What REALLY happened at WTC...

[Endangered Specie]

From people who know a thing or two about this sorta stuff.

http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtcreport.htm

http://www.architectureweek.com/2002/0515/news_1-1.html

http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/latest/wtc.php

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/

http://www.icivilengineer.com/News/wtc.php

http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/wtc/wtctragedy.html

http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

http://www.asce.org/responds/


Ive only had a chance to read a few things from each link, its quite a lot. Any GENUINE additions appreciated

[JDPriestly]

1. Thanks. Very interesting.

[MrSammo1]

2. None of which

explain how it is possible for the buildings to fall at or faster than free fall speeds!

Do you know that if the upper floors were to fall thought water it would have taken long than through all steel and concrete? Go figure?

[LARED]

3. faster than free fall speeds???

Link? Reference?

Didn't happen

[Endangered Specie]

4. Faster than freefall speed?

Ok.. south tower was hit and collapsed around the 80th floor.

This building was 1362 feet tall, and 110floors high, so assuming =floor height that was about 1362*(80/110) = 991 feet.

Vertical motion (with initial speed and position = 0) is described as 990 feet = 1/2*g*t^2 where g = 32.2 feet/sec^2 (accel due to gravity), solving for t you get a time of t=7.84 sec


North tower was hit and collapsed around the 90th floor.

1120 feet = 1/2*g*t^2... t= 8.34 sec


Keep in mind, the times for collapse are a) estimated, and b) dont acocund for that fact that the towers didnt completely fall to the ground, as there was 15-20 (150-200 feet) floors worth of debris.

If you want to recalculate those values with an additional 100 feet subtracted you get...
t(south) = 7.43 sec
t(north) = 7.95 sec

[BeFree]

8. So,,, that's the freefall speed?

t(south) = 7.43 sec
t(north) = 7.95 sec


Are you saying the towers fell at free fall speed?

And if you are, then lets discuss this theory of yours.

I would have to say, that from all appearances, the towers did fall in about the time you desribe.
t(south) = 7.43 sec
t(north) = 7.95 sec

But.... given that there was supposedly some resistance, ie the lower 80 mol floors, then the freefall times you came up with are physically impossible. Eh?

[Endangered Specie]

12. I am NOT saying the towers fell at free fall speed...

That would be impossible no matter what was used to collapse the towers, unless you strapped a big jet engine on the roof to force downward.

The time to collapse was about 10-12 seconds, btw.

[BeFree]

14. Ok, so you think 10 to 12 seconds, max 14?

I can dig it. Sounds about right.

So, the towers, hit near the top, collapsed in 14 seconds. Even the 80 floors below the impact zone collapsed in less than 14 seconds, right? Because what you seem to be saying is that the very top took 14 seconds to hit the bottom.

Is this what you are saying?

[Endangered Specie]

15. That sounds about right,

after the 80 floors below collapsed, the top 10-20 (which caused the 80 floors below to collapse) collapsed themselves, so, the very top would have taken longer to hit "bottom (as far as it could go with all the rubble) than the point at where the planes hit.

[BeFree]

16. "After the 80 floors below"

Are you sure that's what you meant to say?... "after the 80 floors below collapsed"

Because that means you are saying that the floors under the impact zone collapsed first.

You claim the top floors made the bottom 80 collapse.

How'd that happen? Pancake theory, right?

[Endangered Specie]

17. Claim?

well, from the looks of the footage, it sure as hell looks like that, Im not sure why you are questioning that? Its pretty clear that the bottom 80-90 floors collapsed in succession due to the falling mass of the upper 20-30 floors.

[BeFree]

18. Claim

Your claim is that "from the looks of the footage" the tops of the towers took no more than 14 seconds to stop moving, right?

"..from the looks of the footage.."

Can I take it that you have seen ALL available footage from the scene? That you have thoroughly researched the stills, and videos from the scene? Can you unequivocally state that you are done researching and that you have all the info you ever needed to make a decision?

Or have you based your opinion on just the looks of the footage?

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

Now.... as for the 14 seconds of collapse.... You have rated the fall of each of the bottom 80 floors to have collapsed in less than .1 (a tenth) of a second.

What you seem to be trying to tell us is that each floor of a structure built to withstand tremendous weight and stresses, that each floor collapsed and completely lost it's integrity in less than a tenth of a second just from the weight of the floors above.


80 floors
X .1 seconds = 8 seconds.

Do you realize how preposterous that sounds? That it is basically, physically impossible for those floors to have disintegrated in less than .1 second each? That's 10 floors a second!

Ridiculous. It is absolutely ridiculous to think those 80 floors wasted away from just the weight they had continuously held for many a year.

Are ya done with your research, are do ya have an open mind?

[Endangered Specie]

19. ...

80 floors in 14 seconds is .175 seconds each. not less than .1 However, this is misleading, it should be clear that the upper floors took longer to collapse than the lower floors since the "falling mass" would have been larger and faster as it approached the lower floors.

Each floor is designed to hold the other floors above it yes, however, they are NOT designed to hold the floors above it if they are moving at a high rate of speed.

It is not preposterous... it happened, the forces involved are humongeous. Yes, they are built to withstand tremendous weight and stresses, if you define tremendous as the weight above each floor, with some margin of safety.

Each floor weighes on the order of 5 million pounds

I have watched the footage, not necessarily every single piece of footage, but a good deal Id say (I can only watch it so much, it is a bit disturbing you know)

Im still not entirely sure what your point is? are you suggesting explosives were used to demolish it on the way down, I did not see explosives going off.

[BeFree]

20. Ok round it to .2

That's .2 seconds per floor. 2 tenths of a second per floor. Still ridiculous.

..it should be clear that the upper floors took longer to collapse than the lower floors..

But if you really studied the footage you would see that the top floors disentragated before the bottom floors did. Look closely at the frames. The lower floors still stood as the top was turning to dust.

Wanna rephrase your statement?

-----

BTW... I looked at a few of your links. Most were from just days after the event without a long and thorough examination of the facts. And there were numerous statements that the statements were not to be taken as any kind of official statement. Curious too, was that one promised look at illustrations of a report downloaded came up with blank pages!

Now, you did state that you had only looked at a few parts of each website, so how the hell would you know, eh? Look, if ya wanna get anywhere with us give us some beef, not just a bunch of outdated and useless links.

[Endangered Specie]

21. ...

Which links have which dates and problems that dont suit you? You claim to look at a few and are drawing conclusions for the whole pile, very scientific.

Lets face it, mine are from much more credible sources then where you CTers get their balonga from.

"ya wanna get anywhere with us give us some beef, not just a bunch of outdated and useless links." - Maybe you should try praticing what you preach before lecturing me eh?

I cant quite grasp why you people refuse to accept what nearly every civil engineer whos studied this has concluded? They just might know more than you do (sorta like creationists deny who nearly all Biologists and Holocaust Deniers seem to overlook the overwhelming opinions of Historians).

[BeFree]

22. Your links

I probably read more of your links than you did. Yet you state:"You claim to look at a few and are drawing conclusions for the whole pile, very scientific."

Bwahaha... look at your original post...Quote:
"Ive only had a chance to read a few things from each link,"

I am only relaying your words, ie, your preaching to us, and we now see several clear inconsistencies and contradictions, bordering on slander and b**sh like twistings of the English language. Bwahahaha.

[Endangered Specie]

23. ...

"Ive only had a chance to read a few things from each link," - I wrote that when Id originally posted it. Since Ive read quite a bit from all the links, especially the NIST report. (unfortunately, I cant edit that statement and update it). I have read stuff like this in the past (like 2002-3ish), then I came across the theories proposed in this forum, I read them, and, sufficed to say, I didn't buy them.

The burden of proof rests on you, not me; you are the ones making extraordinary claims that do not fit available evidence.

Now, answer my questions. What parts about which links did you not like?

[BeFree]

24. Burden of proof

The burden of proving what happened on 9/11 does not lie with me.

The burden lies with those who made the decision to kill thousands upon thousands of Afghans and Iraqis, and it lies with those who agree with the leaders who caused those deaths.

I am not satisfied that all the evidence has been made available to me or you, and until such time as that evidence is made available, I will continue to explore alternative theories.

Now, if you feel that the scrimpy evidence thus far presented is sufficient for the death warrant executed upon all those people, fine, have it your way.

But as for me and mine, I will withhold judgement until such time as I can be completely satisfied with the facts.

Preliminary Rationalizations such as yours be damned.

[RH]

25. Did you study the Hamburg trial?

And the 2001 New York State Al Qa'eda Trial?

[Endangered Specie]

26. Yes, it does...

you are presenting theories which go against the conclusions of whoardes of enginners and scientists, not to mention numerous eye-witnesses.

If you want to talk about "scrimpy" evidence, I think you CTers are excelling in that... The most "evidence" I get from you and your types are a few flash videos, a few video clips, blurred images, a good deal of which are photoshopped or otherwise doctored, a smattering of not so genuine websites; used to produce extraordinary "theories" and wild speculation.

[BeFree]

28. America

This country is founded on Justice. Justice means having a full, impartial hearing, where the two sides are able to present their cases.

What we have had, concerning 9/11, is just one side. And the result is thousands of deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. Thousands executed in revenge, and only one side of the case has been examined.

It is so sad to see that Americans threw Justice out the window in their rush for revenge. It is sad to see people on DU even, throwing Justice out the window.

Ya'll oughtta be ashamed of yourselves. Frankly, you make me sick.

[Endangered Specie]

29. In case you haven't notice...

No every two sides get the chance to be heard in a courtroom, mainly because alot of the cases are just pure bogus... If the justice dept were forced to take EVERY case filed there'd be a backlog like you can't imagine.

This is even more so in science/engineering realms... the shit gets thrown OUT, fast, thats just the way it is. Sort of like creationism and holocaust-denial do NOT deserve equal time with evolution and history.


MIHOP is technically not disproved by the debunking of the pentagon plane /wtc demo theories you know... there could be some MIHOP scenarios that dont involve this.

I'm not so much interested in debating the justice (MIHOP vs LIHOP vs It was just ALQeada etc.)... as I am in debunking these ridiculous predemo and no pentagon plane theories...
What makes me sick is people blantent lack of understanding of science and engineering, and worse, that people THINK they 'know it all' and can disprove whoardes of experts with their shammy, subjective, and highly selective "evidence".

[seatnineb]

35. How INDIPENDENT is the Expert?

So lets have a look at the leader of these experts with regards to the ASCE Pentagon performance report............

Dr. Mlakar graduated from the U. S. Military Academy at West Point in 1966.
During 1966 to 1973 Dr. Mlakar served as an officer in the Corps of Engineers. This included an Assistant Professorship at the U. S. Military Academy. He also monitored military and civil construction projects for the Omaha District. Other assignments comprised troop command and staff service in Vietnam and the U. S.

Dr. Mlakar also served on the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) team which assessed the structural performance of the Murrah Building in the tragic 1995 terrorist bombing.
In the winter of 1996, Dr. Mlakar also served as the Chief Engineer of a North Atlantic Treaty Organization(NATO) Task Force which rapidly restored a war damaged century old bridge on the main line of communication for Operation Joint Endeavor in Bosnia.

This guy knows his shit......

But he is NEVER GOING TO BITE THE HAND THAT FEEDS HIM

The ASCE report proves that.

[LARED]

36. The ASCE report proves that.

Hah!

You have an interesting notion of proof.

[Endangered Specie]

38. delete

[MrSammo1]

98. So the question is

>>>Each floor weighes on the order of 5 million pounds<<<

Give that the steel below the impact points was capable of handling a load five times what it was lifting, what was the actual pressure applied to the steel when it slipped down 20 feet? did the 5 million pounds apply a pressure of 10 million pounds in this drop? 15 million?

[LARED]

10. I view this a bit differently

The height you should use to calculate free fall is the full height of the towers. No matter where jets impacted, the whole thing, including the top floor had to fall to the ground. This gives something like 10+ seconds for free fall.

I do not believe this presents a problem as all video I have of the towers collapsing gives me something like 11 to 14 seconds as an estimated completed collapse time of either tower. The reason my estimate is so broad is that it is very difficult to determine the end point of the collapse due to the massive amount of dust and debris generated. But one thing is clear; the collapse is not completed in 10+ seconds.

[Endangered Specie]

11. If you use the top height of the towers...

It would be 9.1 seconds... but youd have to factor in the pile of rubble, I think it was 15-20 floors high, so thats 1370 feet-about 150-200 feet (go with 150)... that would be 8.6 seconds.

[LARED]

13. Yes, you're right

9.1 seconds is the correct number.

Because lots of stuff fell into the basement levels I think the rubble pile was about 50 feet high max (if memory serves me correctly).

At any rate if you watch videos of the collapse, they all indicate the the towers fell no where near free fall speeds whether you use 9.1 second or 8.6.

[John Doe II]

61. Air resistance

I'm not a scientist at all. But as far as I remember your calculation assumes that there is a vacuum. So what would be the free fall time with air resistance?

[Endangered Specie]

65. In this case...

the building below would slow the rate of fall, not air resistance... but I was simply trying to point out that the towers did not fall at free-fall rate, or faster than free-fall. The towers took about 30-40% longer to fall than free-fall.

[John Doe II]

66. Free fall

Is it correct that the well-known formula for the calculation of free fall assumes the fall is happening in a vacuum? If I'm correct I'd like to know how long stone that would have fallen from the top of the WTC would have needed to reach the ground. Thanks for helping me out!

[tngledwebb]

82. delete

n/t

[NecessaryOnslaught]

5. Why is it....

that only people shilling the "official" theory can come in here and post ten links, then say "see, this is what really happenned". Why don't you tell us, cut and paste if you have to, what you are trying to say.

[Dancing_Dave]

80. Right on!

This post is the apex of meaningless, cowardly conformism that can't even get itself together in any intelligble form. Bah, humbug!

[Bolo Boffin]

6. Genuine addition

http://wtc.nist.gov

The ongoing NIST study - the interim report is a treasure trove.

[NecessaryOnslaught]

7. Yeah, a treasure trove..

Project Approach
• Due to lack of physical evidence, we rely almost exclusively on:
• Fire insight
• Computer simulations
• Experiments
• Photographic evidence
• Eyewitness accounts

[AZCat]

9. What physical evidence do you think there should have been?

Are you referring to the structural steel? Or do you think there are other pieces of evidence that could be used?

The scrapping of the structural steel has come up several times (that I know of) in this forum, and there seems to be vigorous disagreement. I believe that saving all the steel would have been unhelpful because the state of the steel after the impact/explosion (but before the collapse) is what is of concern when determining the cause of failure of the WTC towers, and that state would have been altered by the collapse of the towers (it would have been deformed and cold-worked). The NIST saved some of the steel so it could check the material properties - this allowed them to make sure there were no errors in the steel batches and also to use the right properties in the simulations, but other than that I don't think there was much they could have done with the steel.

As I stated before, not everyone agrees with me on this.

[demodewd]

27. Hmmm?

No American institution,agency or mainstream publication is going to start with a premise(conclusion) that runs contrary to official government statements.All the above sources assume that the official Arab hijacker scenario is true at the onset of their inquiry. Thus their inquiry is skewered and partial.

Evidence that runs contrary to official statement is not even discussed and analysed. Perhaps some of this apparently contrary evidence could be refuted. But we will never know as that process is essentially forbidden by overidding corporate interests and government secrecy.

It would be interesting to witness an official government agency take up some of these apparent anamolies in a public forum. If they are so sure of their conclusions as being sound and final what would they have to lose? Maybe it is too much of a threat to their desperate clutch on political and economic control as well as mass public programming. Hmmmm??

[Endangered Specie]

30. Thats such a lousy argument...

Maybe contrary stuff (Like CT stuff) is thrown out and rejected because its, say, ridiculous, and not even worthy of consideration.

Creationists claim that, because their theories are thrown out on site by science/school forums, that there is an anti-christian conspiracy at work in science and government... when in fact, its just becaus their theories lack any substance.

Holocaust deniers claim that, becauce their theories are not accepted or allowed by nearly every government/school/magazine or economic or corporate outlet, that the Jews control everything, you know, the Jew conspiracy... when in fact, its just because their theories are pure bullshit.

That, and, from what Ive seen in the archives, CT theories have been debunked already, here and elsewhere.

[demodewd]

31. you big sucker!

I'm talking about possible evidence. Evidence that should be presented to the 9-11 Commission but isn't. It isn't because it possibly runs contrary to their authortarian declarations. You don't declare Osama bin Laden and 19 Arab "hijackers" guilty without a legitimate investigation and a trial. This is not the workings of a democracy. The Administration decides who is on the commission and decides the verdict before the investigation is even conducted. This is the characteristic of a dictatorship.

I haven't read anything you have contributed that intelligently debunks some of the more substantive arguments from those who see big holes in the official line. You just slam them freeper style. You say it's ridiculous. What is ridiculous? Name a situation...name some specifics! But no....you don't do that..you just slam... behaving like some privaleged brat. You don't need to review and discuss possibilities. You can just borishly slam. What? You think that is your privalege?

Oh..I know ...you'll respond by saying they aren't worthy. Maybe you aren't up to the task. Afraid that some of your sophmoric ideas might get squelched? Hey.. if you got good argument then spit it out. Come on, dude, lets hear some of that government is right logic. Come on!!!! Get to it. Put me down. Show me I'm all wet.Come on!!!!!! Show me.

My impression of you is that you have been brainwashed and conditioned to adhere to state authority. You've been conned...that's what I think of you...You'll get suckered again too. That is really my impression of you.

[Endangered Specie]

32. Last I checked...

Osama has basically admitted and took credit for the 9/11 attacks. and the 19 hijackers, well, there voices from tapes of that day, as well as security video, seem to be pretty damning evidence. Osama hasnt had a trial yet, bc he hasnt been caught.

I call it all bullcrap because, from what Ive seen, all of it has already been debunked, numerous times in the archives of this forum... but, if you insist, I am willing to engage in re-debunking. Ive done a little in the past.

Oh, and your impression is flattering, but highly inaccurate ;) My impression of you is you are afflicted with a sincere lack of critical thinking skills, and you are incredibly gullible, and very over-suspicious.

I suppose that because Im a student member of the ASCE, Im a brainswashed youth? oh my :eyes:.

[NecessaryOnslaught]

33. What is your purpose here?

you have yet to say anything of substance, not one single thing. Isn't there a Kirk vs. Picard poll over in the lounge you should be attending to?

[Endangered Specie]

34. My purpose is to annoy the hell out of you

By the way, Picard wins in my book.
:eyes:

[BeFree]

37. You've failed: You are just mildy annoying

"My purpose is to annoy the hell out of you" Sayeth the Endangered Specie.

Really, you should hit the alert button on yourself.

[Endangered Specie]

39. You dont understand sarcasm do you?

*yawn*

[seatnineb]

46. Sarcasm?

Hey Species...............

Dont go runnin no place.........

And see that what was done before:


Could be done again:

[Endangered Specie]

64. Funny not one of the 40,000 occupants noticed explosives

or people installing them :shrug:

[seatnineb]

71. Yeah real funny.........

Yeah!

Just like the F.B I never noticed Ramzi Yousef in 93'!

[WoodrowFan]

81. they were all in on it. (NT)

[tngledwebb]

83. A stopped clock comes to mind,

or Freudian slips.

[seatnineb]

85. You bet!

"Last week the FBI was all over the Trade Center. They were parked in our spot. They knew something was up."
http://www.timesreview.com/nr09-13-01/stories/news3.htm

.....or did your average fire drill at the WTC before 9/11 always involve the FBI?

[Abe Linkman]

87. Labels weren't printed in large enough print, so people couldn't ...

easily read the words: "EXPLOSIVES: For Use Only In Tall Skyscrapers"

[tngledwebb]

84. These photos were taken in two different places!

That's not how pros compare photos, sorry that just won't work round here.
What the pros do is present photos that show absolutely no evidence of a big plane, while averring the same photos actually show clear evidence of big plane. They often go on to back up that story by declaring their special expertise and by referring to official BushCo BS reports. That's they way pros do it.

[seatnineb]

86. Watch it go....

I know Tngledweb.....I know.......

Blink......and you'll miss the plane flying into this building too.......



;)

[Abe Linkman]

88. What the insides of that bldg. looked like after a 757 snaked thru it.

No, really, it's just a "coincidence" that the damage looks exactly like
the damage at the Pentagon...as documented in the ASCE Report...which proves beyond any doubt that a 757 crashed there. And, who are WE to question what those professional engineers say happened? No ASCE, no telling. THAT'S the power of VOODOO. Say WHO do? Say YOU do. Me, too.

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr68c.html

[tngledwebb]

89. This portfolio of photos is worth a thousand links to Drexel U.

Put 'em all together and they spell: controlled demolition.

Until the soi-disant pro/experts explain it all as simple 'venting'...:tinfoilhat:

[vincent_vega_lives]

90. Thats really informative.

But as and demolition expert will tell you gravity does most of the work. The demo guys just give the building a tweak to initiate the release of the stored potential energy.

In controlled demolition it is in the form of explosives that remove structural supports, redistributing loads until the remaining supports can no longer handle their burden.

In the case of the WTC, the aircraft removed some of the supports and fire weakend others until the remaining supports could no longer withstand the loads they were under. Same concept just different initiation process.

[Abe Linkman]

91. Those planes had Voodoo power, I tell ya. The little fires did, too.

n/t

[vincent_vega_lives]

92. What substance!

:eyes:

[MercutioATC]

93. Again, not magic...not Voodoo...it's science, Abe.

[Abe Linkman]

99. Wrong. Science is logical. Can be replicated. Your stuff is VOODOO.

"Magic". Like the Tom Lehrer tune: "Plagarize, plagairze, plagarize - but call it research".

Calling Voodoo "science" doesn't make it so. Except in disinfo talk.

[MercutioATC]

101. What about the damage to the Pentagon is "Voodoo"?

If you have contrary calculations that show that the damage could not have been caused as the ASCE report claims, please post it.

Otherwise, you're just another layperson with an uninformed opinion.

[seatnineb]

94. What you say is true..........but

The load from the damaged interior columns was redistributed to the other interior columns aswell as the outer perimeter walls.

Proof........

The structure held AFTER it was hit by the plane.

Therefore the heat would have to have weakened these outer walls to initiate the collapse.........

But that didn't happen either........

Because these outer walls were cool enough to allow people to hang from them.....



....the fact that these poor people were alive at all proves that the temperatures were nowhere near as high as what Bushco tells us.

[vincent_vega_lives]

95. True but, but...

The load from the damaged interior columns was redistributed to the other interior columns aswell as the outer perimeter walls.

Proof........

The structure held AFTER it was hit by the plane.

Correct, the load was redistributed to the remaining interior and outer perimeter walls. But if you are implying that the fire was not sufficient to weaken the remaining structural steel...well what can I say? Remember the weakening only had to happen on one floor. It may or may not have been were these people were. Do you think people jumped because of smoke irritation? Simulations and fire reconstruction have shown localized temps in excess of 675 degrees C sustained.

http://wtc.nist.gov/

Oh but lets see...the latest definition of "BushCo" is what? One third of the branches of government, FEMA, NIST, the FAA, NORAD, the CIA, FBI, missing anything?

[seatnineb]

96. Fire...hell fire........

Fires that were sustained?..........

Like this fire.............



.....which died down and cooled out so fast that this poor woman showed us how hot it actually was.........not hot enough to kill,incinerate or cremate her.....not even hot enough to burn her(apparently)......



I ain't saying that these fires were not hot.........

I just sayin that they were not hot enough to cremate people.......

[vincent_vega_lives]

97. What can I say

We can go round and round all day about how hot the fires were. In the end the collapse of both the WTC was caused by structural failure.

If you think a plane crashing into the towers and the resulting fires were not enough, which places in contrary to all the people who know about this stuff, then it must be explosives, of which there is absolutely no evidence of, that were placed in advance of the crash, without knowlege, primed and ready to fire (highly sensitive), with wires concealed, in such a manner to bring down three towers, two of which exactly were the aircraft hit them, without being compromised by the crash itself (cut wiring, highly flamable explosives exposed to fire) detonated by radio? Wire? Timer?

But it is too much to belive that the fire was hot enough to weaken the damaged structure? Hats off to ya.

[tngledwebb]

100. Thus, jet fuel and explosive shocks near the top of a skyscraper

and randomly set within an irregular hole, and only one side, as in the WTC plane crashes, will take the building down, straight down, just like the old fashioned way, with squibs and venting and clouds of dust and everything.

Oh, right, 'same concept, different initiation process'- now I get it.

Well, we all wanted snow for the holidays...

[MercutioATC]

102. I think your problem is you're stuck on the "one side" issue.

Yes, the damage to the outer columns was mostly on "one side".

However, the outer columns suported very little of the structure. The inner columns carried most of the weight. In moth WTC crashes, the inner columns were impacted.

[Abe Linkman]

103. I think YOUR problem is your reliance on "fallacious reasoning"...

and it's difficult to know whether or not you do it knowingly and intentionally.

You are trying to refute the evidence that the WTC buildings collapsed due to controlled demolition and that the Official "Cave Men Did It" Conspiracy Theory is true. Saying that "the inner columns were impacted" doesn't prove anything and certainly doesn't refute the evidence of collapses due to controlled demolition.

Since it would be unfair to speculate about whether you really do know what you're doing, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and just recommend that you read the book "Nonsense - How To Overcome It", by Robert J. Gula.

[MercutioATC]

104. Thanks, but I wasn't talking to you.

...and your reply had nothing to do with the issue that was being discussed.

[Abe Linkman]

105. You don't dispute the points I was making, because I'm right about them.

"You are trying to refute the evidence that the WTC buildings collapsed due to controlled demolition and that the Official "Cave Men Did It" Conspiracy Theory is true. Saying that "the inner columns were impacted" doesn't prove anything and certainly doesn't refute the evidence of collapses due to controlled demolition."

[MercutioATC]

106. The issue was the damage to the outer columns.

I stated (correctly) that the majority of the load was borne by the central columns, not the perimeter columns.

If you're going to take issue with my posts, at least try to make your argument germane to the discussion at hand.

[Abe Linkman]

107. The issue is whether or not your claims make any sense. They don't.

You are trying to refute the evidence that the WTC buildings collapsed due to controlled demolition and that the Official "Cave Men Did It" Conspiracy Theory is true. Saying that "the inner columns were impacted" doesn't prove anything and certainly doesn't refute the evidence of collapses due to controlled demolition.

[MercutioATC]

108. Again, that was not what my post said.

If you'll read it again carefully, I'm sure you'll see that I was making a specific comment about perimeter columns and central columns and which bore the majority of the structure's weight.

There was no mention of controlled demolition in my post.

[Abe Linkman]

109. You are avoiding the big problem with your unsupported claims. Why?

As a "professional" ____, you surely realize the implications of having to respond to messages that point out the fallacious logic of trying to prove ANYTHING by merely stating the obvious.


You are trying to refute the evidence that the WTC buildings collapsed due to controlled demolition and that the Official "Cave Men Did It" Conspiracy Theory is true. Saying that "the inner columns were impacted" doesn't prove anything and certainly doesn't refute the evidence of collapses due to controlled demolition.

[MercutioATC]

110. What are you having trouble understanding?

It's not an "unsupported claim" that the central columns bore most of the weight.

The intention of my post was not to solve any "big problem", but to clarify a specific issue.

This is a difficult concept?

[MrSammo1]

55. Glad you noticed

You're never going to get anything but double talk from BushCo's truth ministry.

[John Doe II]

40. Slightly surprised

"Osama has basically admitted and took credit for the 9/11 attacks."
Aha. Source please.
If you check it out you'll see that the first statement of him was a denial. If you're talking about his video messages then I advice you to read Paul Thompson's timeline and see if you can find one video where there are not a lot of doubts about their authencity.

"there voices from tapes of that day".
Excuse me. What's that? Never heard of.

"as well as security video"
If you're talking about the one of Atta and Al-Omari (the only video footage that was released till recently by the way). It was taken in Portland not in Boston where they took Flight 11.

If you're talking about the newly released video footage. I wonder why it took more than two years to release them and why before it was always claimed that the footage of Atta was the only one.
And I don't see how the proof that somebody passed through the security check is the proof that he hijacked the plane later.

All in all you call this
"pretty damning evidence".

Well, I'm slightly surprised. Show me a judge in this world that accept this as evidence.

You reproach others to be "afflicted with a sincere lack of critical thinking skills".
Have a look at your own way of discussing. I'm sorry it lacks everything. It's not substantial, it's not precise.

[Endangered Specie]

52. hmmm....

http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/11/11/wbin11.xml


http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/US/hijacker_surveillance_tape_040721-1.html
As far as voices on planes, several bits were spit out over the airwaves from the cockpit... I recall a couple were "We have some planes" and sometimes they would broadcast messages thinking they were talking on the plane intercom (but were actually broadcasting).


And of course there are the number of cell phone calls from people on the plane.


I suppose they were all faked? :eyes:

I never thought Id see someone stump for UBL, but, I guess you learn something everyday.

You know, im sure Kerry believes Osama and Al-Qeada attacked us on 9/11... who you gonna vote for now?

[John Doe II]

54. Great evidence!

I can only hope that your evidences concerning the WTC are stronger.
Hello!
I thought you talk of something special:
So the fact that there are voices on the recorder is a proof for you that the 19 person presented by the FBI are the hijacker? Really?
And what to the phone calls illuminat concerning the identity of the hijackers I wonder. What does anything ANYTHING you've presented here prove??

After your comparison of CT with Holocaust deniers (which is btw personally insulting!) may I indicate to you that the fact tat one is questioning the official report doesn't necessarily imply that one believes UBL is not guilty. I don't know in which world you live but my world is not black and white. And in my world there is a trial with prosecutor and defendant.
You're talking that some around here lack the skill of critical thinking. I'm sorry your thinking is in no way critical. Have a look what you still present here as evidence and moreover your simplistic attitude.

[DulceDecorum]

41. Endangered Specie says:

Osama has basically admitted and took credit for the 9/11 attacks. and the 19 hijackers, well, there voices from tapes of that day, as well as security video, seem to be pretty damning evidence. Osama hasnt had a trial yet, bc he hasnt been caught.

Endangered Specie is a registered member of the Democratic underground
and perhaps also a victim of the PR machine driven by KKKarl Roverer.
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1006-08.htm
It appears that our traveling companion
believes that Osama made a video where he,
Osama bin Laden,
admitted and took credit for the 9/11 attacks.

Now, as we all know,
from the Rodney King affair,
videotape ain't worth jack.
But let us pretend that it is.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread10480/pg1

The much trumpeted Ben Ladin Video has just been released (13th Dec. mid-night, UK time) after a lot of psychological fanfare and a plethora of pre-meditated and engineered comments to lend credence to it. But after carefully seeing and listening to the video on the CNN for an hour one remains as confused, uninformed and unenlightened. It is like a road from nowhere to nowhere. There are various questions that must be probed before it can even be considered as a ‘candidate for evidence’.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/khurshid_about_usama_video.htm

December 14, 2001
The tape was released by the Bush administration after it weighed concerns over protecting U.S. intelligence sources and methods against the goal of building the public case against bin Laden. Its delay was complicated by the poor audio quality of the tape.
The Bush administration called on four outside, non-government translators to review the tape, to counter possible claims that the White House had doctored it or provided an inaccurate translation.
The tape's release is central to informing people in the outside world who don't believe bin Laden was involved in the September 11 attacks, said Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. "I don't know how they can be in denial after they see this tape," he said.
http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/12/13/ret.bin.laden.videotape/

This article is from Fox,
which,
as all of us here know,
DOES not ever
PUBLISH TOTALLY FAKE CRAP
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1319075,00.html
and is always FAIR(ly right-wing) AND (totally un-)BALANCED
in their reporting.

Thursday, December 13, 2001
This is the transcript (translated into English) of the Usama bin Laden videotape released by the Pentagon on Thursday, December 13, 2001.
Transcript and annotations independently prepared by George Michael, translator, Diplomatic Language Services; and Dr. Kassem M. Wahba, Arabic language program coordinator, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University. They collaborated on their translation and compared it with translations done by the U. S. government for consistency. There were no inconsistencies in the translations.
Due to the quality of the original tape, it is NOT a verbatim transcript of every word spoken during the meeting, but does convey the messages and information flow.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,40750,00.html

NOT VERBATIM.
JUST FAUX.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1648572.stm

First question relates to the quality of the video. It is amateurish, crude, hazy, and on critical points almost inaudible. Why was such a Video made at all and for whose benefit? The suggestion that it was made for recruitment purposes is not even worth considering. The quality and content both belie that suggestion. Dialogues, facial expressions and lip-movements did not synchronize on a number of occasions which suggest some kind of tampering and doctoring – total or partial. The tape has to be examined by experts to establish its worth and authenticity. On the face of it this does not seem to be a genuine piece and serious doubts are being expressed about its authenticity all the world over.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/khurshid_about_usama_video.htm

Prof. Gernot Rotter, professor of Islamic and Arabic Studies at the Asia-Africa Institute at the University of Hamburg sums it up: The American translators who listened to the tapes and transcribed them apparently wrote a lot of things in that they wanted to hear but that cannot be heard on the tape no matter how many times you listen to it.
http://dc.indymedia.org/newswire/display/16801

Mr Bush said it was "preposterous for anybody to think this tape was doctored".
He added: "Those who contend it's a farce or a fake are hoping for the best about an evil man. This is Bin Laden unedited. This is... the Bin Laden who murdered the people. This is a man who sent innocent people to their death."
The foreign secretary, Jack Straw, insisted there was "no doubt it is the real thing".
http://www.rense.com/general18/ez.htm

Endangered Specie,
where,
in Iraq,
are the weapons of mass destruction
that Bush and Straw told us were 45 minutes away from being launched?
Are they also hidden in Osama's armpit?

We all know that they found documents in Kabul indicating that Osama had acquired the knowledge to construct a nukular bomb.
http://www.alternet.org/story/11935
In keeping with the DU rules and the pressing concerns of Homeland Security, I shall only post the last few sentences of the terrible paper.

In next month's column, we will learn how to clone your neighbor's wife in six easy steps. This project promises to be an exciting weekend full of fun and profit. Common kitchen utensils will be all you need. See you next month!
NOTES
1. Plutonium (PU), atomic number 94, is a radioactive metallic element formed by the decay of Neptunium and is similar in chemical structure to Uranium, Saturium, Jupiternium, and Marisum.
PREVIOUS MONTH'S COLUMNS
Let's Make Test Tube Babies! May, 1979
Let's Make a Solar System! June, 1979
Let's Make an Economic Recession! July, 1979
Let's Make an Anti-Gravity Machine! August, 1979
Let's Make Contact with an Alien Race! September, 1979
http://winn.com/bs/atombomb.html

CONTACT WITH AN ALIEN RACE!!

As you can well see,
Osama has fearsome allies and we are fortunate that we have a man of the intellect of Dubya to defend us from this fearsome scourge.
http://www.bushwatch.com/space.htm
The budget is the second time in recent months that the Bush administration has addressed questions about life in space.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/03/tech/main539116.shtml



At the risk of offending some of my fellow DUers, I hereby state that John Kerry has never yet exhibited the courage and the fortitude that GW Bush did, when attacked by a fiendish pretzel.
I am certain that Kerry supporters will argue that their man has YET to find himself in the same predicament, but that fact can be solidly blamed upon his mother who taught him as a child that he should not bite off more than he could chew and also that he should chew BEFORE he swallowed.
Barbara Bush,
did no such thing
because SHE has a beautiful mind,
http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1552
unlike Joyce Marcel,
and those who frequent this place.
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0416-09.htm

But to return to the contents of Osama's armpit.
Everyone with half a brain
knows that it was really SADDAM HUSSEIN
http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Saddam_Hussein
who attacked the US on September 11.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/10/03/cheney_presses_hussein_qaeda_link/

If this is news to you,
then you must have more than half a brain.
Obtain a lobotomy at once.
http://www.bushpresident2004.com/rumsfeld.htm


(He lets Dick do all the thinking.)

SADDAM HUSSEIN is the reason why
we must support the troops who fight to avenge
the four mercenary lemmings
http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/lemmings.htm
who were given their just desserts
by the people of Fallujah.

"George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld
care about the troops
in the same way that Tyson Foods cares about chickens."
Stan Goff, Retired Army Master Sergeant and father of soldier in Iraq
http://www.bushpresident2004.com/troops.htm

The hijackers
WHO ARE STILL ALIVE
must admit
that Osama takes far far better care of his troops
and he NEVER EVER EVER outs his own clandestine operatives.
Or himself.

ISLAMABAD - Saudi billionaire militant Osama bin Laden yesterday denied any involvement in last week's attacks on New York and Washington.
Osama, the man suspected by the United States of orchestrating the worst terrorist atrocity in history, wrote in a statement faxed to the Pakistan-based Afghan Islamic Press (AIP) news agency: 'The US is pointing the finger at mem but I categorically state that I have not done this.
'Those who have done it, they have done it in their personal interest.'
AIP, a private news agency with close contacts with the Taleban, said the statement had been sent to it by Osama's aide Abdul Samad.
It was the first time that Osama had issued a personal denial of any involvement in the attacks.
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/mnt/html/webspecial/WTC/wtcnews173.html

An interview with Osama bin Laden was published in a Karachi-based Pakistani daily newspaper, Ummat, on September 28, 2001. In this interview, bin Laden explicitly denies involvement in the September 11 attacks in the US:
"I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle.
http://911review.org/Wiki/BinLaden.shtml

[Endangered Specie]

53. ...

I never thought I would see someone try and proclaim Osama innocent, but, I guess stranger shit has happened.


Speaking of John Kerry, I imagine he thinks just as much as I do that Osama and Al-Qeada are the guilty parties.

Why the hell are you asking me about WMD in Iraq? and Rodney King?

Your post doesnt make much sense, it looks like you threw it all together. Try posting again with information relevent to the subject and make it a little coherent.

[vincent_vega_lives]

68. Don't mind him/her

Thats a pretty standard post from DD. I don't pretend to understand.
:shrug:

[seatnineb]

43. Hijacker on security video.?

Species..............

See if you can do better than Merc,Bolo,rh and LARED.........

And tell me how Hani mutated from this:


To this:

[John Doe II]

44. I've a guess

He stuffed himself with with hundreds of Super Size menues and asked for an implentation of hair on his front in order to make a good impression as the Wonder Pilot of Flight 77....:beer: :-)

[seatnineb]

48. Hani's been a naughty boy....

John Doe II.......

Are you actually suggesting that our Hani disobeyed the eloquent Abdulaziz Alomari's recommendations for all the hijackers....

"You must believe in the destiny of death,remove extra body hair and apply perfume"
Manual Of A Raid.
Abdulaziz Alomari.
American Airlines Flight 11 Hijacker.

;-)

Please note that this manual was discovered in the luggage which all too conveniently did not make the transfer from the Phantom Colgan 5390 at Logan to American Airlines Flight 11......and was subsequently discovered by the reputable Boston F.B.I.....

[John Doe II]

49. A good one!

:headbang:

Well, I thought of disccusing the watertight proof: the non-existent DNA anlysis of the hijackers of Flight 93 and 77 or more precisely "identified by exclusion". I love that formula!

[RH]

62. DNA of the hijackers of Flight 93 and 77 was analysed

It failed to match with samples of DNA supplied by relatives.

Without knowing in advance which samples belonged to hijackers and which samples belonged to anybody else how do think it would be possible to exclude the hijackers?

:shrug:

Do have a formula to explain that?

[John Doe II]

63. FBI had samples of John Does

Here a few words concerning the identification by exclusion:


"What some experts have called
'the most comprehensive forensic investigation in U.S. history' ended Nov. 16 with
the identification of 184 of the 189 who died in the terrorist attack on the Pentagon."
(c)

"The AFIP <...> provided positive DNA identifications on all 40 Pennsylvania victims,
and developed genetic profiles of the terrorists
that could not be matched to any of the other victims."



"The remains of the five hijackers have been identified
through a process of exclusion,
as they did not match DNA samples contributed by family members of all 183 victims who died at the site."



"Investigators segregated remains which yielded DNA samples
that did not match DNA profiles of the 40 passengers and crew. Those,
by process of elimination, are the hijackers, and their remains are being grouped by common DNA.
The air pirates have been identified as Ziad Jarrah, Ahmed Al Haznawi, Saeed Al Ghamdi and Ahmed Al Nami -
but not so positively identified
that officials will list the names in official records.
'The death certificates will list each as
'John Doe,''
Miller said."



BUT THE FBI HAD DNA SAMPLES.
HERE YOU GO:


In Atta's rental car
"an FBI forensic team had collected fingerprints, hair and food samples, fibers and a tissue."
(Portland Press Herald, 14.10.01)

"About a dozen agents were seen carrying garbage bags out of the residence where Saeed Alghamdi was believed to have lived."
(CNN, 17.09.01)

Ziad Jarrah and Ahmed Alhaznawi's apartment, Marwan Alshehhi's rental car, Nawaf Alhazmi's cars and Marwan Alshehhi's hotel room were searched as well.
(Miami Herald, 15.09.01) (Syndey Morning Herald, 15.09.01) (Arizona Daily Star, 28.09.01) (Ashcroft, press conference, 28.09.01) (FBI, Letter of hijacker) (Department of State, 28.09.01]
Even "cigarette found near the car will be tested for DNA, the aide said."
(Los Angeles Times, 13.09.01)

The family of Ziad Jarrah declared: "We are ready to cooperate with the authorities. "
(Independent, 16.09.01)


BUT NONETHELESS:

“Genetic profiles of five people from the Pentagon crash scene and
four from the scene in Somerset County, Pennsylvania,
that did not match any of the passengers' profiles
have been handed over to the FBI, said a spokesman for the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology.
The FBI has not given the institute any DNA to match up in those crashes, said the spokesman. ”
(CNN, 2/27/03)


So I believe there would have been a chance to positively identitf them or at least some of them. Btw no where I found that samples supplied by relayives didn't match. Can you update me on this please?

Another question: Have fingerprints been obligatory before 2001 in order to get a visa?

[demodewd]

45. head replacement

He had his head replaced. It is a rather simple procedure these days for those who can afford it.

[seatnineb]

47. Samples for the Pathologists.....

Dewd.........

Probably means that the Insitute Of Pathologists probably have DNA from both the body...and the newly replaced head!

;-)

[tngledwebb]

42. But you accept the Official Conspiracy Theory

without exception? And, as you have drawn analogies between holocaust deniers, creationists and those that swallow CT stuff, like you yourself, are you one of those others also? If so, you probably shouldn't be hanging around DU.

[Endangered Specie]

50. Official conspiracy theory?

No, I think calling the "official" record a conspiracy theory is a little (read: far) off ;) The official record has REAL evidence... as confirmed by numerous pictures, eyewitnesses, engineers and scientists.

You might say I follow it blindly... no, I have genuinly examined what has been presented on this forum, I musta watched that Pentagon video 5 times. To put it very mildy, Im not impressed.

I've thought about bringing up your arguments in class or with a professor; one of these days I might do it... (but, I really dont want to wreck my credibility-Id have to make it clear I am playing devil's advocate), I mean I can picture my Engineering professors laughing their butts off over this.

[John Doe II]

51. Did you avoid something?

Did you avoid to comment what has been said on your "pretty damning evidence"? (point 32)?

[NecessaryOnslaught]

56. For the academiaphite in you..

Van D. Romero, Ph.D.
Education

* Ph.D., Physics, State University of New York, 1991
* M.S., Physics, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, 1979
* B.S., Physics, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, 1977

Previous Experience

1995-1997: Director, Energetic Materials Research & Testing Center, New Mexico Tech.
Direct and manage a multi-disciplinary team of scientists, engineers, and staff involved in RDT&E programs in energetic materials. EMRTC provides a working laboratory for conducting research in support of both government and commercial programs in the areas of ordnance, explosives, propellants and other energetic materials. Facilities include over 30 separate test sites, gun ranges and research labs located within a 32 square mile field laboratory. Developed and implemented counter-terrorist program that benefits research and academic programs.

Current Funded Research Activities

* Experimental verification of the alpha-omega effect for galaxy formation with Los Alamos National Laboratories.
* Develop groundwater activation model that can be used to optimize the design for acceleration production of tritium with DOE.
* Seismic source investigation, modeling and characterization of currently deployed explosive sources, design and computational testing of improved explosive sources, experimental verification and validation of improved sources - Western Geophysical (students - recruiting, post-doc and graduate in Geophysics).
* Resusable blast test fixture, investigate explosive impact on wide-body aircraft with FAA.

Courses Taught

* Graduate and undergraduate courses in Solid State Physics and Particle Physics for the Physics Department
* Course in Explosives Surety for the Chemical Engineering Department

Patents Held

* Procedure to study Bubble Evolution by correcting scattered LASER light and dynamic pressure signals


Professional Memberships

* American Physical Society
* Sigma XI
* Health Physics Society


Conference Publications (1997)

* Romero, V., P. E. Williams, D. Collis, S. Welch. "Blast Research, Development, Test and Evaluation," 2nd Asia Pacific Conference on Shock Impact Loads on Structures: Melbourne, Australia; November 25-27.
* Romero, V. and Williams, P. E "Blast Waves from Non-Ideal Explosives," Conference of the American Physics Society Topical Group on Shock Compression of Condensed Matter; Amherst, MS; July 28-August 1.
* Ferrel, R. and Romero, V. "Simulation of High Density Hydrogen Compression," Conference of the American Physical Society Topical Group on Shock Compression of Condensed Matter; Amherst, MS; July 28-August 1.
* Romero, V. Invited Presentation: "Terrorist Bombs: The Characteristic of 'Non-ideal' Explosives." American Society of Civil Engineers, Architectural Engineering Division; Mitigation of the Effects of Terrorist Violence: A Research Planning Conference; March 13-14; Newark, NJ.


Journal Publications

* "Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory Groundwater Model," Journal of Health Physics, November, 1997, Volume 73, No. 5 (Jeffrey S. Bull, Van D. Romero, Samuel I. Baker, Geoffrey B. Stapleton, David L. Goss, and Larry V. Coulson).
* "Blast Waves from Non-Ideal Explosives," in Specialty Symposium on Structures Response to Impact and Blast, Tel Aviv, Israel, October 1996 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "SPH Calculations of Impact Fracture in Steel Cubes," In 16th International Symposium on Ballistics, September 1996 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Environmental Radiation Monitoring Station," Health Physics Society Annual Meeting, June 1994 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Radiological Survey of Surface and Tunnel Areas at the Superconducting Super Collider," Health Physics Society Annual Meeting, June 1994 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Overview of Radiation Protection at the Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory," 8th International Conference on Radiation Shielding, Apr 1994 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Search for Exclusive b ? u Semileptonic Decays of B Mesons," Physical Review Letters, vol. 70, #18, 2681, 3 May 1993 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Measurement of the ?-lepton mass," Physical Review D Rapid Communications, vol 47, #9, R3671, 1 May 1993 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Production and decay of the Dsl (2536)+," Physics Letters B 303 (1993) 377-384, 15 Apr 1993 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Tau Decays with One Charge Particle Plus Multiple ?0's," Physical Review Letters, vol 70, #9, 1207, 1 Mar 1993 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Lepton asymmetry measurements in B??D* l- ?l and implications for V - A and the form factors," Physical Review D, vol 47, #3, 791, 1 Feb 1993 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Search for ?-? ??- : A Test of Lepton Number Conversation," Physical Review Letters, vol 70, #2, 138, 11 Jan 1993 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Measurement of ? Decays Involving ? Mesons,?" Physical Review Letters, vol 69, #23, 3278, 7 Dec 1992.
* "Exclusive ?(2P) production in Y(3S) decay," Physics Letters B 294 (1992) 139-144, 5 Nov 1992 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Isospin Mass Splittings from Precision Measurements of D*-D Mass Differences," Physical Review Letters, vol 69, #14, 2046, 5 Oct 1992 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "A measurement of the tau lepton lifetime," Physics Letters B 291 (1992) 488-495, 1 Oct 1992 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Two-body decay to ??+, ??+, ???+, and ??+," Physical Review D, vol 45, #11, 3976, 1 Jun 1992 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Electronic branching ratio of the ? lepton," Physical Review D, vol 45, #11, 3976, 1 June 1992 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Measurements of semileptonic branching fractions of B mesons at the Y(4S) resonance," Physical Review D, vol 45, #7, 2212, 1 Apr 1992 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Ds+ Decays to ??+, ???+, and ??+," Physical Review Letters, vol 68, #9, 1279, 2 Mar 1992 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Measurements of baryon production in B-meson decays," Physical Review D, vol 45, #3, 752, 1 Feb 1992 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Inclusive and exclusive decays of B mesons to final states including charm and charmonium mesons," Physical Review D, vol 45, #1, 21, 1 Jan 1992 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Scattered LASER Light Techniques for Investigating Subcooled Voids," ASME FED-Vol. 125, Dec 1991.
* "Measurement of the ratio B(D0-->K*?e+?e)/B(D0-->K?e+?e)." Physical Review D, vol 44, #11, 3394, 1 Dec 1991 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Unusual decay modes of D0 and D+ mesons," Physical Review D, vol 44, #11, 3383, 1 Dec 1991 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Measurement of the Inclusive B* Cross Section above the Y(4S)," Physical Review Letters, vol 67, #13, 1692, 23 Sep 1991 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Inclusive ?(2P) Production in Y(3S) Decay," Physical Review Letters, vol 67, #13, 1696, 23 Sep 1991 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Study of continuum D*+ spin alignment," Physical Review D, vol 44, #3, 593, 1 Aug 1991 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Study of D0 decays into final states with a ?0 or ?," Physical Review D, vol 43, #9, 2836, 1 May 1991 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Exclusive and Inclusive Semileptonic decays of B mesons to D mesons," Physical Review D, vol 43, #3, 651, 1 Feb 1991 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Measurements of the ?+c Decay-Assymetry Parameter," Physical Review Letters, vol 65, #23, 2842, 3 Dec 1990 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "Study of K* Production in tau decay," Physics Letters B, vol 251, #1, 223, 8 Nov 1990 (CLEO Collaboration).
* "222Rn and Atmospheric Electric Parameters in Carlsbad Caverns," Journal of Geophysical Research, vol 86, #C10, 9911, 20 Oct 1981 (Marvin Wilkening and Van R. Romero).

http://www.nmt.edu/~red/van.html

[NecessaryOnslaught]

57. And Dr. Romero says...

ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL' ~ "'EXPLOSIVES PLANTED IN TOWERS,'
NEW MEXICO TECH EXPERT SAYS."
By Olivier Uyttebrouck Journal Staff Writer

Televised images of the attacks on the World Trade Center suggest that explosives devices caused the collapse of both towers, a New Mexico Tech explosion expert said Tuesday. The collapse of the buildings appears "too methodical" to be a chance result of airplanes colliding with the structures, said Van Romero, vice president for research at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology.

"My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse," Romero said.

Romero is a former director of the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center at Tech, which studies explosive materials and the effects of explosions on buildings, aircraft and other structures.
Romero said the collapse of the structures resembled those of controlled implosions used to demolish old structures. "It would be difficult for something from the plane to trigger an event like that," Romero said in a phone interview from Washington, D.C.
______________________________________________________________

From the original article* published in the Albuquerque Journal on 9/11/01.

http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup//experts/

[AZCat]

58. For the record...

Dr. Romero has retracted his statement, saying (according to your link):
"I'm very upset about that," he said. "I'm not trying to say anything did or didn't happen."

Make of those comments what you will, but he did retract and to not disclose that is disingenuous.

[NecessaryOnslaught]

59. And his reward was several appointments in the Bush administration.

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Senator Pete Domenici today reported that Van Romero of Socorro has been appointed by President Bush to serve on a White House commission aimed at closing the educational achievement gap for Hispanic American youth.
Domenici confirmed that Romero, vice president for Research and Economic Development at New Mexico Tech, has been selected to serve on the President’s Advisory Commission on Education Excellence for Hispanic Americans. Bush created the commission by executive order on Oct. 12, 2001. http://infohost.nmt.edu/mainpage/news/2002/4june02.html=

US buying town to train for terrorism response

"Though now practically deserted, it "has all the characteristics of a contemporary American community: the churches, the bank, the health clinic, even the baseball diamonds," said Van Romero, vice president for research at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology."

"New Mexico Tech has trained 90,000 emergency workers since the bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building in 1995, and is currently receiving 20 million dollars in grants from the Homeland Security Department for anti-terrorism programs, the report said."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040926/ts_alt_afp/us_attacks_town_040926230151&e=1&ncid=

Another shill for the platitude of the "additive effect" theories , and since debunked pancakes theories, who works for Reichsmarshall Ridge.

"Thomas Eagar is Thomas Lord Professor of Materials Engineering and Engineering Systems at MIT. He was recently nominated to serve on a National Research Council committee on homeland security."

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse2.html

Van Romero is right on. This is a man who has no doubt witnessed thousands of hands on experiments with numerous types of explosives, on numerous types of structures. Rest assured that he damn well knows the effects of explosives on steel, concrete and glass structures. When Romero witnessed the slurry of concrete being ejected at high velocity from the structures at the very beginning of the collapse, when he saw the degree of powderization of the concrete as is was ejected in a symmetrical wave down the four faces of the building, sending heavy steel debris hundreds of yards laterally from the building, he knew damn well what he was seeing.

[AZCat]

60. That is conjecture

Is it possible that your theory is true? Sure. But we don't know that.

However, we do know that Romero DID retract his statement made on September 11th, for whatever reason. If you're going to use his original statement as part of the narrative, please include all the relevant details (I think his appointment stuff is relevant also).

[tngledwebb]

67. Isn't ANYTHING unexplainable to the OCT adherents?

What a strange mindset to have near total trust in almost all aspects of the official story of 9/11, unless...

Well, asking yet again- OCT supporters, which part of the Official 9/11 Story still troubles your sleep? If you are happy with it as it stands in the MSM and with Officialdom, why not go help the vote re-count, why bother with 9/11 skeptic issues at all?

[AZCat]

70. Are you sure you meant to reply to me?

Because your post doesn't seem to have anything to do with the subject of mine. Instead, it repeats the same refrain heard over and over again: anyone who doesn't buy the claims of the alternate theory proponents is a tool of the administration. Do you have anything else to say, or has it come down to a shouting match?

[tngledwebb]

72. Yes, you and the chronic credulity of all other OCT adherents.

Any doubts about the official story? Any lingering questions?

Not sure you were labelled a tool of the illegal regime, or how you heard anyone shouting, but apologies if it seemed so.

[AZCat]

73. That's okay

I get frustrated sometimes with the dialogue around here, but I probably should just keep my mouth shut. I don't think it will change just because some anonymous poster wants it so.

My doubts about the official story are many, but my problem here is that it is too easy to post parts of an article that support claims being made while leaving out other parts. Dr. Romero had made statements about the collapse of the WTC towers, but he subsequently retracted them. I find it curious that because I pointed that out and then called the claim that Dr. Romero had been "rewarded" for retracting his statement conjecture, I am labelled as an OTC adherent with "near total trust in almost all aspects of the official story of 9/11". What part of telling the truth about something has become taboo?

[tngledwebb]

74. But your doubts about the official story are....?

A few, any, none?

[AZCat]

75. So you want me to list them?

Why should I? What am I to you, besides an anonymous poster on a message board? What will me telling you what I believe change anything in any way? Can't you just respect the idea that maybe I just want the truth?

[tngledwebb]

76. I am a fellow Du'er, I am not asking you to prove anything

or change anyone's mind about anything. Just one or two unresolved 9/11 issues on your list would be appreciated.

[AZCat]

77. Sure

I am reluctant to trust anything touched by the BFEE. I am reluctant to trust anything associated with the Army Corps of Engineers. I am reluctant to trust anything said by the major news corporations. I am reluctant to trust anything released by any of the airlines involved in the events of September 11th.

But this does not mean that I automatically reject what they say either. I think it is important to get corroboration for any evidence. I confess I have a bias against theories that involve lots of seemingly difficult to pull off acts, but I think it is arrogant to rule anything out right now.

So what do I believe? I believe that Bush and his cohorts had a hand in the atrocities committed. I don't know if Osama was in their pay or if there was some sort of mutual benefit that produced the collaboration. I think that if the planes that crashed into the WTC towers and the Pentagon were not what the official story states, then they were not modified with pods or sprayers. It would be far easier to put all the extra "stuff" inside of the planes than on the outside, and it wouldn't be visible to eyewitnesses. Of course, that means you have to dispose of the planes and the bodies, and that seems a bit complicated. Why not just convince Osama (either with cash or a bit of a push from other means) to get some of his men to hijack planes and then crash them? Far easier, and less evidence that leads back to the BFEE. And whatever I think about the BFEE, they're not stupid.

Regardless, there doesn't seem to be any conclusive evidence either way. I know there are those here who disagree with me and may think me an idiot for not seeing the obvious, but I prefer to move slowly to believe something and be more sure that I am right than jump to conclusions that might be wrong.


Does this answer your question? Any followups?

[tngledwebb]

78. Thank you. You may not need to hear it but you have gained my respect.

n/t

[AZCat]

79. Thank you also.

I may not need to, but it is still nice to hear it.

[vincent_vega_lives]

69. You forgot NIST

This has some good stuff.

http://wtc.nist.gov/