Fox News Reports on Collapse of Building 7 Before It Happens

[eots]

July 16, 2007: Former California Seismic Safety Commissioner Endorses 9/11 Truth Movement
Prominent Engineer Calls for a New Investigation of 9/11
PDF Version Article on OpEdNews

Summary: J. Marx Ayres, MS, former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council and former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission called for a new investigation of 9/11, "Steven Jones' call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that the WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fire, but through the use of pre-positioned 'cutter-charges' must be the rallying cry for all building design experts to speak out."

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

 

[eots]

New Seismic Data Refutes Official WTC Explanation

Two unexplained "spikes" in the seismic record from Sept. 11 indicate huge bursts of energy shook the ground beneath the World Trade Center's twin towers immediately prior to the collapse. American Free Press has learned of pools of "molten steel" found at the base of the collapsed twin towers weeks after the collapse. Although the energy source for these incredibly hot areas has yet to be explained, New York seismometers recorded huge bursts of energy, which caused unexplained seismic "spikes" at the beginning of each collapse.

http://100777.com/node/245

 

[LA RAM FAN]

yeah but the 9/11 coincidence theorists will never bother to read AMERICAN FREE PRESS since they know their an objective newspaper source that reports REALS news and not fairy tales.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

If it had been an explosion, seismographs would have picked up a spike. According to seismographs at NYU, there was no spike. Thus, there was no explosion.

Read Davidray Griffiths book DEBUNKING THE 9/11 DEBUNKING.it proves that the 9/11 commission report, popular mechanics, and NIST are fairy tales.also look at Eots last two posts as well.it counters that.

 

[DiveCon]

obviously Your Another One Of The 9/11 Coincidence Theorists Who Hasnt Read Griffiths Book Debunking The 9/11 Debunking Which Proves The 9/11 Commission Report, Popular Mechanics, And Nist Are Fairy Tales.

Bullshit

 

[Big_D]

Why explosives could not have been used:

"Since their inception in the late 1800s, blasting engineers have understood that building implosions work best when the forces of gravity are maximized. This is why blasters always concentrate their efforts on the lowest floors of a structure. While smaller supplemental charges can be placed on upper floors to facilitate breakage and maximize control as the structure collapses, every implosion ever performed has followed the basic model of obliterating structural supports on the bottom few floors first, "to get the structure moving.""

"...for explosives to be considered as a primary or supplemental catalyst, one
would have to accept that either, a) dozens of charges were placed on those exact impact floors in advance and survived the violent initial explosions and 1100+ degree Fahrenheit fires, or b) while the fires were burning, charges were installed undetected throughout the impact floors and wired together, ostensibly by people hiding in the buildings with boxes of explosives. There is no third choice that could adequately explain explosives causing failure at the exact impact points."

“The chemical properties of explosives and their reaction to heat render scenario A scientifically impossible and scenario B remarkably unlikely, as we know of explosive compound that could withstand such force and/or hear without detaching from the columns or simply burning off prior to detonation.

There are other problems with both scenarios: Given the consistent weight distribution around the outer perimeter of each structure, one would have needed access to a prohibitively large quantity of load-bearing I-beam columns to allow “cutter charges” to initiate failure. Those columns would have needed extensive preparations, also known as “pre-burning”, to allow the explosives to perform their function. And in order to prepare the columns you first had to be able to see the columns, which means at least partially removing the outer-perimeter interior walls of all blast floors, including furniture, plumbing, conduit lines, insulation, etc.

All of this would have been performed within 55 minutes between plane impact and collapse – working in an environment of unspeakable heat and destruction – or have been performed completely undetected, in advance, on multiple floors in both buildings while suffering no adverse effects from planes’ impact with these same areas.

This is impossible.”

-Brent Blanchard
"Director of field operations at Protec Documentation Services...
Protec is one of the world’s most knowledgeable independent authorities on explosive demolition, have performed engineering studies, structure analysis, vibration/air events in more than 30 countries. These include the current world record-holders for documents the work of more than 20 explosives contractors who perform structure blasting as a primary source of revenue…"
http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC STUDY 8-06 w clarif as of 9-8-06 .pdf

Plus, how could they have placed all those explosives in there without them knowing?

"The demolition of the Washington DC Convention Center in 2004 involved preparations that went on for months. Massive crews were at work, placing explosives around ~500 columns and doing other preparation work. The crews and activity were highly noticeable to people in the area."
Wrecking Corp. Razes Washington Convention Center | Construction Equipment Guide Story
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_power_down.html

And this was on a project MUCH smaller than the WTC buildings!

 

[Big_D]

Read Davidray Griffiths book DEBUNKING THE 9/11 DEBUNKING.it proves that the 9/11 commission report, popular mechanics, and NIST are fairy tales.also look at Eots last two posts as well.it counters that.

I have made this point on numerous occasions and it looks like I will never get a response. Again, why would I take Griffin's word over Dr. Zdeněk P. Bažant when his book never passed the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics in their engineering division and Bažant's has? Here is his paper again:http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/405.pdf That means 20+ engineering experts from around the globe read this and approved it. Both you and eots insulted this paper and I have been asking for you two to back it up and neither of you will do so. Also, Griffins book didn't debunk the popular mechanics article. It just simply pointed out the differences with the popular mechanics to other papers.

 

[eots]

Danny Jowenko on WTC 7 controlled demolition

this man says a day

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=877gr6xtQIc[/ame]


[ame=http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=iB0uxfnwgm0&feature=related]YouTube - 9/11 Conspiracy - Crash Course #4 of 4[/ame]

 

[DiveCon]

Danny Jowenko on WTC 7 controlled demolition

this man says a day

YouTube - Danny Jowenko on WTC 7 controlled demolition


YouTube - 9/11 Conspiracy - Crash Course #4 of 4

who gives a rats ass what he says, hes WRONG

 

[LA RAM FAN]

These Are Intel Men...RESPONSIBLE FOR BREIFING PRESIDENTS AND TACTICIAL DIRECTORS OF NORAD..who just happen to have phds

yeah I would say those people of yours are far more of a better source to listen to than his.matter of fact,I have seen you list in the past Ray Mcgovern who was a former CIA analysis op for BUSH SR listed before.I know he believes 9/11 is an inside job cause not only does david ray griffith list him as someone who thinks so but I was fortunate enough to meet him at a 9/11 truth movement once and got to talk with him and he told me he goes through the same thing we do all the time when he tries to tell people 9/11 was an inside job.that he gets called a wacko conspiracy theorist even though the evidence is overwhelming.sorry but i will believe high level intel people who actually served under BUSH sr in the CIA over BIG D'S people anyday of the year.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

So why would all these professors I have shown have written papers on their views on 9/11 when they know that it is a lie? It is one thing to not speak up while it is another to state the opposite viewpoint.

Didn't you say in the past that Senator Mark Dayton agreed with you, even though I proved you wrong? It seems to me that he has a good job.

I have provided a link where Dr. Asif Usmani believed that the fall of the WTC buildings were done by terrorists and he is in fact from India. According to this link only 2 out of five citizens of India believe 9/11 was done by Al Qaeda. It would appear as if he could get away with saying that 9/11 was an inside job, but he believes it was done by terrorists. Only 2 out of 5 Indians believe al Qaeda is responsible for the 9/11 attacks—and that’s far higher than in Pakistan where only 1 out of 20 do, finds a new poll by CNN-IBN. - World Public Opinion

read my post again i just explained it and no you did NOT prove me wrong and charlie sheen is a poor example.He is an actor.They cant control what actors say,only people in universitys and i would check that guys bank account in India after he started saying that to see how much richer he got.

Also, there are a number of other people who believe in the conspiracy that still have a job. Charlie Sheen is still on Two and a Half Men isnt he?

read my post again,i just explained it and no you did not prove me wrong.Also charlie sheen is a poor example.He is an actor.they cant control what actors say,only people in universitys and I would check that guys bank account in India after he started saying that to see how much richer he got.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I didnt answer this b/c I thought it was just a hypothetical question nor is it relevant. To be honest, I have not researched this at all. However, I did see a documentary of this on the history channel and they went through all the points in the movie one by one. They dismissed all the points thoroughly. However, I am sure that you do not believe them at all. Other than this I have not heard anything else on the topic. If you want to start a new thread or have one to show me otherwise then please do so.

another perfect example of how you fall for the propaganda by the government.I have seen that documentary you are talking about and it is complete B.S.they didnt disprove anything.watch the video sometime called The "MEN" who killed kennedy.it has far more truth to it than the propaganda YOU saw.it IS relevent because like i said,if you STILL believe in THAT fairy tale which has been proven to be a fairy tale over the years,you'll live in denial on THIS one as well.Like i said,I only attempt to reason with people who tell me they can believe that the kennedy assassination was done by elements in the government but not 9/11.those kinds of people can handle kennedy being killed off cause it was so long ago,they just cant handle 9/11 cause its so more recent.I usually can reason with THOSE kinds of people.

 

[Big_D]

Danny Jowenko on WTC 7 controlled demolition

this man says a day

YouTube - Danny Jowenko on WTC 7 controlled demolition


YouTube - 9/11 Conspiracy - Crash Course #4 of 4

I saw both youtube clips and I didn't see where he said that. In fact at the end of the first clip, danny jowenko describes how they would have to bring down the fall of the building. He states, "You need to have experienced people. But, if you had thirty or forty men...Two with a cutting torch. Others clearing the walls, others hooking up det cords and boosters. All that has to be coordinated. And another hooks up the electronic system..."
The individual interviewing him states that the building was on fire. Danny's reply is, "They didn't extinguish it?" To which the interviewer says, "No. So they would have had to do it while on fire." Then Danny says, "Yes. That's odd. I cannot explain it." This is taken from the youtube clip you provided and it shows that these people would have had to be working while the building was on fire.

Here are some other articles that show that it is long process to demolish a building:
"The button to bring down the 30-story office tower at Seventh and Houston streets, one of the tallest buildings ever to be imploded, will be pushed at 8 a.m., said John Angelina president of D.H. Griffin of Texas, a Houston company that has served on the demolition team, which also includes Midwest Wrecking in Fort Worth.

Crews have been working feverishly this week on the final preparations on work that began in November.

"We'll work as hard today as we have in the last four months," Brian Choate, Midwest Wrecking's chief executive, said Thursday."
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/14122036.htm
WTC Power Down

"In 24 days, CDI's 12 person loading crew placed 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on 9 levels of the structure. Over 36,000 ft. of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay devices were installed in CDI's implosion initiation system. As the implosion required the detonation of a total of 2,728 lb. of explosives, CDI implemented 36 "primary delays" and an additional 216 “micro-delays" in the implosion initiation sequence in an attempt to keep detonation overpressure to a minimum."
Controlled Demolition, Inc. | Press Release
WTC Power Down

 

[Big_D]

yeah I would say those people of yours are far more of a better source to listen to than his.matter of fact,I have seen you list in the past Ray Mcgovern who was a former CIA analysis op for BUSH SR listed before.I know he believes 9/11 is an inside job cause not only does david ray griffith list him as someone who thinks so but I was fortunate enough to meet him at a 9/11 truth movement once and got to talk with him and he told me he goes through the same thing we do all the time when he tries to tell people 9/11 was an inside job.that he gets called a wacko conspiracy theorist even though the evidence is overwhelming.sorry but i will believe high level intel people who actually served under BUSH sr in the CIA over BIG D'S people anyday of the year.

So why is it that you would take these people's opinion over my experts? As I have PROVED,(from post number 260 in this thread) I have engineers professors from the top engineering schools in the world! Here is a list of the top 10 engineering schools in the world: http://skorcareer.com.my/blog/worlds-top-10-engineering-schools-20082009/2008/12/11/ From the top five listed, I have used engineering professors at all five of them. Again, they all agree with me. Why would you take the word of anyone else over theirs? Who would know better on why the WTC buildings collapsed? Yet, you will take the word of an EX CIA agent at the time of the attacks and has NO engineering experience at all. Also, I have had trouble finding somewhere that McGovern actually says he believes 9/11 was an inside job. He thinks that the 9/11 investigation left open many questions and wants a new one. However, I cannot find where he says he believes it was done by our govt. I have been able to find that McGovern signed a petition that he believes Bush purposely allowed the attacks to happen. He didnt say that bush made it happen. When you met him, he could have been referring that people call him a conspiracy theorist because he believes that Bush let the attacks to occur, not perpetrating it.

 

[Toro]

New Seismic Data Refutes Official WTC Explanation

Two unexplained "spikes" in the seismic record from Sept. 11 indicate huge bursts of energy shook the ground beneath the World Trade Center's twin towers immediately prior to the collapse. American Free Press has learned of pools of "molten steel" found at the base of the collapsed twin towers weeks after the collapse. Although the energy source for these incredibly hot areas has yet to be explained, New York seismometers recorded huge bursts of energy, which caused unexplained seismic "spikes" at the beginning of each collapse.

http://100777.com/node/245

This is what the site says

Seismographs at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N. Y., 21 miles north of the WTC, recorded strange seismic activity on Sept. 11 that has still not been explained.

This is what Protec, the demolition experts, say

Seismographs at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, New York, recorded the collapses of WTC 1, 2 and 7. This data was later released to the public and currently appears on their website. Additionally, on 9/11 Protec field technicians were utilizing portable field seismographs to continuously record ground vibrations on several construction sites in Manhattan and Brooklyn for liability purposes.

In all cases where seismographs detected the collapses, waveform readings indicate a single, gradually ascending and descending level of ground vibrations during the event. At no point during 9/11 were sudden or independent vibration "spikes" documented by any seismograph, and we are unaware of any entity possessing such data.

This evidence makes a compelling argument against explosive demolition. The laws of physics dictate that any detonation powerful enough to defeat steel columns would have transferred excess energy through those same columns into the ground, and would certainly have been detected by at least one of the monitors that were sensitive enough to record the structural collapses. However, a detailed analysis of all available data reveals no presence of any unusual or abnormal vibration events.

http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC STUDY 8-06 w clarif as of 9-8-06 .pdf

From Lamont

[Won-Young Kim] led the effort at Lamont to document and interpret seismic signals from the tragedies of 2001 September 11, finding detections up to 400 km from Ground Zero in Manhattan, and supplying numerous investigators with the times of the two plane impacts in Manhattan and the one crash in Pennsylvania. He also showed that claims of a seismic detection of the attack on the Pentagon were false. His work here has been an important part of the official U.S. government report on what actually happened in this tragedy.

Won-Young Kim Wins Eastern Section SSA Award | Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory

More

On Sept. 11, 2001, the Lamont network recorded the impacts of two jets hitting the twin towers of the World Trade Center, and their subsequent collapses. "I just cried," Kim told The New York Times. Then, he went to work, leading the effort to analyze the data. Initially, there were mistaken reports about the exact times of the attacks, but Kim and his colleagues pinpointed them through the seismic recordings: 8:46:26 a.m. and 9:02:54 a.m. Their analysis also clarified the time when a third hijacked plane crashed in Shanksville, Pa.: 10:06:05 a.m. The findings became part of the official government report on the tragedy.

Urban Earthquakes, Nuclear Bombs And 9/11: New York Seismologist Honored For Work Local And Global

So the guy who did the seismic tests at Lamont contributed to the official report - which the conspiracists say is false - did not say that an explosion caused the WTC to fall.

From Popular Mechanics

Claim: Seismographs at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y., 21 miles north of the WTC, recorded the events of 9/11. "The strongest jolts were all registered at the beginning of the collapses, well before falling debris struck the earth," reports the Web site WhatReallyHappened.com.

A columnist on Prisonplanet.com, a Web site run by radio talk show host Alex Jones, claims the seismic spikes (boxed area on Graph 1) are "indisputable proof that massive explosions brought down" the towers. The Web site says its findings are supported by two seismologists at the observatory, Won-Young Kim and Arthur Lerner-Lam. Each "sharp spike of short duration," says Prisonplanet.com, was consistent with a "demolition-style implosion."

Fine Lines: Revisionists say sharp spikes (graph 1, above) mean bombs toppled the WTC. Scientists disprove the claim with the more detailed graph 2 (below). (Seismograph readings by Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University: Won-Young Kim, senior research scientist; Arthur Lerner-Lam, associate director; Mary Tobin, senior science writer)

FACT: "There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers," Lerner-Lam tells PM. "That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context."

The report issued by Lamont-Doherty includes various graphs showing the seismic readings produced by the planes crashing into the two towers as well as the later collapse of both buildings. WhatReallyHappened.com chooses to display only one graph (Graph 1), which shows the readings over a 30-minute time span.

On that graph, the 8- and 10-second collapses appear — misleadingly — as a pair of sudden spikes. Lamont-Doherty's 40-second plot of the same data (Graph 2) gives a much more detailed picture: The seismic waves — blue for the South Tower, red for the North Tower — start small and then escalate as the buildings rumble to the ground. Translation: no bombs.

Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report - Popular Mechanics

Of course, the conspiracists resort to ad hominem attacks against Popular Mechanics. Its an old tactic - discredit your opponent and divert attention from the argument. I would too if I were them, given their good work rebutting the conspiracists. However, Popular Mechanics comes to the same conclusion as Protec, who are world-renowned experts in demolition.

 

[Big_D]

another perfect example of how you fall for the propaganda by the government.I have seen that documentary you are talking about and it is complete B.S.they didnt disprove anything.watch the video sometime called The "MEN" who killed kennedy.

That doesnt mean anything. They could have simply misspoke.

it has far more truth to it than the propaganda YOU saw.it IS relevent because like i said,if you STILL believe in THAT fairy tale which has been proven to be a fairy tale over the years,you'll live in denial on THIS one as well.Like i said,I only attempt to reason with people who tell me they can believe that the kennedy assassination was done by elements in the government but not 9/11.those kinds of people can handle kennedy being killed off cause it was so long ago,they just cant handle 9/11 cause its so more recent.I usually can reason with THOSE kinds of people.

Did you even read the words you quoted from me? I CLEARLY said that I had no opinion on the JFK assassination as I never researched it before. Yet again, you jump to conclusions.As I said, the history channel show did seem to provide an adequate rebuttal for the movie but that was the only info I saw on the subject.

 

[Big_D]

read my post again,i just explained it and no you did not prove me wrong.

Again, you made an adequate reason why someone wouldnt step forward, you NEVER made an argument why someone would take the time and write a well thought out paper on how the planes brought down the WTC buildings. Again, NOBODY is forcing them to write these papers.

and I would check that guys bank account in India after he started saying that to see how much richer he got.

Give me proof of this and I will believe you. Don't you think that this professor is already well off financially wise? Why would go against what he knows is the truth to support a government that is not even his own? If he believed it was brought down by demolition then he could have simply created a paper explaining this and nobody would be able to combat it, as it would be the truth. Next, the paper he wrote is barely known. If the govt paid him off then it would be well acknowledged by now. Furthermore, this professor actually disagrees with the NIST findings! He believes the planes still brought down the towers, but he disagrees on the specifics. The paper is in fact has not been loading in the past few days. If the govt did pay him off, then it is now in vain. In addition, They would not put their reputation on the line and take such pride in their work and wouldn't let this happen. Also, if our govt is buying people off then wouldn't some trustworthy individual have spoken up by now? I had many other experts as well from different countries and they all disagree with you. For example, the engineering professor from the University of Tokyo (rated one of the top 10 engineering universities in the world) also agrees with me.
His paper: http://shippai.jst.go.jp/en/Detail?fn=0&id=CA1000265
The professors credentials: http://www.adm.u-tokyo.ac.jp/IRS/IntroPage_E/intro70145484_e.html
Like I said in the past, your points opens up a pandora's box of questions that are just too many for your point to hold weight.

 

[eots]

This is what the site says



This is what Protec, the demolition experts, say



http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC STUDY 8-06 w clarif as of 9-8-06 .pdf

From Lamont



Won-Young Kim Wins Eastern Section SSA Award | Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory

More



Urban Earthquakes, Nuclear Bombs And 9/11: New York Seismologist Honored For Work Local And Global

So the guy who did the seismic tests at Lamont contributed to the official report - which the conspiracists say is false - did not say that an explosion caused the WTC to fall.

From Popular Mechanics



Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report - Popular Mechanics

Of course, the conspiracists resort to ad hominem attacks against Popular Mechanics. Its an old tactic - discredit your opponent and divert attention from the argument. I would too if I were them, given their good work rebutting the conspiracists. However, Popular Mechanics comes to the same conclusion as Protec, who are world-renowned experts in demolition.

popular mechanics is in direct conflict with the findings of nist and is not a credible source yet it is directly and indirectly the voice of the official conspiracy theory and if protec wishes to keep lucrative government contracts they b3etter pull the party line..

 

[Toro]

popular mechanics is in direct conflict with the findings of nist and is not a credible source yet it is directly and indirectly the voice of the official conspiracy theory and if protec wishes to keep lucrative government contracts they b3etter pull the party line..

Rather than engage in ad hominem attacks, explain this graph from Lamont and why your link excluded it.

 

[Toro]

You know, this argument that everyone is tainted because they have contracts to defend / employment to consider is taken to extremes by the conspiracists. Perhaps we should ask, who the hell was Alex Jones before 9/11? How much money has he made from feeding all these conspiracy theories? How much money have guys made from writing books? Who the hell were the Loose Change guys, besides some unemployed drop-outs living in the woods before 9/11? Do they not have a vested financial in keeping this going? Perhaps all conspiracists who have made a dime off 9/11 should be disqualified as sources entirely.