This caught my eye:
Quote:
I have a differing opinion on 9/11. It was, planed, funded and carried out by Al Queda, Bin Laden et al. I don’t think the US military, CIA, or Mossad were involved. I do believe that the “Latter Day Gadiantons” had a hand in it though. I am sure they knew something was going to happen, helped to fund it and helped the “patsies” to be successful in their endeavor. (Oldmandalton
We agree that the LDG's had a hand in it. It may be worthwhile to answer your other points -- those based on science and experiment, as opposed to those based on speculation. I will start a thread to do that, and you can copy and paste your answers if you wish -- but I wish to start with a published, peer-reviewed paper in an established journal:
Quote:
Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction
Authors: Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, James R. Gourley
The Open Civil Engineering Journal, pp.35-40, Vol 2
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/conte ... TOCIEJ.SGM
I should note here that there were THREE peer-reviewers for the above paper. In the end, all three approved publication of the paper. Can you say that for the "debunkers" you quote? As far as I can tell, OMD, none of your quotes comes from a peer-reviewed paper in an established journal. Nevertheless, I am willing to consider experiment-based arguments. ]

Welcome Dr Jones. I see the Heavy Weights have joined the pile on of the poor Old Man.

May I ask you a few question, Dr Jones. I am just getting into this 9/11 theory and would like some info and your point of view.

1. Who were the piers who reviewed your paper.
2. Did the Engineering or Physics Dept agree with your findings?
3. Who flew the plans? Did they belong to a larger group?
4. Why bother setting demolition charges when the buildings were going to be attacked anyway? If all the planes had hit we would have had damage to the Pentagon, Twin Towers and the Capital with all of the lose of life and destruction.




[I should note that our work goes well beyond this paper now, with our latest study of the red/gray chips found in the WTC dust soon to be published -- we hope! It is going through a lengthy peer-review process now.

Mark's statement is unfounded and disingenuous:
Quote:
For every "smoking gun" accusation of planted explosives and thermite having been used to bring down the towers that has been brought forward publicly there have been numerous articles written with alternative reasonable explanations of how the towers could have come down by experts in the field of civil engineering and structural science who frankly were much more qualified than Dr. Jones to render said opinions and explanations.
But please, then, Mark -- SHOW US THE PAPER THAT RESPONDS TO OUR "FOURTEEN POINTS" PAPER ABOVE -- can you do it and thus substantiate your comment above? I don't think so.
You may find two or three of our points addressed, certainly not all fourteen...
That will be the subject of the new thread, taking a peer-reviewed paper in an established journal as a starting point. Let's see how we do.]

Is the above paper published or in the process of pier review?

Under a Heavy Load but Still Standing

Old Man

You need to pay attention. Your questions were answered earlier. Look at the new thread on this topic.

[I had a version of this post ready to submit and I hit the wrong button, which deleted it. Second attempt.
These are at least interesting hypothetical articles. After giving them a quick scan, however, I have a few comments.
The origin of the molten metal pouring out of the South Tower window, etc., is certainly open to speculation. First, I've seen 2-3 videos of this event, each of which pan the lower reaches of the flow, and I don't recall seeing the material turn to a silver color. I remember seeing about the same white-yellow color persisting all the way down.
Also, as I recall, the author mentions nothing about the white smoke coming off the point of origin. Neither does he say anything about the splattering effect that is highly visible at the point of origin, both of which are indicative of a thermitic reaction. He ignores the possibility that the white smoke is aluminum oxide which is the oxidation product of a thermite reaction and is whitish in color. And the visible splattering looks more like a reaction effect than just the flow of molten aluminum out of a window. But of course, this is all speculative without more direct evidence.
Further, the author puts an awful lot of store in the yellow-white color value of the molten material being caused by the addition of debris, such as office furniture (wood, plastics, etc.) to the molten material. This is highly speculative, especially in the light of the preliminary experiment performed by Steve Jones and others, where adding such material to molten aluminum had no such effect.]

The speculation goes both ways larseb. Why should I believe your theories and speculation and not mine when I have not been given a plausible explanation for, Why Bother.

[Finally, in his attempts to equate the amount of material flowing out of the window (not sure how he was able to estimate that), with mass-ballance calculations of the amount of iron produced in a thermitic reaction, he seems to ignore the iron that could have been melted by the reaction. When you put a thermite bomb on an engine block, you are getting iron from both the reduction of Fe2O3 AND from the resulting high temperature melting of the engine block.
And a couple of comments on the speculation that shock energy being transmitted down the box columns was sufficient to greatly raise temperatures of steel in the subbasements of all three buildings, with the temperatures subsequently increased by addition of steam and O2 to the point of melting them and keeping the pot cooking for several weeks. He seems to be caught in a basic contradiction in requiring that the box columns stay intact long enough to transmit the energy to the basement. But if the shock energy from collapsing floors didn't break them, what did? Maybe I glossed over what he said. One last question: has this heating effect from collapsing buildings been observed before, either in imploded buildings at least as high as Bldg 7, or perhaps measured to a lesser degree in smaller buildings brought down by demolitions?

You miss understood. It wasn’t JUST the energy from the box columns. Don’t forget the burning jet fuel and contents of the building.

OMD

[Stump - Start here -
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_t ... explosions
Eyewitness accounts of explosions before WTC Collapses - http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICL ... tness.html
Fires and explosions - http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICL ... hters.html
Includes snippet from Marlene Cruz on explosions in the basement where she worked and how she was injured.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw
"This video shows that many actual 9/11 witnesses heard and saw explosions going off inside the towers, long before they actually fell. These witnesses include police, firemen and mainstream media reporters."
Barry Jennings full report 1 and 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQY-ksiuwKU
Discusses service floor renovations during building evacuation exercises.
Died at age 53 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ris8OGSskCk
Reported before Building 7 collapsed - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7SwOT29gb
Clues as to why it was targeted.
Building 7 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEuJimaumW4
http://www.911studies.com/911photostudies124.htm
Peter Jennings interviewed Marlene Cruz - http://www.911blogger.com/node/6488
Peter Jennings passes away - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fImL1EpKC6Q
Kenney Johannemann commits suicide - http://www.infowars.net/articles/Septem ... itness.htm
William Rodriguez sues "everyone" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Rodriguez
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysi ... sions.html
Who knew about Building 6?
Patricia Androvic on Building 6 explosions - http://killtown.blogspot.com/2006/02/91 ... e-wtc.html
Building 6 - http://www.911studies.com/911photostudies116.htm
http://www.911studies.com/911photostudies121.htm
Further research - http://www.911studies.com/links.htm
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICL ... ideos.html
How many more witnesses do you ned before you believe this was an orchestrated, planned event and the planes were essentially a diversion?]

Stump, then go to these;

http://www.debunking911.com/explosions.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/ny ... tephen.txt
http://www.stupidcollege.com/items/Elec ... -Explosion
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... A964958260
http://www.fdnewyork.com/wtc.asp
http://www.debunking911.com/quotes.htm
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/new.york.terror/
http://911stories.googlepages.com/home
http://loosetrains911.blogspot.com/
http://www.911myths.com/html/accounts_o ... sions.html





[Why were buildings 5, 6 and 7 destroyed as well?
CIA was in 7 and so were the accountants who were investigating the SEC. So was the command center.
US Customs and other Federal agencies were in Building 6.
Tenants:
Building 5 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_World_Trade_Center
Building 6 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6_World_Trade_Center
Building 7 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center
WTC - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_o ... ade_Center]
It was a massive murder activity to destroy the evidence. It worked.]

Evidence to what was destroyed?

[13 days later, we got the Patriot Act handed to us.]

This would have occurred just as well if the buildings had not collapsed. So why bother risking the exposure of you Secret Combination by planting explosives?

OMD

[quote="Oldemandalton]
This would have occurred just as well if the buildings had not collapsed. So why bother risking the exposure of you Secret Combination by planting explosives?

OMD[/quote]

They probably weren't too concerned with the risk. If their people were caught, they would just do like they seem to have done with JFK's assassin.

[Dalton, I'm not aware that people who believe in the 'Illuminati' brand of LDG's deny that a certain brand of fanatical Islam is dangerous. If these people are correct that there is an over-arching LDG group outside of Islamic fundamentalists that to some degree manipulate the latter, it would be doubly foolish to ignore this group and not fight them. In fact it would be stupid.]

I agree with you 1000%. Check out the tread I began 0n how they are organized and what we can do; http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=5334


[I did an HP quorum lesson on gadianton/secret combinations and came away with the overwhelming understanding that this was an exceedingly important topic to the compilers of the BofM, including the Lord. A very important aspect of these SC's, is that they are most dangerous when they are internal and apt to take over a country from the inside. Moroni warned us specifically about that very thing.
President Benson's 1988 talk dovetails with this warning, with him testifying that 'A' secret combination is growing in power and control in THIS country and many others.]

I agree again, larsenb.

[Who are they, pray tell, Dalton?? Who do you have tagged?? ]
Again, check out my posts in the above thread and you will how much we agree.


[Benson also mentioned that many other secret combinations are flourishing, which could easily include the Mafia and various Moslem terrorist groups; and don't forget the narco-traffikers who have murdered roughly 5000 people in Mexico this past year.]

You don’t know how much this sounds like me talking, just ask my wife!

[But the most dangerous are the internal ones and those who are 'wise/sly' enough to manipulate all the others, etc., in a dialectic and exploitative fashion. These are the most important to the 'REAL Master Mahan', because they are positioned to do the most damage, bringing down or 'enslaving' entire countries and even civilizations. They are his main tool, and their main method is to work through war and contention, which they exploit, exacerbate and even create.]

Read my post on the Five Stages of Collapse and the predictions for the coming year. It is upon us.

[I did my time in Vietnam. I'll fight whoever attacks me and my family AND who try to take away my liberties, for whatever specious reason. A perpetual war on an abstract noun called 'terror', isn't sufficient reason for dismantling this country, nor is any other reason.]

I honor your service larsenb. I have your back man!

OMD

[Right on Larsenb!
Mark and OMD have been like "flies to stink" when anybody posted anything contrary to their view of the world. But since Dr. Jones has entered the ring, they seem to be AWOL.
Time to put your science where your mouth has been. Where are you boys?]

Actually, Red Pill, I am visiting family in Clinton of all places and in the dog house because I have been trying to answere all these post that have poped up. Dog Pile!

Now I am going to have to sleep on the couch! Thanks a lot guys!

Old, Tired, Man

[ 2 years ago when I was waking up to what happened on 9/11, I attended a symposium which included an engineer who had worked for UL, the group that tested and approved the steel girders actually used in the towers. He was fired for questioning how the UL glibly endorsed the official version of the collapse (at the time - there's been many versions since, that raise anyone's suspicions?).
Unfortunately I accidentally threw away my notes while clearing my office, but I do remember a few things.
One thing I want to point out to people who regurgitate the official version of steel beams oxidizing is one basic fact: all steel girders were coated with asbestos. These proffered theories on steel oxidation assume direct heat. This was not the case. The heat would need to have penetrated the fire retardant first. Definitely possible in some cases, but that leaves a lot less energy to heat the steel.]

During my 20 years of construction I have witnessed the application of the insulation you speak of. It is sprayed on to the beams and columns several inches thick. It dries to a consistency of
Paper mache. When the planes crashed into the towers, the wreckage stripped the columns of their insulation and thus exposed them to the heat. As the building collapsed the rest of the beams and columns were exposed from the wreckage.

[Another thing to remember is that all these debunker theories and "official" explanations are based on computer simulations. The engineer told us how, when the government didn't get the results they wanted, continued to tweak the variables until they did. Basically the towers became huge blast furnaces in order to get the kind of collapse they said happened. Skyscrapers are not blast furnaces. The kind of uniform heat required to melt enough girders to cause a collapse is basically impossible... unless you have a computer, I guess.]

Aren’t all of the other theories derived from computer models or calculations?

[The towers could lose 25% of the girders and still remain standing. Under the most aggressive simulations that had some basis in reality the best they could do is 14%. That pesky asbestos, bad for human lungs but great for fires, has plenty to do with that.]

The insulation was removed by the planes and collapse. It is very soft and can be removed with your hands.

[Now, IF what they say was true, that enough girders melted to cause a structural collapse, we should've seen a pancaking effect, at least partially. An aggressive simulation of a pancake collapse with a half second delay as the floors below give (see Col Flagg's conservation of energy post above) would've added over 30 seconds to the collapse. Near-freefall collapse is impossible in the official story of 19 Al Qaeda terrorists and box cutters.
If I had my notes I could post much more, but the bottom line is that the towers were specifically built for direct impact by jetliners. It was part of the specs. Calculating the kinetic energy of a static body loaded with jet fuel is something any engineer worth anything can do. These are all known quantities. This can be done, and was done. The story just doesn't stand up.]



You are correct; they survived the impacts as designed. It was the fires that weakened the steel supports.


[Apparently people just can't face the idea of the evil it took to do something like this. Easier to think 19 Arabs not even qualified to fly a twin-engine Cessna than people within your own government.]

Gruden, may I ask you a question?

Who did fly those plans then?

OMD

[Em, this wasn't an earthquake, OMD. Planes struck them from the side. They did not burn uniformly. Thus the building - if enough girders lost integrity (big IF) - it would not be uniform and eventually would've fallen to one side]

The fire burned for 50+ minuets. Several floors we effected by the planes impact. With the insulation gone and beams exposed a large are was affected. The columns and beams lost strength (not melted) and thus gave way.

A very Tired and Lonely, OMD

My wife went to bed long ago and told me to sleep on the couch

[Seismic devices registered a large underground explosion shortly before the planes hit. This would weaken the foundation underpinning the towers. There were also multiple witnesses that confirmed this.]

This doesn’t make sense to me.

Why weaken the foundation before the collapse when it would be better to do it AS it collapsed?

If they went off before the collapsed wouldn’t there have been a risk that someone would seen or hear it? Knowing this then why not wait until the collapse?

I am sorry but logic tells me that a lot of this stuff is silly and doesn’t make sense.

OMD

To everyone trying to follow this, This thread is now in two locations.
We have a new discussion for the 14 points here....

http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5396

-Paul

[Oldmandalton evidently ignores my post, but I will respond nevertheless to his (as it relates to my research):]

I am sorry and tired Dr which one did I ignore?

[Quote:
[As for the “evidence” of thermite found at the site there are many problems.
!. Where did the samples come from and is there a possibility of contamination?
2. How pure are they?
3. Was there even enough to leave a trace? (20 lbs of sulfur out of 1million tons of dust)
4. Were there other sources of these chemicals in the buildings besides thermite? (All of these elements were found at the TT)
5. Research tells us more about the structural steel specifications at the time the WTC was constructed, and throughout their tables it’s very obvious that Chromium (CR, highlighted yellow) is rarely included, while Manganese (MN, highlighted blue) is much more common
http://www.911myths.com/html/low_chromi ... ngane.html
1 and 2: The earliest-collected sample in our in-depth study came from Frank Delessio who, according to his videotaped testimony,[ was on the Manhattan side of the Brooklyn Bridge about the time the second tower, the North Tower, fell to the ground. He saw the tower fall and was enveloped by the resulting thick dust which settled throughout the area. He swept a handful of the dust from a rail on the pedestrian walkway near the end of the bridge, about ten minutes after the fall of the North Tower. He then went to visit his friend, Tom Breidenbach, carrying the dust in his hand, and the two of them discussed the dust and decided to save it in a plastic bag. On 15 November 2007, Breidenbach sent a portion of this dust to Dr. Jones for analysis. Breidenbach has also recorded his testimony about the collection of this dust sample on videotape. [17] Thus, the Delessio/Breidenbach sample was collected about ten minutes after the second tower collapsed. It was, therefore, definitely not contaminated by the steel-cutting or clean-up operations at Ground Zero, which began later.
There are several other samples of WTC dust, from independent collectors, and sent independently to researchers at FIVE laboratories for analysis so far (that I know of). ALL of these labs observe the red/gray chips which we have reported, the strongest evidence yet for unignited energetic (explosive) material.
["3. Was there even enough to leave a trace? (20 lbs of sulfur out of 1million tons of dust)"
Yes, there is a fairly large amount of the energetic unignited material in the WTC dust, easily observable with a small loop. Dr. J. Farrer found ten good examples of the material in a small sample of the WTC dust, which was sent directly to him, approximately 3g. I can get the exact figures if anyone needs the detail.]

I would not be surprised to find the same traces of the chemicals that were found at ground zero in the dust in any other fire and collapse form any other building of this size.


["4. Were there other sources of these chemicals in the buildings besides thermite? (All of these elements were found at the TT)"
This material is highly energetic; in the words of Dr. Farrer "It blows up." The detailed DSC experiments that he performed prove his point; you will have to wait for publication for more detail on these.]

Question, which were the chemical traces were you looking for and could they have been also found in a building that suffered a fire and collapse?

["5. Research tells us more about the structural steel specifications at the time the WTC was constructed, and throughout their tables it’s very obvious that Chromium (CR, highlighted yellow) is rarely included, while Manganese (MN, highlighted blue) is much more common
http://www.911myths.com/html/low_chromi ... ngane.html"
So what? you will have to explain the relevance of these comments if you want a reply. I do not see how these relate to the unignited red material l, which demonstrably contains aluminum and iron oxide (the ingredients of thermite).]

Aluminum and iron oxide could not be found in a building that suffered; a plane impact, fire, then collapse?

OMD: "Arent your claims of "thermite explosives" just educated guesses and” unsubstantiated assertions and claims’?"
[Not at all -- we have results from electron microscopy, X-ray EDS analysis, Fourier Transform Infrared analysis, and Differential Scanning Calorimetry, all confirming the presence of unignited thermitic material. Confirmed also in independent laboratories. These are experimental data obtained using state-of-the art methods.]

Actually what you have found are chemicals that MAY make up thermite but is also found in any building of this size that would have suffered the above mentioned conditions.

[Now, in view of these facts, have not YOU made ” unsubstantiated assertions and claims’
Oldmandalton?]

These are all unproven theories Dr Jones. Every 9/11 theory out there on both sides are just that, theories.

May I ask you a few questions Dr Jones. Way back in the beginning of this thread I asked why the Towers needed to be demolitioned in the first place since the LGDs new the attack was coming? Before you start poring on the science on me I would like to discuss this with you. It goes back to my premise that the demolition was unnecessary for the LDGs to get the effect it got. This is the weakness of your theory.
Could you explain this to me please before we get into the science?

Thank You for your patience, Dr. Jones.

OMD

[Why the devil's advocate stance?]

The reasons given for the need to set demolitions in the Towers make no sense to me. This is how it all started anyway.

[ I spent all day getting links that all discussed explosions and bombs going off, vehicles also blew up (I didn't know that until today), more than 2 buildings were bombed. I learned that BOTH Buildings 6 and 7 were also blown up. I showed links to pictures of Building 6 being gutted 10 stories down to the lower basement.
LOTs of witnesses were also shown in the links. ]

Yes, Yes I know they heard explosions, but so have other people heard explosions when there were none present in other circumstances. Just because some one “thought” they heard something like a “bomb” doesn’t mean they were there as I have shown in other accedents that loud noises were heard and described as “explosions”. Did anyone actually see the charges before or after being set.


[I do not need to be explaining the obvious. People died who warned others (read my earlier posts) in a diabolic attempt to hide the truth.]

Yes they did and the truth was hidden, but the hidden truth was not that the Towers had explosives in them but that we knew about it before hand and did nothing to stop it.

[Frankly, I never think questions are stupid, just stupid answers, but some of your questions are right up there as being really, really dumb. I'm rather tired of having to present things that are as plain as the nose on your face. Though in the process, I have been learning more than I care to.]

Ditto, Robert. I am sorry if the questions may seem dumb to you. I am trying to understand your position so we may understand each other. Please answere my dumb questions. They were asked with an honest heart.

[Please read and watch the darned links before trying to explain away the obvious. I'm a patient man, but you are wearing my patience rather thin. I don't think you really want to know truth when it has been presented plainly and simply.]

If I explained away the obvious then they were not so obvious, were they?

[The buildings were bombed. That is an obvious fact. No manner of coverup or doctoring of evidence is going to change that.]

Sorry I disagree.

[Today I learned that those within the system who wanted to discover the truth were fired from their NIST jobs as a result of asking direct questions on bombings. THAT alone should be enough, if it were not for the volumes of testimonies by witnesses that is precisely what happened.
God only requires 2 witnesses, so why should you be any different? I presented you with many.
Anciently, the people only had to look upon the serpent on the pole in order to be cured. Many died because they refused to believe something so simple would cure them.
Today we not only have pictures and testimonies of those who sealed their testimonies in blood regarding this event. We but have to look to see. If we refuse to see what is going on, we too will be put to death. Maybe soon.]

Dark days are ahead, Robert.

[Stop trying my patience. What is done is done.]

You don’t have to come to this thread to be punished be me, Robert. I am sorry that you feel that way. I was just trying to figure out why some idiot would risk exposure to their Secret Combination by planting explosives when the 4 planes would have done enough damage to receive the results we have seen over the past 8 years. That’s all I wanted to know. Then came the posts about the witnesses, science, et al. So here we are. I have been patient through attacks on my mental status and power without a return attack by me. I am a patient man Robert. I truly do want to try and understand your position. If you don’t want to answer my questions, then I hope someone will.

[Dr. Jones is more patient than I am.]

I hope so too. I also hope he can give me his ideas on why it was done and by whom.

OMD