9/11 third tower mystery 'solved'

[Gordon Gekko]

By Mike Rudin
BBC, Conspiracy Files


The final mystery of 9/11 will soon be solved, according to US experts investigating the collapse of the third tower at the World Trade Center.

The 47-storey third tower, known as Tower Seven, collapsed seven hours after the twin towers.

Investigators are expected to say ordinary fires on several different floors caused the collapse.

Conspiracy theorists have argued that the third tower was brought down in a controlled demolition.


MORE: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7485331.stm

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by Gordon Gekko

The final mystery of 9/11 will soon be solved, according to US experts investigating the collapse of the third tower at the World Trade Center.

By NIST?? Thats like relying on Sandia to tell us that "DU is safe" zg

[bjcount]

IMHO fire, heat, and structural steel do not mix. Add water to the mix and any hardend steel member such as bolts that been exposed to high heat will shatter like glass.

There is no conspiricy here, just simple math with a touch of chemistry and physics.

Fire softens steel=structural weakening
weight of floors at 4 million pounds ea + structural weakening = movement of structure.
movement+weight+gravity+the earth's centrifugal force= devastation

WoW that looks like a new BJ RoR formula.

As an eye witness to the collapse of the towers from just 2 miles away on that perfectly clear day, it was a miracle the loss was not 100 times greater.

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by bjcount

IMHO fire, heat, and structural steel do not mix. Add water to the mix and any hardend steel member such as bolts that been exposed to high heat will shatter like glass.

There is no conspiricy here, just simple math with a touch of chemistry and physics.

Fire softens steel=structural weakening
weight of floors at 4 million pounds ea + structural weakening = movement of structure.
movement+weight+gravity+the earth's centrifugal force= devastation

WoW that looks like a new BJ RoR formula.

As an eye witness to the collapse of the towers from just 2 miles away on that perfectly clear day, it was a miracle the loss was not 100 times greater.

At least a couple hundred scientists, engineers and architects who have looked closely at this will disagree with you. Fire doesn't cause a steel skyscraper to collapse at near freefall speed directly into its own footprint. WTC-7 is the smoking gun of 9/11. zg

[bjcount]

Originally Posted by zengrifter

At least a couple hundred scientists, engineers and architects who have looked closely at this will disagree with you. Fire doesn't cause a steel skyscraper to collapse at near freefall speed directly into its own footprint. WTC-7 is the smoking gun of 9/11. zg

Then I have to disagree with you, fire brought down the WTC towers. IMO The intense heat from the burning jet fuel weakened the steel columns, girders, etc.. When the columns could now longer support the weight of the structure above it came straight down upon itself. The momentum was too great for the lower structure to support so one floor after another kept stacking up. One of the laws of physics, an object in motion stays in motion until another force acts upon it and only mother earth could stop it. If you watched in horror as the WTC buildings came down, it was over fast. If you guestimate 1200' free falling at what is it 32'/sec squared, how long did it take for the towers to come down? A minute maybe 2, of course include the delay time initially as each floor slowly gave way until too many were dropping at once.

But then again a second idea which comes to mind in that for National Security, we stock piled a huge cache of weapons in the basement of WTC-7 and when they ignited either intentionally or by accident, it knocked the legs out from under the building causing it to implode.

This will always be a heated debate for years to come.

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by bjcount

Then I have to disagree with you, fire brought down the WTC towers. IMO The intense heat from the burning jet fuel weakened the steel columns, girders, etc.. When the columns could now longer support the weight of the structure above it came straight down upon itself. The momentum was too great for the lower structure to support so one floor after another kept stacking up. One of the laws of physics, an object in motion stays in motion until another force acts upon it and only mother earth could stop it. If you watched in horror as the WTC buildings came down, it was over fast. If you guestimate 1200' free falling at what is it 32'/sec squared, how long did it take for the towers to come down? A minute maybe 2, of course include the delay time initially as each floor slowly gave way until too many were dropping at once.

Holy cow!!! YOU say that you watched it??? Then you give a suppossed personal opinion that mimicks the official line!!!
An official line that was released within hours. Then you say that it took 1-2 MINUTES for each collapse!!!??? zg

Ps - This thread was about WTC-7 - the third skyscraper collapse. Did you even know about WTC-7?

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

See Also (ZEN ZONE) -

100 Professors Question 9/11

9-11 Conspiracy

Official 9/11 Story DISPUTED!

The Looniest 9-11 Conspiracy Theory

Zengrifter on NYC TV talks about 9/11 -VIDEO

Seismic Proof 9/11 Was An Inside Job

MUST SEE VIDEO: Loose Change !

Evidence of Micro-Nukes In WTC On 9/11

150+ 9/11 Smoking Guns

LQQK! Phoney 9/11 News Footage -VIDEO

More Evidence of 9/11 TV Fakery -VIDEO

9/11 TV fakery on Fox News -VIDEO

Engineers say WTC collapse was planned

September 11th Revisited -VIDEO

The Coincidence-Theorist's Guide to 9/11

Another USAF Officer Blasts 9/11 Coverup

Ex-CIA Offical: 9/11 A 'Monstrous Series Of Lies'

Popular Mechanics' 9/11 Lies

The Real Causes of 9/11

Physicist: Thermite felled WTC

Daniel Ellsberg Says Government May Have Carried Out 9/11

The Secret 9/11 Gold Heist

Hustler Exposes 9/11!

William Rodriguez, 9/11 Truthster

The 'A-List' of 9/11 Dissenters

9/11 - Giuliani Destroyed the Evidence -VIDEO

9/11 - Who Put The Thermite There?

Steven Jones & 911 Physics

“Lucky Larry” Silverstein

New World Order VIDEO

911 MORE Scientific Evidence

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml?discuss

[bjcount]

Originally Posted by zengrifter

Holy cow!!! YOU say that you watched it??? Then you give a suppossed personal opinion that mimicks the official line!!!
An official line that was released within hours. Then you say that it took 1-2 MINUTES for each collapse!!!??? zg

Ps - This thread was about WTC-7 - the third skyscraper collapse. Did you even know about WTC-7?

I do not know what the official version was, what I wrote was only my opinion. At 2 miles from the site when you see a building burning you can not tell if its smoke or crushed debris bellowing into the air. From where we were that lasted for minutes. If you watched on TV it was seconds.

The command center which fell was collateral damage just like the other ten buildings a block away which were not hit by a plane but received extensive damage. Wasn't there much debris that fell onto the roof of wtc 7 and do we know what was stored there? Structures are known to fail. It was built on rock, perhaps a fault line was present and the 2 towers crashing down impacted the foundation at wtc 7.

That was a nice list of articles you listed...thanks for the reading materials to fill me in.

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by bjcount

I do not know what the official version was, what I wrote was only my opinion. At 2 miles from the site when you see a building burning you can not tell if its smoke or crushed debris bellowing into the air. From where we were that lasted for minutes. If you watched on TV it was seconds.

The command center which fell was collateral damage just like the other ten buildings a block away which were not hit by a plane but received extensive damage. Wasn't there much debris that fell onto the roof of wtc 7 and do we know what was stored there? Structures are known to fail. It was built on rock, perhaps a fault line was present and the 2 towers crashing down impacted the foundation at wtc 7.

That was a nice list of articles you listed...thanks for the reading materials to fill me in.

Never in history had ANY steel skyscraper collapsed due to fire - other fires burned hotter and longer.
Than we have THREE in one day under questionable circumstances. Wake up and smell the COUP D'TET! zg

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by zengrifter

By NIST?? Thats like relying on Sandia to tell us that "DU is safe" zg

Nor are writers for BBC to be trusted. zg

See -

BBC Reported Building 7 Had Collapsed 20 Minutes Before It Fell

BBC Conspiracy Files: 9/11 -VIDEO

And this just in -

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



No BBC, WTC 7 Did Not Collapse “Due To Fire” & The Final 9/11 Mystery Is Not Solved

Prison Planet
July 6, 2008

Sunday, July 6, 2008

“The building collapsed due to fire”

I’m still waiting to see a shred of evidence to support this theory. Just “saying” that the building collapsed due to fire is not evidence or proof that it collapsed due to fire. You can bet that NIST won’t bother to explain this away:

When the hit piece comes out, this is a critical piece of evidence that NIST (I am assuming) will ignore in their report: “Although virtually all of the structural steel from the Twin Towers and Building 7 was removed and destroyed, preventing forensic analysis, FEMA’s volunteer investigators did manage to perform “limited metallurgical examination” of some of the steel before it was recycled. Their observations, including numerous micrographs, are recorded in Appendix C of the WTC Building Performance Study. Prior to the release of FEMA’s report, a fire protection engineer and two science professors published a brief report in JOM disclosing some of this evidence.

The results of the examination are striking. They reveal a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused “intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.” The New York Times described this as “perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.” 2 WPI provides a graphic summary of the phenomenon. A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges–which are curled like a paper scroll–have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes–some larger than a silver dollar–let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending–but not holes.

FEMA’s investigators inferred that a “liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur” formed during a “hot corrosion attack on the steel.” The eutectic mixture (having the elements in such proportion as to have the lowest possible melting point) penetrated the steel down grain boundaries, making it “susceptible to erosion.” …The “deep mystery” of the melted steel may be yielding its secrets to investigators not beholden to the federal government.

Professor Steven Jones has pointed out that the severe corrosion, intergranular melting, and abundance of sulfur are consistent with the theory of thermite arson. ”

MORE- http://www.prisonplanet.com/no-bbc-w...ot-solved.html

[sicharlton]

The only reason the BBC reported that it had collapsed, as the reason the poor lady was talking about it with it just over her shoulder was because of an inaccurate source in the US...I forget what it was called.

After watching that fool on Loose Change for just a short time I soon became bored with him, seriously he seemed like typical guy who would LOVE their to be a conspiracy and will look at any anomaly and call it a conspiracy. Whenever anything is over analysed there are always anomalous results. For example when Larry Silverstein said the word 'pull' that seems to only mean one thing in so many minds, it could mean pull the firefighters from the building, pull anything but if you keep on going you end up at 'pull' = demolition...jackpot..that supports our 'Conspiracy' that'll do nice. He seemed so convinced by his own documentary and its content that interviews with him since, show him unable to accept ANY other explanation, he just cant accept it. His own judgment has become clouded by his lust for a conspiracy.

I'm a Civil and Structural Engineer, I've seen this discussed many many times...and very importantly for WTC7..why are there no remains of ANY form of demolition equipment in the wreckage? Demolition experts seem to conflict on the WTC7 a lot. Because of the way it fell it is automatically assumed that it was done professionally, OK I can appreciate that the way it falls is very similar to demolition however the fact that there are no remains of charges..which there would be present (approx 25cm initially) I cannot buy it. I suppose the same is with WTC7 as with the first two to go, it only needs one floor to collapse and the rest is pretty sure going to fall down.

Originally Posted by zengrifter

Never in history had ANY steel skyscraper collapsed due to fire - other fires burned hotter and longer.

Even if this is the case that doesn't really matter, its not entirely down to the fire, what also needs to be considered is which columns have failed and can the ones intact keep withstanding. The fire plus failed columns will lead to ULT. Failure.

I bet 'Minoru Yamasaki' the architect and the engineers wished they had opted for bricks surrounding their columns just like in the Empire State Building rather than some new technology 'spray-on' flame retarder.

Hmmm a conspiracy, I'm not buying it. Perfect timing to increase the anger against the East yes, and I'd say jumping on that bandwagon worked but I remain to be convinced of any form of conspiracy here. I take it as a horrendous and awful tragedy.