Evidence of Explosives in the World Trade Center Metal

[spooked911]

http://home.pacbell.net/skeptica/9-11bulletpoints.html

Explosive Evidence. The FEMA report titled World Trade Center Building Performance Study, Appendix C (Available at http://www.fema.gov/library/wtcstudy.shtm) “Limited Metallurgical Examination”, shows evidence of explosives used, by way of photographs, microscopic, and chemical examination. They do not draw this conclusion though. Instead, the authors write (in these selected sentences):  “Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure.”... “The thinning of the steel occurred by high temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation.”...“The unusual thinning of the member is most likely due to an attack of the steel by grain boundary penetration of sulfur forming sulfides that contain both iron and copper.”...“A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel.”... “The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure. A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing steel structures exposed to severe and long-burning fires.”

I would like to note that when faced with a mystery, the proper thing to do is to experiment. An experiment could be done to test if high explosives or a “long-burning fire” could reproduce the observed corrosive destruction of the steel. A real investigation, as opposed to a whitewash investigation, would do this. Actually, if you think about it, a long-burning fire might be able to soften the steel but it wouldn’t be able to inject the chemical ingredients of explosives into the steel, as the examination shows. (See Information Box below.)

Where were samples 1 and 2 found within the wreckage? This is important. This doesn't appear to be discussed in the report. Why not?  If the samples were found near the top of the pile that would mean, most likely, that they came from the top portion of the building. This is important because there would be no “long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings” of the above-mentioned samples. If the location isn’t mentioned in the report (I scanned the sections that this information should be in to no avail) this can be taken as a good sign of a cover-up (ineptness is another possibility). Also, what was the condition of the rest of the beam that the sample was cut from? If the sample came from a beam that was deeply buried and underwent “long-term heating”, shouldn’t the damaged area that the sample came from be quite large, in as much, as it would necessarily be a large mass of material that would be able to retain high heat for a long time period? (This is basic physics any engineer worth his salt should understand.)

It is clear to me that this FEMA report isn't an impartial investigation that is after the truth. Also striking is how often it is mentioned throughout the report of the need for further investigations. The FEMA report is nothing but a preliminary report that no insurance company, victims family, or other interested party should be content with.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information Box

 
<"Any of the following metals or metallic oxides, namely, lead, oxide of lead, oxide of iron, potash, baryta, lime, soda, oxide of zinc, oxide of copper and any compound of such metal or oxide (other than a metallic sulphate), any chlorate, nitrate, or other oxidising agent, or any other substance declared by the Governor-General-in-Council to be capable of forming with Di-nitro-phenol a dangerous compound." [br /> --This is from the Indian DEPARTMENT OF EXPLOSIVES at http://dipp.nic.in/explosive/explmain.htm]

Sulfur
"The most popular vaporizing agent due to the fact it lowers ignition temperature for most pyrotechnic mixtures."
 --From the web page: Pyrotechnic Chemicals at http://members.aol.com/PyRoKiNg29/pyrochem99.html

Sulfidation
"The reaction of a metal or alloy with a sulfur-containing species to produce a sulfur compound that forms on or beneath the surface on the metal or alloy."  Definition provided by The Hendrix Group, Materials and Corrosion Engineers at http://www.hghouston.com/popup/sulfidation.html

Oxidation
"Can be defined in several different ways. The simplest and most rigorous of these is 'the loss of electrons from an atom, compound or molecule.' In general use, the term is generally applied to a chemical reaction of a substance with oxygen (O2) or an oxygen-containing material which adds oxygen atom(s) to the compound being oxidized."
--Source:  The MSDS Hyper Glossary at www.ilpi.com/msds/ref/oxidation.html

Eutectic
1) An isothermal reversible reaction in which a liquid solution decomposes, on cooling, into two or more intimately mixed solids. The number of solids formed are the same number of components in the system.
2) An alloy having the chemical composition indicated by the eutectic point on a equilibrium diagram.
--Definition provide by Steel Founders' Society Of America. (http://www.sfsa.org/sfsa/glossary/deftrmee.html)

Eutectic Reaction
An isothermal, reversible reaction between two (or more) solid phases during the heating of a system, as a result of which a single liquid phase is produced.
--1994, 66 , 582 IUPAC Compendium of Chemical Terminology 2nd Edition (1997)

This bit from the same page is also interesting:
Highly sensitive garbage? It appears that FEMA was determined to keep a tight reign on who would be allowed to do a serious investigation of the cause of the collapse. Through the companies hired, they also made sure complete control was had over the hauled-away debris to the point of installing GPS locator devices into each truck at a cost of $1,000 each. This was done ostensibly for efficiency reasons. Yet in an article about the access control and security systems used, the author reports: “Ninety-nine percent of the drivers were extremely driven to do their jobs. But there were big concerns, because the loads consisted of highly sensitive material. One driver, for example, took an extended lunch break of an hour and a half. There was nothing criminal about that, but he was dismissed.” What is so "highly sensitive" about bent-up steel? You would naturally think nothing if the governments story about why the buildings collapsed is to be believed. But if explosive charges were placed in strategic locations throughout the buildings, then indeed, some of the cargo would be "highly sensitive material."

See: http://securitysolutions.com/ar/security_gps_job_massive

[dbeach]

1. FEMA is another propaganda piece

in the pie of 9/11 lies...

'distracto man"... the unofficial distractions that the lie boys send us ...FEMA is part of the problem ..check out Mt. Wheather for some
info about the Femites

http://www.freedomsite.net/fema%20-%20the%20u_s_%20shadow%20government.htm

[spooked911]

3. That's interesting about Mt. Weather --thanks!

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

16. One must remember that FEMA was started as a black op group

and even had Oliver North as part of their alumni.......

[ROH]

2. Very interesting!

Thank you for this information.

[dbeach]

4. WTC was unsafe from original design???

I read this lastb yr and thougt it 9/11 among many things that it was or was not may indeed have ben an ole fahioned insurance scam.

Amazing that lucky Marvin Bush cancelled his insurance contracts on WTC and Dulles International IN SUMMER OF 2000..WHAT LUCK!

http://cryptome.org/wtc-failure.htm

"What is now happening in New York City, State, with help of the federal government, a stupefying cover-up of culpability for the unsafe condition of the WTC towers which was well known in the design professions and among municipal, state and national officials. And WTC was hardly the only unsafe building in the United States, not only high-rises but the full range of building types. "

CREATE THE CRISIS
OFFER THE SOLUTION

GRAB THE DOUGH AND GO!

[LARED]

5. While these are unusual events

and should be investigated further it is hardly evidence that explosives were used.

This types of corrosion failures are fairly common in the petro-chemical industry. Typically around steam and cracking equipment. I have seen at least 3 or 4 failure of this nature in my career. Not the specific mechanism mentioned in the report but similar in nature. In fact I looked at a specimen this morning that is a likely suspect of this type of corrosion. I'll be sending it off to a metallurgist this week.

The key is this statement sulfur forming sulfides that contain both iron and copper. Sulfides are found in many many common compounds. Because sulfur is found in explosive compounds is hardly evidence of explosive.

Again this is interesting but not a smoking gun by any measure.

[demodewd]

6. re: smoking guns

What are some of your most prominent smoking guns to substantiate your position?

[LARED]

7. Care to clarity what you are asking

What positions are you asking me about?

[demodewd]

8. clarification

What smoking guns in the World Trade Center collapses leads you to believe FEMA's and NIST's interpretation of events?

[LARED]

10. What purpose would that serve?

You believe both FEMA and the NIST are government stooges.

[demodewd]

12. your own deductions

Tell me what smoking gun evidence you have from your own deductions or any other source that leads you to basically believe the government's version of events.

[LARED]

18. No smoking gun, just well done analysis.

Spend a few hours going through this work. Very impressive and they're not done yet

http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/progress_report_june04.htm

NIST has received all of the essential information it needs for the WTC investigation. That
information includes NYC 9-1-1 tapes, the transcripts of approximately 500 interviews of employees of
the FDNY who were involved in WTC emergency response activities, and supporting documents for
McKinsey & Company’s FDNY study.
Chapter 2
44
The following is the list of documentary information received or inspected by NIST.
December 2002
• The original design drawings (structural, architectural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing) and
the original fabrication and construction drawings for the WTC towers
• Tenant alteration application reports, including drawings and specifications, for the WTC
towers and WTC 7, and associated construction audit reports
• Tenant design standards manuals for structural; architectural; heating, ventilating, and airconditioning
(HVAC); fire protection; plumbing; electrical; fire alarm; and construction
review
• Emergency evacuation procedures manuals, including fire safety guide
• Operations manuals for the fire protection system, including sprinklers, standpipes, alarm
system and communication protocols, and water and power supply
• Operations manuals for the HVAC systems
• Reports on facility condition surveys and structural integrity inspections for the WTC towers
and WTC 7
• Recent inspection and maintenance reports for the elevators and escalators in the WTC
towers; elevator numbering system
• Reports on pre-design tests of structural components, including dampers for the WTC towers
• Reports on wind tunnel tests of the WTC towers and wind speed measurements near the
WTC site
• Reports on the 1993 bombing damage assessment and repairs, and documentation of changes
made to the evacuation system after 1993
• Documents related to the location, approval, and inspection of fuel tanks in WTC 7
• Documents related to fire rating and fireproofing of structural steel members in the WTC
towers
• Documents related to PANYNJ building and fire code requirements and practices
• Correspondence sent to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration regarding the
evacuation experience of WTC occupants on September 11, 2001
• Documents related to the lease of the WTC towers by Silverstein Properties
• Reports prepared by McKinsey & Company for FDNY and NYPD
Progress on the World Trade Center Investigation
45
• Basic FDNY dispatch data, including time of dispatch and unit identification
• Firefighter fatality and injury data from FDNY
May 2003
• More than 1,000 hours of recordings made by PANYNJ on September 11, 2001 (from 0705
through 1900 hours) of telephone calls, as well as police, fire, operations, maintenance,
security, and other radio transmissions from four distinct locations
• Personal injury data from FDNY and Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Police
Department (PAPD)
• Handwritten notes on the events of September 11, 2001, by PAPD staff
• Emergency responder fatality data for FDNY, NYPD, and PAPD
• WTC list of tenants with contact information from PANYNJ and Silverstein
• WTC list of occupants issued security badges by PANYNJ
• Report on WTC smoke management system by Hughes Associates, Inc.
• Phase I and final reports on fire engineering of WTC steelwork by Buro Happold
• Transcripts of depositions by two PANYNJ staff in the WTC insurance litigation
• Documents, videos, and photographs related to the fireproofing of the WTC tower structures
• WTC floor plan for the fire alarm system and drawings of WTC subgrade plumbing and city
water main
• Information regarding building contents such as partitions and furnishings from a key WTC
tower tenant, to characterize the types of combustibles and estimates of the mass loading in
the region of the fires
• FDNY WTC incident summary, September 20, 2001
• FDNY reports on the fire history of WTC 1, 2, and 7 from 1970 to 2001
• FDNY reports related to inspections of WTC 1, 2, and 7 from 1999 to 2001
• FDNY policies and practices on operations specific to the WTC buildings and on
accountability of firefighters at incidents
• FDNY information on dispatched units, apparatus, command posts, and staging areas
• FDNY information on number of command and company officers and firefighters operating
in and around WTC 1, 2, and 7 with number of surviving personnel
Chapter 2
46
• Detailed briefing on the NYPD communications system, including 9-1-1 system and radio
networks
August 2003
• Design and structural calculations from Leslie E. Robertson Associates (LERA) for the WTC
towers, including TV antenna, beams, and beam girders, as well as wind analysis and
calculations
• Correspondence from LERA during the time of construction
• Laclede floor truss shop drawings (1,364 sheets) and other documents on steel and joints
• Information on steel from Nippon
• List of WTC drawings in possession of Yamasaki and Associates
• Information on the flammable contents of the American Airlines B-767 aircraft
• Information regarding building contents and floor layouts from some WTC tower and
WTC 7 tenants
• Mechanical and electrical specifications for WTC 7
• Asbestos litigation documents from PANYNJ
• Underwriters’ Laboratories, Inc. (UL) test reports regarding spray-on fireproofing from
supplier (Isolatek)
• Correspondence on the selection of WR Grace fireproofing products, test data, and UL design
listings (WR Grace)
• Data on the WTC internal radio system and FDNY radio repeater from PANYNJ
• Some FDNY training practices for operations in high-rise buildings
• Global positioning system coordinates and map where human remains and equipment were
located from FDNY
• Information on FDNY personnel killed on September 11, 2001, and map of fire and
Emergency Management Services Command Post Locations
• NYPD internal communications concerning the terrorist attacks on WTC (43 cassette tapes)
• Disaster Response Plan, Patrol Guide Procedures, and other guides and manuals from NYPD,
including the Unusual Occurrence Report on the 1993 WTC bombing
• A large portion of NYPD and FDNY extensive photographic and videographic collection
Progress on the World Trade Center Investigation
47
• Updated badge list of WTC occupants maintained by PANYNJ
• WTC fire safety and PA/FDNY WTC training videos and pre-September 11, 2001
WTC photographs
September 2003
• Information on the flammable contents of the United Airlines B-767 aircraft
• Documents from PANYNJ on accessibility for disabled persons, active fire protection
systems, and adoption of revisions to NYC Building Code
• Elevator and escalator contract information from PANYNJ
• Status of changes to WTC towers (March 1973) from PANYNJ
• Transcripts from September 11 PAPD audiotapes, police reports, and PAPD special awards
ceremony documents for September 11, 2001
• Additional documents from PANYNJ on asbestos litigation
October 2003
• Supporting documents for McKinsey & Company’s FDNY and NYPD studies
• Review of UL test reports regarding spray-on fireproofing from supplier (W.R. Grace)
• Information from Boeing on flammable contents of aircraft that contributed to fires
May 2004
• Review of NYC 9-1-1 tapes and logs, transcripts of about 500 first responder interviews with
employees of the FDNY who were involved in WTC emergency response activities
• General description of WTC building systems and capital program
• WTC documents presented as exhibits in asbestos litigation
• Additional documents on WTC maintenance services, accessibility, elevators, code
compliance, fire rating, fire detection system, fire alarm system, etc.
• Photographs of WTC 7 construction project
• Architectural and HVAC drawings for WTC 7, including modifications
• Well in excess of 6,000 photographs representing more than 185 professional and amateur
photographers. Organizations that have provided materials include FDNY, NYPD,
Associated Press, Corbis, Reuters, The New York Times, The New York Daily News, and the
Chapter 2
48
Star Ledger. Many organizations have provided both published and unpublished
photographs.
• In excess of 150 hours of videotapes from news media (NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, and local
New York stations WABC, WCBS, WNBC, WPIX, WNYW, and New York One), FDNY,
NYPD, and more than 20 individuals. In many cases, the videos provide not only broadcast
material (known as air checks), but also material that was recorded but not broadcast (known
as outtakes).
The few NIST requests for materials that are lost, currently pending, or not yet located include:
• Original contract specifications for WTC towers (lost in the collapse of the buildings)
• Construction and maintenance logs for WTC 1, 2, and 7 (lost in the collapse of the buildings)
• Calculations and analyses that supported the original aircraft impact studies (lost in the
collapse of the buildings)
• Descriptions of partitions and furnishings in most of the tenant spaces of WTC 2 and WTC 7
in the fire and impact zones
• Shop drawings showing connection details of WTC 7
NIST is making efforts to assemble this information from various sources because much of it was lost
when the buildings collapsed. NIST continues to pursue other materials that can further clarify some
aspects of the Investigation.

[libertypirate]

33. So there is no use for a forensic investigation I guess....

The fact that FEMA thought the plan started on 9-10 doesn't mean anything to you I guess?

Well there is one piece of overwhelming BULLSHIT this and every other government publication fucked up!

Steal is not ever going to be weaker than an aluminum aircraft wings. So the airplanes ran into steal buildings with reinforced concrete remember that?

Let's not play games the wings didn't break off, what phenomena of metallurgy are you going to quote to bullshit me about this?

You know we all know this when we taxi down the runway they bounce up and down, even fully loaded with fuel...

They flex so easily why aren't they pinned to the outer wall of any of the buildings or falling to the ground bellow.

I am waiting for this response, baited breath...

[LARED]

37. A few things to consider

Aluminum is actually quite strong and hard. In many ways it is comparable to steel. Look up the tensile or yield strength of aircraft aluminum and compare it to steel. There is not as much difference as you seem to believe.

Being flexible and having strength are two different animals.

If you ever took a trip in the country you will see road signs that has been shot at with lead buck shot. Lead is very soft. A typical velocity of a shot gun is somewhere around 600 mph give or take a bit. The lead seem to penetrate quite easily. Do you still think the jet should have gotten stuck in the wall? Really, on one one hand you complain that aluminum is not strong enough to penetrate steel and then you state the planes are supposed to be hanging half way out of the building.

[libertypirate]

42. It is not a valid argument

to compare something with a finite impact point with machine that impacts a building...

If you want me to explain the difference you are in the wrong place...

and water can be used to cut metal.

and a light can be used to cut metal.

but in the end the wings of an airplane are never going to be strong enough to cut through steal...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3773484&mesg_id=3777181

Pictures

[ROH]

39. Thorough wide-ranging investigations are certainly very important

but your remarks about aluminum and steel are not appropriate.

Check out Strength of Aluminum vs Strength of Steel:
http://www.kastenmarine.com/alumVSsteel.htm

[libertypirate]

43. WTF

Yeah but we are not talking pound for pound are we?

We are talking about something with less strength than the steal in a car.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LARED]

11. Reading problem?

I was merely pointing out that the presence of sulfides can come from many sources.

Spooked911 seems to believe the presence of sulfides in some way is evidence that explosives ARE present. This is not the case.

[spooked911]

13. You're right. I actually meant to add a question mark to the thread title

or qualify it in some way but I seemed to forget to do this. Either I forgot to qualify it, or I was feeling somewhat ornery, I'm not sure which.

This is POSSIBLE evidence of explosives, not conclusive evidence of course.

Though what would cause a "hot corrosion attack" besides explosives? Would a jet fuel fire cause that?

[LARED]

17. Hot corrosion attack is manifested in a number of ways

It basically works this way. Steel or more typically an alloy comes in contact with copper, sulfur, iron, or many other elements, from any number of compounds. These compounds under the right conditions join with the base material to form a eutectic material, ie a material the has a lower melting point than the base material. There can be significant local changes in the base material because of this. This reaction sets up a combination of corrosion and or melting, depending on the materials and conditions.

I am not an expert on this and if you want three expert opinions about these types of failures you need to hire two metallurgists.

Meaning it is not a well understood process, subject to many variables.

Two years ago I investigated a pure nickel flange failure in a high temperature furnace. The failure was caused by a mechanic putting a thin layer of copper based anti-seize on the bolted joint. The high alloy flange looked like it peeled open after only being in service for a few months.

[philb]

20. the jet fuel fire was only at limited location and very short time; not

sufficient to melt steel; it would have had to have started a very hot fire based on material in the building burning, and what kind of material would that have been to sustain a fire hot enough to melt a lot of steel.
The reports from fire fighters said the the fires, especially in South Tower did not appear to be very hot and were dying down and the firefighters thought they were controllable. They saw no indication of anything that could cause a collapse.

I don't think that a gasoline fire from an airliner could have had much to do with the building collapse, but this kind of thing could be tested by modeling and tests under simulated similar conditions. Why hasn't this been done if they are serious about determining what caused the collapse?

[Dancing_Dave]

40. Good to hear you chiming in here, Philb!

Your understanding of basic physical issues in the WTC demolition disaster is always so great, keep up the good work! :yourock:

[Christophera]

67. Yes, Right On!

This topic needs simple attention as this forum is starting to look like the "London Bombings" forum.

[stickdog]

15. Exactly. It could have been thermophilic microbes from Yellowstone Park.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

[spooked911]

14. So what exactly is it you do and how long have you been doing it?

You may have posted this at one time, but I have never seen it. Could you refresh us on your background? Thanks.

[LARED]

19. What I do?

You mean outside of becoming a world class curmudgeon, Well I'm a mechanical engineer with 25 years experience in the chemical manufacturing industry.

[nomatrix]

21. Lared, what's your beef with explosives used at WTC?

(A)Is it that you doubt it was an inside job?
or
(B)That it is impossible for the terrorists to have use explosives to ensure the collapse?


Please clarify what your argument is.

25 Yrs of CNN just rebroadcasted the event with Aaron Brown at the anchor desk saying a "Huge Explosion" (2x) then the WTC collapsed.


Explosives used in previous attacks Cole, Embassys
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/10/23/uss.cole.01/

[LARED]

22. Re

A. Yes, I doubt is was an inside job. I assume by inside you mean the government

B. Impossible is a word I would not use, but there is no reason explosives were needed to ensure a collapse, nor do we even know if a collapse was the intended outcome. And it's hard to overlook the fact that there is no evidence of explosives being used.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

23. Aren't eyewitness accounts considered evidence?

http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/underground/underground_explosions.htm

[LARED]

24. Those are not eyewitness

they heard explosions, they did not see explosions or explosives.

It is quite common for people to call any loud noise an explosion.

If you read the NIST reports there is nothing mystifying about damage to the lower levels of the building. There are many people that spoke about extensive damage in the building from the impact.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

25. Extensive damage to the sub-basement prior to the

plane hitting. How could that have happened?

[LARED]

26. Because it didn't happen (n/t)

[philb]

47. Here is statement of WTC1 building engineer about the basement explosions

Mike Pecoraro, building engineer, WTC tower 1
http://www.chiefengineer.org/article.cfm?seqnum1=1029

The two decided to ascend the stairs to the C level, to a small machine shop where Vito Deleo and David Williams were supposed to be working. When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone.

“There was nothing there but rubble, “Mike said. “We’re talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press – gone!” The two began yelling for their co-workers, but there was no answer. They saw a perfect line of smoke streaming through the air. “You could stand here,” he said, “and two inches over you couldn’t breathe. We couldn’t see through the smoke so we started screaming.” But there was still no answer.

The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. “There were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can’t see anything” he said.

They decided to ascend two more levels to the building’s lobby. As they ascended to the B Level, one floor above, they were astonished to see a steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds, wrinkled up “like a piece of aluminum foil” and lying on the floor. “They got us again,” Mike told his co-worker, referring to the terrorist attack at the center in 1993. Having been through that bombing, Mike recalled seeing similar things happen to the building’s structure. He was convinced a bomb had gone off in the building.


Lobby: WTC1 (before the building came down)
Mike related. "I'm looking ahead and I see all the windows, either three story tall windows or four story tall windows, 10 feet wide; shatter. All of them broke at the same time. All the glass flew over my head. I'm looking up, on my knees, with my hands on the floor, and I saw all that glass. You're talking glass three inches thick, go right over our heads. I saw that some of the firemen who was standing on the perimeter (mezzanine) was blown right off the top. They just flew over the top. I can't put a number on it, maybe ten. Bunch of firemen were guarding doors there. They got blown off. Don't know where they went. I saw pieces of debris as big as cars go right over my head without stopping. Like a line drive right over my head," he said, raising his hand to indicate an approximate 4 foot level.
"I put my head down, put my hands over my head. I still had gloves in my hand. I put the gloves over my head and there was a wind that came through the revolving doors that blew me?100 feet to the far wall, right by the visitor's desk. The floor was covered with sheetrock (powdered) and water so it was like a soup. It was very slippery".

"You couldn't see anything now. There was dust in the room. My eyes were covered with dust and debris. I got hit in the back of the head with something so hard I fractured my elbow on the floor. Something stuck in the back of my calf and I just got beat all over the left side of my body. Then the building started bouncing even harder. So hard it was lifting me off the floor, bouncing me on the floor".

"I had somebody fall on top of me. That freaked me out. I kicked that person off me because I didn't want them on me. And then it just stopped. It was dead quiet. There was no sound except this hissing sound coming from? I believe it was steam pipes, at the edge of One World Trade Center. There was no people, no sounds, there was just quiet. I was alive!"
…
"I still had my flashlight in my holder, my walkie-talkie was split in half. I couldn't call anybody. I turned the flashlight on, people jumped all over me, that must have been standing right next to me. I don't know who they were. All they wanted was help. How do we get out? I turned the flashlight off and put it back in my holder because it didn't do a damn thing (within the thick dust) and I told them, just follow me. I told them I was an engineer in the building, I think I know where I am, follow me out, we're gonna give it a try. There was pandemonium. Nobody would listen to me. They just left. I don't know where they went or who they were".

Slowly moving through the thick cloud, Mike led the fireman through the lobby. "There was piles of stuff on the floor," he said. "I don't know what it was. There were people on the floor we were falling over". Somehow, Mike managed to lead them to the South Entrance of the tower to a door which led to the Marriott Hotel. Debris blocked all of the doors from the building. The men managed to move through broken windows to the outside.
…
When I tell you the stuff (dust) on the street was a foot deep, that's conservative. I'd say over a foot deep. It was like walking through a blizzard of snow".
Mike ran north and suddenly found himself out of the dust cloud

This is still before the building came down, what caused the “wind” and dust?

[philb]

49. Another report of major explosions in basement of WTC1 & WTC2

Construction worker Phillip Morelli describes being thrown to the ground by two explosions while in the fourth subbasement of the North Tower. The first, which threw him to the ground and seemed to coincide with the plane crash, was followed by a larger blast that again threw him to the ground and this time blew out walls. He then made his way to the South Tower and was in the subbasement there when the second plane hit, again associated with a powerful underground blast. This is one of a series of interviews with WTC survivors done by NY1 News: http://ny1.com/pages/RRR/911special_survivors.html

[libertypirate]

27. So now your a sound engineer....

I doubt in a city setting they would have a problem distinguishing the difference.

Sounds in cities have specific problems and is why background noise in a city is muffled; it bounces off the buildings.

If you are trying to suggest or imagine what would be considered background noise during the collapse, stood out as explosions you’re not a very sharp guy.

Rhythmic background noise in a city has to be of high fidelity to the human who experiences it. This means it has to be clear. This is accomplished either by a reduction in background noise (not likely) or the degree to which it is different than the background noise.

The descriptions of the sounds (AKA Explosions) were so distinct that they could not have been part of sound created by the collapsing structures. The sound created as the structures fell to earth by the pieces was chaotic; the sound described as explosions was evenly distributed and over came the background noise.

"It is quite common for people to call any loud noise an explosion."

This statement makes you a moron.

No they don't... You want to know how I know this... People are not fooled by sound like they are by what they see. We should everyone know this, because in theaters to give us multi-dimensional sound they put speakers in front, on the sides, and behind the people watching the film. You can't fool the ears as easy as the eyes period; the ears don't fill in the blanks like the eyes. Now if it was one large noise you might have somewhat of a point but when you are dealing with multiples of the same sound. The mind doesn’t fill in the blanks it does a resample each time it hears the sound and focus attention where and what the sound is.

As for the NIST this is a lovely organization that likes to print the truth and then silently try and change it after the fact. They once published the actual time they suspected the "fuel" to burn in the buildings only to revise this to under a minute. In a Bush administration no one is independent, if they are I suspect they might get suicided. They originally published that the fuel would have been 98% consumed in the first 10 seconds. No fuel; no excuse for the Neo-con artists playing government with peoples lives.

[LARED]

28. Do you disagree with this statement?

It is quite common for people to call any loud noise an explosion.

[libertypirate]

29. Does a bear shat in the woods?

You mean tastes like chicken?

Are you really going to base your argument on this?

Are you going to produce some study?

Are you going to play association games?

Or are you going to base your logic on observable phenomena something other than some unusual common sense argument?

As for you statement

"It is quite common for people to call any loud noise an explosion."

NO an explosion is not the first thing that pops into most people's minds when they hear loud noises. It's simple Mr. Chemical Engineer it's not on the top of everyone’s list of things that create loud noises in natural or potential situations. The brain equates the possibilities by the provable notion of what could be the noise. The top of that list gun shot, something not normally out of the realm of possibilities in an urban area, second backfire.

In critical stressful situation most people don't think out of the box, they only have time to interpret it. This is the only reason why the American public doesn’t see the truth, they never bothered to ask is that possible…

[seatnineb]

30. libertypirate!............

This mini explosion towards the bottom of the south tower ,was captured by Luigi Cazzaniga who was on Park Row,5 minutes before the south tower collapsed....







But I can predict LARED's reaction.....

"It was probably a burst gas pipe,electric fault,a severed elavator ect,ect"

;-)

[libertypirate]

31. He'll say it's a building fart or something....

[nolabels]

63. Somebody just pluged a polorized hair drier in backwards causing a short

Exploding hot water heater or something, geez

[Make7]

52. But you agree with LARED, don't you?

seatnineb wrote:
I agree with the following........

A burst gas pipe. A fire that flared up when air hit it. An electrical short. Fuel igniting. Something burst into flames from heat.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=35758&mesg_id=36330

:P Make7

[seatnineb]

53. Oh the explosion that you could not see!

To quote the honorable Make7.........

Make7
Mon Apr-04-05 02:22 PM

Please explain where the explosion is.
The debris is outside the building.

The building is not damaged in the area of the photograph.

Where exactly is the explosion?

What am I missing?

[spooked911]

55. Speaking of which, what do LARED et al make of the various shots

of explosive "squibs" that come out of the towers a few floors below where the collapse is?

Particularly this is clear for WTC7 and WTC1.

See here:
http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/Flashes/squibs_along_southwest_corner.htm

[LARED]

58. Those so called squibs

are commonly known as venting.

[spooked911]

60. Did you see the ones for WTC7?

Why would the upper stories of WTC7 need venting?

What exactly do you mean by venting anyway?

[Make7]

56. Perhaps you forgot.

But after you posted the series of frames from that video, which makes the explosion/fire very clear, I did agree that something was there. As you may recall from some of the responses in the other thread, when you only posted single frames to begin with, there was some misunderstanding as to what you were trying to show. Let's look at some of them shall we:

Well, you have provided a very interesting image. What you think it means, I've not a clue. - LARED

Perhaps you could explain the picture you posted. Thanks. - Make7

This is as bad as a Rorschach test. Didn't see what I see in the picture I posted?

Well, then you must not understand and can't see what really happened, or worse - you are one of those horrible people that won't see the truth behind 9/11 (or something).
/sarcasm

If you want to advance an argument, it is helpful if you explain your evidence, instead of playing childish games by claiming that it rebuts other points without explaining why. - AZCat

What is that picture supposed to prove? You have posted the same picture three times in this thread with these comments as the only text in those posts:

• Kiss goodbye to your venting cover...
  
• Yeah...really...
  
• What do we have...I'll let you be the judge...

None of which explains what you believe this picture to be or what you think it proves. I am hoping you will give us some explanation as to the possible relevance of that picture. - Make7

Now, I know that in the other thread at first you actually posted two different pictures - but they were very similar and in different posts, so I mistakenly thought that all three were the same - when in fact, one out of the three was slightly different. But even after you posted the series of frames there was some confusion:

Something wrong. I get the same photo 6 times over. - k-robjoe

I find it interesting that you posted a series of frames in this thread to show people what you were talking about, whereas in the other thread you wouldn't even answer questions about the single frames you had posted to begin with. Hmmmmm......

However, what I find more interesting is the fact that your reply in this thread quotes a post of mine previous to agreeing that something was there and represents that as my current position. I feel that is disingenuous - especially considering the fact that you acknowledged my agreement in the other thread:

Ohhhhhhhh.............so you can see it now! - seatnineb

____________________

I can't help but notice that you once again failed to answer a simple question posed to you. Par for the course...

-Make7

[seatnineb]

57. You are wrong as usual.

He was standing in a crowd on Church Street, about two and a half blocks from the South Tower. Just before the South Tower collapsed, he saw “a number of brief light sources being emitted from inside the building between floors 10 and 15.” He saw about six of these flashes and at the same time heard a “a crackling sound” just before the tower collapsed.”
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/collapseofWTCeyewitnessreportsexplosions07feb05.shtml.

[LARED]

59. What time were those images taken

You seen to imply there is a relationship between the brief light sources and those images. Is there?

[seatnineb]

61. They were taken at 9:55am.

I brightened the picture so you can see the clock in the foreground.

[Make7]

62. I am? About what? Please elaborate. (eom.)

[LARED]

35. You have touched on the reason explosions were used

NO an explosion is not the first thing that pops into most people's minds when they hear loud noises. It's simple Mr. Chemical Engineer it's not on the top of everyone’s list of things that create loud noises in natural or potential situations. The brain equates the possibilities by the provable notion of what could be the noise. The top of that list gun shot, something not normally out of the realm of possibilities in an urban area, second backfire.

So the schema used by people's minds filtering the world creates perceptions. I agree. Perhaps the massive explosions that everyone saw that morning have something to do with them associating loud noises with explosions?

What do you think?

[libertypirate]

36. There is one major flaw...

One was seen and the other was heard.

Can you say it looked like it sounded? No

It sounded like I thought it might look? Doesn't work either.

We can place sound but what we can't do is extract the dimensions of it's source.

It is still comparison of apples and oranges; one explosion cannot be mistaken for the sound of multiple charges.

[Dancing_Dave]

41. Yes, the SENSORY EVIDENCE remains...

In spite of any Indeterminacy imposed by the official cover-up!

[philb]

48. Lots of witnesses at WTC saw and heard explosions

One of the first firefighters in the stricken second tower, Louie Cacchioli, 51, told People Weekly on Sept. 24: "I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there were bombs set in the building."

Kim White, 32, an employee on the 80th floor, also reported hearing an explosion. "All of a sudden the building shook, then it started to sway. We didn't know what was going on," she told People. "We got all our people on the floor into the stairwell . . . at that time we all thought it was a fire . . .We got down as far as the 74th floor . . . then there was another explosion."

"Shortly after 9 o'clock ... received word of the possibility of a secondary device, that is another bomb going off. He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could, but he said there was another explosion which took place.


Edmund McNally phoned his wife Liz twice following the aircraft impact. Mr McNally said in his second phone call "Liz, this was a terrorist attack. I can hear explosions below me.''
Tom Elliott, WTC 2 survivor: They saw only two firemen going up. They told them there had been an explosion near the 60th floor.
9/11 NBC News broadcast
475kB mp3 - to download file right click the link and select 'Save Target As'


Auxiliary Fireman Lt. Paul Isaac Jr. also spoke of bombs in an interview with internet
reporter Randy Lavello. Isaac had served with Engine Company 10 in lower Manhattan
during the late 1990s, so he knew the area around the WTC. Isaac said that many New
York firemen were very concerned about the ongoing cover-up of why the World Trade
Center collapsed. “Many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings,” he
revealed, “but they are afraid for their jobs to admit it because the higher-ups forbid
discussion of this fact. There were definitely bombs in those buildings.”

Teresa Veliz was a manager for a software development firm. She was on the 47th floor
of the North Tower when American 11 struck. Veliz was able to reach the ground level at
about the same time that the South Tower collapsed. Flung to the ground in total
darkness, Veliz and a colleague followed another person who happened to have a
flashlight. As she narrated later: “The flashlight led us into Borders bookstore, up an
escalator, and out to Church Street. The explosions were going off everywhere. I was
convinced that there were bombs planted all over the place and someone was sitting at a
control panel pushing detonator buttons.
Large numbers of witnesses saw and heard explosions in the WTC buildings
http://www.reopen911.org/Tarpley_ch_6.pdf
http://www.911research.com/wtc/analysis/collapses/steel.html

CBS News Channel Eyewitness in Helicopter Describes 'Secondary Explosions' in the WTC1 and WTC2 before collapse http://www.prisonplanet.tv/articles/april2004/042704secondaryexplosions.htm

[Christophera]

66. Much Harder To Overlook Explosives In Use

The US government has been infiltrated. The infiltrators did it.

[Rich Hunt]

54. excuse me...

But it might be more relevant to read and analyze the science and the logic itself than to ask the poster such personal and irrelevant questions.

What he does is not relevant here - what is relevant is the soundness of the information given.

Plenty of science here and elsewhere for you to quibble with - no need to get personal.

[Dancing_Dave]

32. Good find!

This is all perfectly consistent with many other scientific findings about WTC debris...high energy, high temperature thermo-explosive events are what create such debris. We may not know exactly what explosives were used and where they were placed (the cover-up destroyed a lot of the evidence we'd need to do that), but we can tell that this was a high-energy, carefully engineered demolition by people with inside access to the WTC...ironically, they WERE the "security"! ;-)

[seatnineb]

34. Absolutely!

:toast:

Dancing_dave writes.....
carefully engineered demolition by people with inside access to the WTC

And they did have time to get that access....


"About a week before Sept. 11, there was a bomb threat I guess, because I remember around lunch time all these people from the towers were standing outside. It was a really sunny day, but I couldn't leave the restaurant. I used to get to work by taking the 1/9 which stopped at Corlandt St inside the WTC."
Raquel.

http://www.laurasmidiheaven.com/world-trade-center/inde... .

[Dancing_Dave]

38. That piece of evidence seems to have disappeared....

Well, it's not the first time some evidence against the Official 9/11 Myth has strangely disappeared! ;-)

[seatnineb]

51. That link seems to have been revived.....

About a week before Sept. 11, there was a bomb threat I guess, because I remember around lunch time all these people form the towers were standing outside. It was a really sunny day, but I couldn't leave the restaurant. I used to get to work by taking the 1/9 which stopped at Corlandt St inside the WTC.
On Sept. 8, I was going to work, and I had a really strange feeling coming out of the station.
I was watching all the people and just thought "wow, I am so proud to be working in this area, look at all these successful people, and I'm now one of them. I'm on top of the world!" So, I went to work.

http://www.laurasmidiheaven.com/world-trade-center/index18.shtml

[spooked911]

46. That is an interesting find. I wonder how often there were bomb threats

at the WTC before 9/11.

It would be a perfect way to clear out the building and do some dirty work.

[seatnineb]

50. F.B.I was at WTC just one week before 9/11

Ms. Terry added this: "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

Nothing to see here folks.......move along....

[Christophera]

64. The Fact That Dust Had Iron Burned Into It Shows High Explosives

and the proximity of the steel and concrete with the high explosive had to be very close.

[Dancing_Dave]

44. This really is a significant find!

A number of quite good scientific studies of WTC explosive debris have been done, but they tended to look at the "WTC Dust" from an environmental and public health point of view, not really focusing where we need to identify particular explosives used in the demolition of WTC buildings 1,2, and 7.

I will forward this info on to some people in New York who may make good use of it!

[spooked911]

45. I hope it does some good. It is intriguing at least.

Also, the incredible security around the steel debris transported from ground zero is highly suspcious. Sure, the steel had some value, but was it really THAT VALUABLE? Or were they keeping it out of the hands of people who might want to carefully analyze it?

[philb]

65. Firemen and survivors report basement explosion at WTC2 before

the tower "collapsed"

When the fire rescue team reached an area directly in front of Tower Two, Antonio said he'd take over the equipment cart Will had pushed from Building 5. ... The team moved ahead. Scant minutes passed. Suddenly the hallway began to shudder as a terrible deafening roar swept over them. That's when Will saw the giant fireball explode in the street.
Seconds later the team's entire world began to crumble. It was precisely 9:59 a.m. The Trade Center's South Tower had just collapsed. http://www.bowhunter.com/feature_articles/BN_FromTheRubble/


United Airlines Flight 175 struck the 78th through 84th floors of the south tower at almost 9:03 a.m., 16 1/2 minutes after a jet hit the north tower.
Brian Clark, executive vice president of Euro Brokers on the 84th floor, was standing against the west wall when the higher wing of the Boeing 767 hit his floor. "It felt like the building was going to fall," he recalls. Five Euro Brokers colleagues walked with Clark into the hall, turned left and entered Stairway A. Clark and co-worker Ronald DiFrancesco continued down. Clark heard banging from inside Fuji Bank's wrecked office. "Help! I'm buried! Can anybody help?" yelled Stanley Praimnath, a loan officer. Clark pulled him from the rubble and they walked down together.
As he left the building, saw a fireball rolling toward him. He put his arms in front of his face. He woke up three days later at St. Vincent's hospital. His arms were burned. Some bones were broken. His lungs were singed. But he was alive.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2001/12/19/usat-escape.htm

Also note: there are videos showing the basement explosions, and janitors and building engineers who've also confirmed them.