Amazing photographs

[Westgate]

On this day, especially after that awful BBC hit piece, I have found this amazing set of photographs taken from the guys apartment in Jersey.

http://amanzafar.no-ip.com/WTC/

[THETRUTHWILLSETU3]

and you don't get dust clouds as big or for as long as that with a conventional controlled demolition.

Just waiting for someone to say the photos are faked

[Batrabill]

This is my first and last post on this site. I've just read a great deal on this site and on Loose Change and I feel really upset that I find myself so far from the position taken by the majority here.

To put it simply this all seems driven by deep distrust of government, which many people can understand, but then strays quickly into a form of myopia that is sometimes funny, but more often shocking.

I have read very closely all the arguments to suggest that the WTC was blown up. I know a fair amount about building demolition and am faced with one plausible and internally logical theory that the impact of the planes weakened a few floors eventually resulting in those floors collapsing. As blasters say "get the building moving and gravity does the rest"
Or, I am to believe, that thousands of charges were fitted to the two buildings by what must have been quite a substantial team of contractors (how di
o I get that work - I bet the pay is great) to ensure the buildings total destruction.

The really weird thing is that you all believe the latter.

That is so illogical, anti-scientific, and bizarre that I find it quite frightening.

I haven't mentioned the NO PLANE theory because that doesn't deserve rebuttal. Nor, come to think of it flight 93 for the same reason.

Think for a moment - Governments are useless at organising anything, but they organised this and got away with it?

Oh wait, those pesky kids on nineeleven.co.uk they're onto us!

Well done Scooby.

Dupe.

[QuitTheirClogs]

[Abandoned Ego]

[Batrabill]

NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST’s dedicated Web site, http://wtc.nist.gov. This included consideration of a number of hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.

[scubadiver]

Batrabill,

How do you explain the molten metal that was found six weeks later under each of three buildings. Obviously kerosene fuel can't do that.

Come to think of it, how do you explain the collapse of WTC 7?

[Snowygrouch]

BB,
Are you TRYING to make me laugh?

1: NIST never tested for explosive residue
2: NIST had to try to conduct a WTC investigation with ZERO steel!!!
3: NIST has to try to conduct WTC1&2 inv. with 0.25>0.5% of the steel!!
4: NIST was NOT contracted to discover the collapse mechanism after initial failure.
5: NIST did NOT conduct ANY technical calculations of ANY sort into how the building fell totally or at the speed it did.
6: NIST was headed by a presidentailly appointed cheif
7: NIST was headed by senior poeple who also did the Oklahoma and FEMA investiagtions.
8: NIST found NO evidence of ANY permanent mettalurgical changes in ANY of the structural sections analysed. (this means the steel barely reached 400 degrees, the tempering zone).

9: My hands are sore now, but this list carries on for a while......

Dear or dear.

C.

[Bongo]

Batrabill, we are used to this kind of comment from people who find the concept that the Government likely had input to the events of that day.

You have 'Typically' provided not a single shread of evidence for your statement.

For example, you state that the momentum of the collapsing upper floors was sufficient to, "As demolition experts say, 'Get the building moving' for gravity to do the rest'... However upon close scrutiny of the 'Scientific' facts, the time taken for the upper floors to crash through 'the path of most resistance' actually exceeded the time it would have taken for an object to have fallen through air. (If you understand the physics here, you will inderstand the dilemma). http://911blimp.net/prf_FreeFallPhysics.shtml
I would like to add that the steel on all the floors below the impact zones of each tower were not subjected to even warm temperatures and retained their full design strength (And this design held up all the floors above for 29 years IMO). You also have to remember that these towers were over designed as all steel structures typically are (NB. structural engineers design elements to about 3 times what is required as a margin of safety).

In addition, you then go on to state...

[jackchit]

[Carlos]

great post bongo..

[rodin]

[rodin]

[rodin]

Bongo - did you hear the BNP Terrorist case today - guy uses an alter ego of 'BongoKiller' (or something similar).

[Bongo]

Maybe he just doesn't like percussion?

[Batrabill]

Oooo, you got me. Actually i read the bit where it says that anything critical will be moved to Critics Corner so it would become academic.

It is pointless arguing the case with you lot.

I find the existence of anomalies in a single catstrophic event inevitable.


You think they prove the tooth fairy was behind everything including faking the moon landings. (Where are those stars in the pictures?)

Sleep well. You have totally wasted 20 years of schooling.

[rodin]

In the above you can see the core still standing, plus a building on the right with a large diagonal slice out of it. Which building is that?

In successive pics the diagonal cut gets deeper, then the building collapses altogether

So both buildings had part of the core stand momentarily after the main collapse.

[Micpsi]

[Batrabill]

Mental illness is extremely common. Conspiracies involving thousands of people are extremely rare.

[Bongo]

Yes, Batrabill, Conspiracies involving thousands of people are extremely rare, but as Guy Smith (The Director of the BBC Conspiracies documentary) agreed on Alex Jones last night... they do happen.

... so where is your evidence that it did not happen on this occasion?

I take it you have watched 9/11 Press For Truth as I asked you to in my last post?

Ps. It is good that you have extended your stay to more than one post.

...Ps. I do not feel I have wasted my Engineering Degree or my Post Graduate Diploma in Energy and Environmental Systems either.

[Mark Gobell]

[Skeptic]

[QuitTheirClogs]

Micpsi – do you know anything about David L. Griscom?

http://patriotsquestion911.com/#Griscom

[Carlos]

fascinating pics!!

Rodin - I wondered how that diagonal gash could be caused too.... and how it gets larger within seeconds - could it be from falling debirs from the WTC's?

[GEFBASS]

To Rodin and Carlos,

This may help.

first picture is the diagonal `cut`

second picture is merged with a later shot after the towers fell.

third shot the after the towers fell shot.

Geoff.

[Carlos]

lol..

thanks

[A Sharp Major]

Good views, perhaps the best you'll see, of the 'back' of WTC 7 after the collapse of the second tower. Looks very damaged and very on fire.

[Fallious]

[Fallious]

[quote="rodin"]

This shot is fascinating. Assuming this is a rather substantial part of the core there's a few things which come to mind for me.

- It's height is roughly the same as the surrounding buildings.
- It's about half the height of the whole tower.
- It's still standing, so we have confirmation that the upper half of the core fell outward. Ergo, no pancake OR progressive collapse possible?

Anyway, fascinating.

[andrewwatson]