To add comments or start new threads please go to the full version of: Basic Physics
PhysForum Science, Physics and Technology Discussion Forums > General Sci-Tech Discussions > Other Sci-Tech Topics
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148

Alan (ex elevator man)
Do you believe someone should have investigated the problems with the elevators ?

I'm not sure how to answer that. Any 'problems' were the result of a plane crashing into the building creating havoc with everything, not just the elevators. The problems with people being stuck... well, that's what they were designed to do, which is keep the public from doing anything stupid and getting killed by crawling out themselves, under normal circumstances... meaning a stuck car that just blew a fuse, or overran a floor, or any number of things that will shut one down. Other than keeping planes out of buildings, I'm not sure what results an investigation would find.
reasonwhy
QUOTE (Alan (ex elevator man)+May 7 2006, 09:51 PM)
Do you believe someone should have investigated the problems with the elevators ?

I'm not sure how to answer that.  Any 'problems' were the result of a plane crashing into the building creating havoc with everything, not just the elevators. The problems with people being stuck... well, that's what they were designed to do, which is keep the public from doing anything stupid and getting killed by crawling out themselves, under normal circumstances... meaning a stuck car that just blew a fuse, or overran a floor, or any number of things that will shut one down. Other than keeping planes out of buildings, I'm not sure what results an investigation would find.

<br>Elevators were locked and could only be opened from the elevator roof. The people trained to open the elevators were ordered to leave.

The elevators were supposed to open at the lobby during an emergency. At least 50 elevators in one building did not.

Nobody appered to know the emergency plans and who was responsible for the elevators.

USA TODAY estimates that at least 200 people died inside World Trade Center elevators, the biggest elevator catastrophe in history.
Rove's shill
QUOTE (David B. Benson+May 7 2006, 11:45 PM)
A collapse scenario for WTC 7 --- The FEMA report on the collapse of WTC 7 appears to require 47 seconds from start to finish, much longer than the 18 seconds for the preliminary estimated time from the LDEO seismograph record. While the beginning of the collapse might not cause ground shocks, surely the final event, the collapse of the north wall, did. So this collapse scenario is just long enough to account for the 18 seconds of ground shocks. You may add more 'collapse' at the beginning if you wish. The events to be discussed occurred in the following order, with the stated times, taken from the previously posted video:

unobserved............................... 4 seconds
east penthouse sinks............... 5 seconds  (first 3 to disappear)
west penthouse sinks.............. 2 seconds
north wall falls........................... 7 seconds
---------------------------------------------------
total time................................. 18 seconds

Unobserved: The collapse is believed to initiate about floor 5--7. Some accounts state that floor 5 was burning most fiercely, others than it was floor 7. In either case, the fire was strongest in the eastern portion of the building, with flames coming out the windows in the east side. My choice of moment 0.0 is when enough of the lower portion of the east part of WTC 7 collapsed onto the ConEd station below to begin producing the seismograph trace of the entire event. Perhaps by this time up through floor 12, another floor with observed fires, had fallen. The east side continues to fall, from the bottom towards the top. The east curtain wall largely falls in, to the west. The east portion of the south curtain wall falls partly to the south, onto the street to the south.

East penthouse sinks: The east penthouse slowly sinks below the parapet of the north wall, developing a kink in the middle where the collapse of the penthouse and the roof is most pronounced. (The kink is not the 'kink' mentioned in the FEMA report. That one I will call a 'crease' and is not yet observed.) The east and south curtain walls continue as before; the north and west curtain walls are unaffected as yet. After the east penthouse has completely disappeared, it is possible to see daylight through at least one upper story window in the north wall toward the east end. This indicates that entire inner structure has fallen for the eastern approximately 1/3 of the building.

West penthouse sinks: This penthouse is about twice as long, east to west, as the other. It sinks out of sight behind the parapet of the north wall as the internal structure below it falls apart. At this stage the western portion of the south wall is falling as well. Again some goodly portion of it falls into the street to the south and some of the southwesterly-most portions actually end up on top of WTC 6 across the street to the south. Both the north and the west curtain walls continue to stand as the west penthouse disappears.

North wall falls: The north and west walls are now completely free of any connections except for the posts and beams of the curtain walls themselves. Also, the last remaining bracing below the curtain walls now fails. The north and west walls, largely in one piece at the beginning of the fall, fall freely. A substantial portion of the west curtain wall  falls to the west of the WTC 7 site. The north wall, however, falls somewhat southerly, hence ending up draped over the WTC rubble pile. After these walls have fallen about 10 stories, a crease appears in the upper left hand corner of the north wall. This crease rapidly races, as a growing line, across the face of the north wall, both down and to the right. This approximately 30 degree crease indicates that the segments of the north wall have lost all internal structural integrity as the wall falls freely.

So: the scenario agrees with the debris field, the videos, the seismograph records, the firemen's reports on Firehouse.com, and --- to an extent --- various descriptions such as the FEMA report and (perhaps) what various NIST investigators have said. I haven't restated all of that evidence here, but I am now ready for comments, complaints, and interpretations.

<!--QuoteBegin-->
QUOTE
April 19, 2006 – According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, on March 31, 2006, under solicitation number SB1341-06-Q-0186, a fixed price purchase order has been awarded by the federal government to Applied Research Associates, Inc. (ARA) of Albuquerque, New Mexico to research and provide World Trade Center Building Seven structural analysis and collapse hypotheses.[1]  Specifically, the U.S. government has contracted with ARA to:



Create detailed floor analyses to determine likely modes of failure for Floors 8 to 46 due to failure of one or more supporting columns (at one or more locations) in World Trade Center Building Seven. 
<br>Link

8 thru 46? Are you kidding me? Benson, you gotta get a hold of these guys at the NIST. You got the whole package. Just undercut the price. At least match the price and convince them of the bargain because they will get 8 floors for free!

Award link
Rove's shill
QUOTE (David B. Benson+May 7 2006, 11:45 PM)
A collapse scenario for WTC 7 --- The FEMA report on the collapse of WTC 7 appears to require 47 seconds from start to finish, much longer than the 18 seconds for the preliminary estimated time from the LDEO seismograph record. While the beginning of the collapse might not cause ground shocks, surely the final event, the collapse of the north wall, did. So this collapse scenario is just long enough to account for the 18 seconds of ground shocks. You may add more 'collapse' at the beginning if you wish. The events to be discussed occurred in the following order, with the stated times, taken from the previously posted video:

unobserved............................... 4 seconds
east penthouse sinks............... 5 seconds (first 3 to disappear)
west penthouse sinks.............. 2 seconds
north wall falls........................... 7 seconds
---------------------------------------------------
total time................................. 18 seconds

Unobserved: The collapse is believed to initiate about floor 5--7. Some accounts state that floor 5 was burning most fiercely, others than it was floor 7. In either case, the fire was strongest in the eastern portion of the building, with flames coming out the windows in the east side. My choice of moment 0.0 is when enough of the lower portion of the east part of WTC 7 collapsed onto the ConEd station below to begin producing the seismograph trace of the entire event. Perhaps by this time up through floor 12, another floor with observed fires, had fallen. The east side continues to fall, from the bottom towards the top. The east curtain wall largely falls in, to the west. The east portion of the south curtain wall falls partly to the south, onto the street to the south.

East penthouse sinks: The east penthouse slowly sinks below the parapet of the north wall, developing a kink in the middle where the collapse of the penthouse and the roof is most pronounced. (The kink is not the 'kink' mentioned in the FEMA report. That one I will call a 'crease' and is not yet observed.) The east and south curtain walls continue as before; the north and west curtain walls are unaffected as yet. After the east penthouse has completely disappeared, it is possible to see daylight through at least one upper story window in the north wall toward the east end. This indicates that entire inner structure has fallen for the eastern approximately 1/3 of the building.

West penthouse sinks: This penthouse is about twice as long, east to west, as the other. It sinks out of sight behind the parapet of the north wall as the internal structure below it falls apart. At this stage the western portion of the south wall is falling as well. Again some goodly portion of it falls into the street to the south and some of the southwesterly-most portions actually end up on top of WTC 6 across the street to the south. Both the north and the west curtain walls continue to stand as the west penthouse disappears.

North wall falls: The north and west walls are now completely free of any connections except for the posts and beams of the curtain walls themselves. Also, the last remaining bracing below the curtain walls now fails. The north and west walls, largely in one piece at the beginning of the fall, fall freely. A substantial portion of the west curtain wall falls to the west of the WTC 7 site. The north wall, however, falls somewhat southerly, hence ending up draped over the WTC rubble pile. After these walls have fallen about 10 stories, a crease appears in the upper left hand corner of the north wall. This crease rapidly races, as a growing line, across the face of the north wall, both down and to the right. This approximately 30 degree crease indicates that the segments of the north wall have lost all internal structural integrity as the wall falls freely.

So: the scenario agrees with the debris field, the videos, the seismograph records, the firemen's reports on Firehouse.com, and --- to an extent --- various descriptions such as the FEMA report and (perhaps) what various NIST investigators have said. I haven't restated all of that evidence here, but I am now ready for comments, complaints, and interpretations.
Oh yeah, you got alot of unobserved 'talking points' in your post. Can we talk about the observed symmetry of the collapse, or was that covered by the 'snowflake book'.
Alan (ex elevator man)
Elevators were locked and could only be opened from the elevator roof. The people trained to open the elevators were ordered to leave.

That's by design, and that won't change. As for leaving... these are mechanics, not firemen or first responders.

The elevators were supposed to open at the lobby during an emergency. At least 50 elevators in one building did not.

That happens when all hell breaks loose... power going out, cables cut, fried elevator controllers (each one has it's own controller, plus a master controller in each bank of elevators) from the jet fuel.

Nobody appered to know the emergency plans and who was responsible for the elevators.

I'm betting there is no elevator plan for "Plane hits building, fires throughout".

USA TODAY estimates that at least 200 people died inside World Trade Center elevators, the biggest elevator catastrophe in history.

And how many died that weren't in an elevator? That "the biggest elevator catastrophe in history" was part of an even bigger catastrophe isn't a coincedence.
lenbrazil
QUOTE (reasonwhy+May 8 2006, 06:07 AM)
Elevators were locked and could only  be opened from the elevator roof. The people trained to open the elevators were ordered to leave.

<br>There is no clear evidence they WERE ordered to leave, even the president of Ace said they left on their own. The only person saying they were ordered to leave is not a disinterested party but one of the mechanics. He doesn't say specifically who gave the order. IF an order to leave was issued it probably came from the bosses at Ace.

Also as Alan pointed out they aren't rescue workers. When cops or firemen sign up they know they will be asked to put their lives on the line to save others that's not the case with mechanics. Did you bother to look at that thread I provided the link to? The posts are overwhelmingly supportive of the mechanics (it's an elevator industry forum) people say that they were right to leave not that they were ordered to.

Sure some lives could have been saved if the mechanics hadn't left but then a large number of them would have been killed. Can you honestly say you wouldn't have left if you were one of them? Have you ever risked you life to save strangers?

There are door locks that could have been opened from the outside but as was explained in the article those models didn't fit the WTC's elevators. This might not have made much of a difference because as the article indicateds many opputunities were passed up to save people in the elevators. THAT should be investigated.

QUOTE
The elevators were supposed to open at the lobby during an emergency. At least 50 elevators in one building did not. 
<br>I agree with you that should be / should have been looked into

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
The elevators were supposed to open at the lobby during an emergency. At least 50 elevators in one building did not. 
<br>I agree with you that should be / should have been looked into

Nobody appered to know the emergency plans and who was responsible for the elevators.
<br>Not supported by the evidence, there was disagreement between the PA and Ace

QUOTE
USA TODAY estimates that at least 200 people died inside World Trade Center elevators, the biggest elevator catastrophe in history.
<br>Which was part of the largest structural collapse in history and the deadliest terrorist attack in history and the deadliest attack on the US in history. As I already pointed out most of them would have died any way. It's hard to protect elevators from having all their cables cut simultaneously or being engulfed by fireballs
lenbrazil
QUOTE (reasonwhy+May 8 2006, 03:06 AM)
QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 7 2006, 06:26 PM)

With people from Ace backing his version it not fair to call the writer a liar. Newspaper do occasionally get things wrong, sometimes this is  intentional (Judith Miller) but sometimes people make stuff up and sometimes people don’t understand what they read.

There is a 8000+ message thread on the topic

http://www.liveboards.com/mb/server/thread...50&S=1550&SID6=

The only mainstream news I believe comes from Stephen Colbert. biggrin.gif

QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 7 2006, 06:26 PM)

Reasonwhy, if you are going to make a claim in a forum you should provide links to articles that support not contradict it.

Len

Len , it is hard for me to remember what you do not know and have not read. That was not the reason I posted the article link. tongue.gif
Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the Jones interview has come up on this thread before, if not how could you assume that I or anybody else was aware of it? If so please provide a link to the post where it did. When a person makes a claim and a link follows it's understood that the linked page will collaborate not contradict that claim

As for Colbert apparently he went on the Today show and insinuated that the mechanics were cowards so he's probably an as$hole but you have yet to produce convincing evidence that he was wrong about them leaving on their own. That version was confirmed by the president of Ace. It's ironic that you provided the link to support your claims and then you turn around and try to impeach the credibility of the author.

I forgot to ask you this a couple of weeks back, you said something about the elevators or shafts being "hermetically sealed", what was that all about?

Also you denied that any fireballs went down the elevator shafts but the article you linked provided additional evidence they did.

Len
lenbrazil
QUOTE (reasonwhy+May 6 2006, 09:52 PM)
So we get a gallon of Babbit metal at the bottom of each elevator shaft. That really solves the molten metal mystery. Babbit metal used on modern barrings is just a thin layer (add another tablespoon per elevator).
Each tower had 103 elevators so using your math we'd have a total of a little over 103 gallomns let's say 105 that could have made a pretty good size pool at the bottom of the shafts.

I don't know how to convert from gallons to sq. inches so I'll go to metric and back. 1 gallon = 3.8 liters, 105 gallons = 399 liters. I'll round that to 400. 400 liters = 0.4 cubic meters. 1 meter = 39.3 inches. So we could have had a 15.7 [0.4 x 39.3] x 39.3 x 39.3 inch pool or a 64 x 64 x 6 inch pool etc. The shafts weren't seperated before the collapse so there is no reason to expect the babbitt would have formed seperate pools. AFAIK their is only one report of molten metals in the elevator shafts, that of Peter Tully, and it doesn't sound like it was a 1st hand account.

In very few of the accounts of molten metal did the person claim to have seen it. In addition to babbitt and aluminium several other metals have metling points below 1000 C some of them are among the most commonly used metals.

ALAN - Is it possible there was lead, zinc, magnesium, tin, brass or brone in the elevators? If so how much?

Len
adoucette
QUOTE (reasonwhy+May 7 2006, 10:47 PM)


No, I do not think the elevator guy is lying. I believe his first reaction. He would be aware of all the Brakes and safety devices on the elevator and that is why he did not assume the elevators PLUNGED TO THE BASEMENT. He was probably debriefed by two or three professionals (similar to yourself) and they told him what to think. From that point on it was easier for him to believe  that elevators PLUNGE TO THE BASEMENT when the cables are sheared instead of what he learned in training and from previous experience.

My point is the elevators were  200-400 people died should have been investigated. USA today is the only investigation I have found.

Sinceyou don't understand the difference between something being OPEN (when power is on) and CLAMPED SHUT (when power is lost), I'll ignore that you don't understand how the safety brake works.

But

YOU ARE SAYING the elevator guy is lying.

they told him what to think

Total MADE UP BS.

As to the investigation, it is already STANDARD PRACTICE that you don't get in elevators in an emergency. This is just ONE MORE reinforcement of that concept.

However, I do believe NIST dealt with the Elevators, just not sure in what regard.

http://aec.ihs.com/news-06Q2/nist-icc-wtc.jsp

The 19 proposed changes - submitted by building code experts associated with two ICC committees, the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) and the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) - address areas such as increased resistance to building collapse from fire and other incidents, use of spray-applied fire resistive materials (commonly known as "fireproofing"), performance and redundancy of fire protection systems (such as automatic sprinklers), elevators for use by first responders and evacuating occupants, the number and location of stairwells, exit path markings and fuel oil storage/piping.

Arthur



Arthur
brian
Horses mouth on its way?

Reynolds: “Come Out of the White House with Your Hands Up!”

---Reynolds, who served as George W. Bush’s Labor Department Chief Economist in 2001-2002, believes that a 9/11 truth victory is looming on the near-term horizon. He predicted that one or more of the 9/11 insiders will soon “give it up” and come forward with what they know, saying “Remember, you heard it here first.” He said that most of those complicit in the attacks did not realize how over-the-top the plot was, due to the need-to-know compartmentalization of such covert operations, and that some semi-complicit individuals will probably be coming forward---

http://milwaukee.indymedia.org/en/2006/05/205461.shtml

Will we see Arthur turning?
adoucette
OH BOY, an ECONOMIST.

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

See http://nomoregames.net/ for MORE idiocy.

Note, he didn't show up with any PROOF of his allegations.

Arthur
Common Sense
QUOTE (Guest_Alan (ex elevator man)+May 7 2006, 01:13 AM)
*not sure if I did this right, though I'm registered now Dontcha hate newbies!

Did you ever work for ACE elevator?

Nada, never did. I appreciate you guys taking me serious. I don't pretend to compare with y'allz degrees and scientific formulas, tho I eat that stuff up. This site is an intellectually stimulating experience for me... and I thank Dr. Benson for pressing me to stop in. I only wish I enjoyed the learning experience when I was actually still in school. I might coulda got a degree or two (85th-percentile on h/s tests), but alas... the hippie days were my focus back then. *laughs*

Just ignore the blue-collar guy and keep up with the scientific stuff, I'm soaking up every word.

Again, props to Dr. Benson, and only slightly less for the rest of you guys.
There are actually only a couple here who have actual degrees. The rest are here because of the topic like me. You seem to have more expertise than most here. smile.gif
Common Sense
QUOTE (reasonwhy+May 7 2006, 09:47 PM)
He was probably debriefed by two or three professionals (similar to yourself) and they told him what to think. From that point on it was easier for him to believe that elevators PLUNGE TO THE BASEMENT when the cables are sheared instead of what he learned in training and from previous experience.

As opposed to reading a real conspiracy theory web site where they told you what to think. From that point on anyone who disagrees with you is brainwashed right? PLEASE...
Common Sense
QUOTE (adoucette+May 8 2006, 09:32 AM)
OH BOY, an ECONOMIST.

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

See http://nomoregames.net/ for MORE idiocy.

Note, he didn't show up with any PROOF of his allegations.

Arthur
This is even worse than the UL water tester turned steel expert.
astaire
Hi Neu-Fonze,
I'm having a bit of trouble swallowing what you are suggesting.

QUOTE (NEU-FONZE+Apr 29 2006, 05:40 PM)
So, the bottom line is this:

               The top section of WTC 2 tipped at a FASTER angular velocity than is 
               physically possible for a body freely rotating about a pivot at its base!

<br>So what is this supposed to imply?

The pivot was elsewhere? It was not "freely floating"?

I can't think of any mechanisms that could achieve the rotation you suggest including explosions.

You are assuming a rectangular solid block with a hinge on the bottom left corner. Correct?

The force of gravity acting at the center of mass of the block provides a clockwise rotational force.
You seem to be saying some additional force is required?
Where and from what?

An explosive force inside the block would provide forces in all directions.

To provide a force in the direction you suggest we would need to see mass exjected to the left or above. This was not seen as far as I know.

An explostion to the left or above would work but that is not what was seen.


-Astaire
astaire
Hi Common Sense,

Its been a while. Thanks again for providing the links to 2 debunking websites. However, I didn't find a page where the early fall of the antenna tower is debunked.

Do you know of a page that debunks that?

-Astaire
adoucette
QUOTE (Common Sense+May 8 2006, 11:20 AM)
QUOTE (adoucette+May 8 2006, 09:32 AM)
OH BOY, an ECONOMIST.

laugh.gif  laugh.gif  laugh.gif

See http://nomoregames.net/ for MORE idiocy.

Note, he didn't show up with any PROOF of his allegations.

Arthur

This is even worse than the UL water tester turned steel expert.
What is ludicrous is the CT camp paints him as a Bush INSIDER who has some special knowledge of what went on.

Then you get to his site and its just a rehash of the SAME CT BS.

That and a lot of links to Amazon Com & Hufschmid.

Here are some excerpts from this mass of BS.

It is well-known that the hole in the west wing of the Pentagon, less than 18-foot diameter, was too small to accommodate a Boeing 757, but the North Tower’s hole wasn’t big enough for a Boeing 767 either, the alleged widebody airliner used on AA Flight 11 (officially tail number N334AA, FAA-listed as "destroyed"). A Boeing 767 has a wingspan of 155’ 1" (47.6 m) yet the maximum distance across the hole in the North Tower was about 115 feet (35 m), a hole undersized by some 40 feet or 26 percent. "The last few feet at the tips of the wings did not even break through the exterior columns," comments Hufschmid

The small size of the holes in both towers casts doubt on the airliner-impact hypothesis and favors professional demolition again.

The hole in the North Tower also is suspicious because it did not even have a continuous opening at the perimeter, but instead contained substantial WTC material (p. 27) just left of center (pp. 62, 105). This material appears integral to that area, so it did not move much, suggesting minimal displacement and no clean penetration by a jumbo jet.

In the case of the South Tower, an engine from UAL Flight 175 (tail number N612UA and FAA-registered as still valid!) has not been recovered despite the fact that the flight trajectory of the video plane implied that the right engine would miss the South Tower.

Adding to the problems of the official theory is the fact that photos of the North Tower hole show no evidence of a plane either. There is no recognizable wreckage or plane parts at the immediate crash site. While the issue probably takes us too far afield, the landing wheel assembly that allegedly flew out of the North Tower and was found several streets away could easily have been planted by FEMA or other government agents.

The familiar photo of the Flight 93 crash site in Pennsylvania shows no fuselage, engine or anything recognizable as a plane, just a smoking hole in the ground

The WTC 1 and Pentagon holes were not alone in being too small. Photos show that the hole in WTC 2 also was too small to have been caused by the crash of a Boeing 767. In fact, the South Tower hole is substantially smaller than the North Tower hole.

"The lack of flames is an indication that the fires were small, and the dark smoke is an indication that the fires were suffocating," points out Hufschmid (p. 35). Eyewitnesses in the towers, as well as police and firefighters, reported (pp. 199–200) the same thing.

Third, the impact opening was 15 floors lower in the South Tower than in the North Tower, where core columns were thicker, so the South Tower fire had to produce more heat to raise the steel temperatures to soften up (thermally weaken) the steel columns. Yet its fires were considerably smaller and 30 minutes shorter in duration. The Tower collapsed after burning only 56 minutes. A prime candidate to explain why "the wrong tower fell first" is that the small dying fire in the South Tower forced the hand of the mass murderers who decided to trigger demolition earlier than planned in order to sustain the lie that fire caused the collapse.


http://www.nomoregames.net/printer_friendl...d_WTCs_collapse


Arthur




adoucette
QUOTE (astaire+May 8 2006, 12:01 PM)
Hi Common Sense,

  Its been a while. Thanks again for providing the links to 2 debunking websites. However, I didn't find a page where the early fall of the antenna tower is debunked.

Do you know of a page that debunks that?

-Astaire

See http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=71481

For info on this issue.

QUOTE
"Photographic and videographic records were reviewed to identify structurally-related events. Where possible, all four faces of a building were examined for a given event or time period to provide complete understanding of the building response. Observations from a single vantage point can be misleading and may result in incorrect interpretation of events. For instance, photographic and videographic records taken from due north of the WTC 1 collapse appeared to indicate that the antenna was sinking into the roof (McAllister 2002). When records from east and west vantage points were viewed, it was apparent that the building section above the impact area tilted to the south as the building collapsed."
<br>Arthur
newton
QUOTE
Third, the impact opening was 15 floors lower in the South Tower than in the North Tower, where core columns were thicker, so the South Tower fire had to produce more heat to raise the steel temperatures to soften up (thermally weaken) the steel columns. Yet its fires were considerably smaller and 30 minutes shorter in duration. The Tower collapsed after burning only 56 minutes. A prime candidate to explain why "the wrong tower fell first" is that the small dying fire in the South Tower forced the hand of the mass murderers who decided to trigger demolition earlier than planned in order to sustain the lie that fire caused the collapse
<br>wow.

'BS'.

lol.

Arthur
Christophera
You Wouldn't Know Elevator Spam If you Ate It. careful now, you might choke.

Hate to interrupt your feasting, but you guys are just getting too full of shiit and too far from anything having to do with physics or what is important.

Free fall, ............ is logically the first thing on the physics "to do" list. "How did it happen?" "What does it take to get the structure we are told exist, to fall freely, what does it look like if it is to fall at that rate?" If that doesn't look like what we saw then we have to ask, "What kind of structure can fall at free fall within the event witnessed?"

Since there appears to be few here that have the needed focus, I'm going to try and start some sensical, productive focus.

Again, and again. It's true. I've had to post this over and over to try and get physics people here to use logic and the concept of physics to eliminate the impossible.

This is the core of WTC 2. Can this possible be the remnants of 47, 1,300 foot steel columns of the core as lying FEMA says?

User posted image

Here is a steel column, but it is not inside the core area. It is 14 inches thick.

User posted image

This photo was taken a second after the above. Can this possibly be the remnants of the 47 columns? We can see that the 14 inch columns above are far larger. What material could this possibly be. (hint = rebar)

User posted image


Gee, .................. could the towers have had a concrete core? How would that appear if it were blown up and would that enable free fall better than steel columns within the event witnessed?

User posted image
adoucette
QUOTE (newton+May 8 2006, 12:22 PM)
QUOTE
Third, the impact opening was 15 floors lower in the South Tower than in the North Tower, where core columns were thicker, so the South Tower fire had to produce more heat to raise the steel temperatures to soften up (thermally weaken) the steel columns. Yet its fires were considerably smaller and 30 minutes shorter in duration. The Tower collapsed after burning only 56 minutes. A prime candidate to explain why "the wrong tower fell first" is that the small dying fire in the South Tower forced the hand of the mass murderers who decided to trigger demolition earlier than planned in order to sustain the lie that fire caused the collapse
<br>wow.

'BS'.

lol.

Arthur
Yes, BS.

Since the plane hit the WTC 2 on the side where the floor length was only 30 feet, thus the plane arrived at the Core with more energy than in WTC 1, it did more damage to the core than was done in WTC 1, where it hit on the 60 ft floor side.

Additionally the asymmetric impact in WTC2 took out one of the CORNER core columns (none of which were taken out in the WTC 1 impact). The FOUR corner core columns supported 25% of the Core supported loads.

As you might expect, an asymmetric impact on the short floor side, that still hits the core would be a WORSE blow than a symmetrical impact on the long floor side.

Which means "the wrong tower fell first" is BS.

The assertion that the fires in the South Tower at the point of collapse were both "small" and "dying" is BS.

Which means that his overall assertion that: A prime candidate to explain why "the wrong tower fell first" is that the small dying fire in the South Tower forced the hand of the mass murderers who decided to trigger demolition earlier than planned in order to sustain the lie that fire caused the collapse

is ALSO BS.

Arthur
adoucette
QUOTE (christophera+)
you guys are just getting too full of shiit and too far from anything having to do with physics or what is important.

<br> laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Haven't had a post that makes me LMAO in a while.

Thanks

Arthur
yesitdid
QUOTE (Rove's shill+May 8 2006, 05:06 AM)
Did you really write that YID? You are going after Andrew for posting exclusively on this thread, but you post only slightly less than exclusively on this thread (or 911 related). But he is obsessed? Right? Is that what you are telling us?

Let me guess, it depends on my interpretation of slightly. Get Benson to help you on this one.

C'mon, you remember how we 'met', baby. Over on the Pentagon thread, you, Arthur(s), Cspam defending the 'truth'. Gang attacking those who wouldn't bow down. Ahhh those were the days, huh.

31 times!!!!!
Interpretation of 'slightly'? Don't make me laugh.

You post ZERO on any other topic and neither does Andrew. THAT is the point. ZERO, NADA, ZILCH, ZIP

One trick ponies that dance and loop.
yesitdid
Reynolds is touted as an expert for two reasons.
1 ) He is a Ph.D.
2 ) He is a former Whitehouse appointee.


Well Ph.D or not his expertise as an economist means that he should be good at ,,, arithematic. Hardly more than Foxx or metamars or Arthur or I has in the way of expertise. So scratch that value.

He may also have been in the Bush team, as it were, but there is no evidence to suggest that he learned anything about plans such as he proposes the Bush administration carried out on 9/11 so he certainly was not an insider in any plot. So scratch that value.

What you are left with is ,,,,, nothing!
Rove's shill
QUOTE (yesitdid+May 8 2006, 05:42 PM)
QUOTE (Rove's shill+May 8 2006, 05:06 AM)
Did you really write that YID? You are going after Andrew for posting exclusively on this thread, but you post only slightly less than exclusively on this thread (or 911 related). But he is obsessed? Right? Is that what you are telling us?

Let me guess, it depends on my interpretation of slightly. Get Benson to help you on this one.

C'mon, you remember how we 'met', baby. Over on the Pentagon thread, you, Arthur(s), Cspam defending the 'truth'. Gang attacking those who wouldn't bow down. Ahhh those were the days, huh.

31 times!!!!!

Interpretation of 'slightly'? Don't make me laugh.

You post ZERO on any other topic and neither does Andrew. THAT is the point. ZERO, NADA, ZILCH, ZIP

One trick ponies that dance and loop.
Yeah and you are 94% of a one trick pony that spins and misrepresents.

31 times!!!!
Christophera
QUOTE (adoucette+May 8 2006, 05:29 PM)
QUOTE (christophera+)
you guys are just getting too full of shiit and too far from anything having to do with physics or what is important.

<br> laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Haven't had a post that makes me LMAO in a while.

Thanks

Arthur

THX for confirming that you have no interest in determining how 3,000 fellow Americans died. I had a feeling you might laugh at my effort to create reasonable focus for the uses of physics to understand what did, and did not happen.
David B. Benson
Rove's shill --- It was interesting to read that NIST is trying once again to do a complete structural analysis of the collapse of WTC 7. My scenario only offers an overview, so I'll skip going for the contact. biggrin.gif I did take into account your so-called symmetry by pointing out that the north and west walls fell freely in 7 seconds, after the interior of the building was falling or had fallen. Would it have helped you if I had used 6.6 seconds instead? wink.gif Ok, I just rounded up. laugh.gif

Arthur --- Thanks for reporting the link regarding seismograph records. Do you know of any more? For some reason I am completely unable to get what I need directly from the LDEO site.

I don't recall who posted regarding the quite short seismograph records of 8 and 10 seconds for WTC 2 & 1, respectively. Recall that these times were the preliminary assessments. The link provided by Arthur appears to have some additional analysis done and I hope to discover more.

Yes, I am a retired professor. However, other than the simplest parts of Basic Physics, I don't claim any particular expertise in the topics under discussion. Shoot, I can't even manage to become a member properly. sad.gif
brian
QUOTE (yesitdid+May 8 2006, 05:49 PM)
Reynolds is touted as an expert for two reasons.
1 ) He is a Ph.D.
2 ) He is a former Whitehouse appointee.


Well Ph.D or not his expertise as an economist means that he should be good at ,,, arithematic. Hardly more than Foxx or metamars or Arthur or I has in the way of expertise. So scratch that value.

He may also have been in the Bush team, as it were, but there is no evidence to suggest that he learned anything about plans such as he proposes the Bush administration carried out on 9/11 so he certainly was not an insider in any plot. So scratch that value.

What you are left with is ,,,,, nothing!
The reality is you need not be anything other than reasonably intelligent and familiar with the evidence to know that -

"It is already possible to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, one very important thing: the destruction of the World Trade Centre was an inside job, orchestrated by terrorists within our own government."

- if your an American that is. We Scots just add a y to our.

The heartening thing about the Reynolds claim is that he must have connections that give him reason to believe some may be willing to come clean. As he said, many would know they were involved in something but only the true extent of what they were involved in would become clear afterwards.

And once the rats start to desert the sinking ship .....

What are we left with .. SEPTEMBERGATE?

Rove's shill
Benson
QUOTE

Rove's shill --- It was interesting to read that NIST is trying once again to do a complete structural analysis of the collapse of WTC 7.
<br>Is this sarcasm?
Common Sense
QUOTE (astaire+May 8 2006, 11:01 AM)
Hi Common Sense,

Its been a while. Thanks again for providing the links to 2 debunking websites. However, I didn't find a page where the early fall of the antenna tower is debunked.

Do you know of a page that debunks that?

-Astaire
I don't know what you mean by debunked the antenna on the tower. I'm going to assume you mean why did the antenna fall first. The antenna didn't fall first as other videos from other angles show which is just what the NIST said. They admitted the first FEMA preliminary hypothesis was wrong because they saw videos from one side which makes it seem like the antenna dropped first. That hypothesis was before they examined the evidence thoroughly.

Think of looking at a table with a large candle in the middle from slightly below the top of the table. If you quickly take the legs out of the side furthest from you, it will seem like the candle goes down first, but in reality the table is tilting away from you as the furthest unseen side falls.

They had a total of 4 reports discussing the progress of the investigations at different stages.
lenbrazil
QUOTE (yesitdid+May 8 2006, 05:49 PM)
Reynolds is touted as an expert for two reasons.
1 ) He is a Ph.D.
2 ) He is a former Whitehouse appointee.


Well Ph.D or not his expertise as an economist means that he should be good at ,,, arithematic. Hardly more than Foxx or metamars or Arthur or I has in the way of expertise. So scratch that value.

He may also have been in the Bush team, as it were, but there is no evidence to suggest that he learned anything about plans such as he proposes the Bush administration carried out on 9/11 so he certainly was not an insider in any plot. So scratch that value.

What you are left with is ,,,,, nothing!
Reynolds it should be pointed out was a low level part of the administration he was chief economist for the Labor dept.

He started on Sept 4, 2001 and thus had only been on the job 4 days.

He claims no inside knowledge, he learned about 9/11 on CNN and other media outlets just like the rest of us. He didn't start questioning 9/11 till after he left the administration.

He left the administration ebittereed towards the Bush administration for good (he opposed the invasion of Iraqi) and personal reasons (he felt he was being ignored) so as CS his being part of the administration is irrelevant.

[ http://www.boulderweekly.com/archive/090805/coverstory.html ]

So is his having a PhD, there is a PhD of Islamic studies who believes that Tom and Jerry was a plot by "the Jewish Disney company" to improve peoples perceptions of mice because Jews were associated with mice, there are PhDs in philosophy and physics who believe the Moon landings were faked (ST911 founder Fetzer is one), and Phds in electrical engineering, litature and political science who believe the Holocaust was a hoax. There are PhD in engineering and philosophy who belive in "inteligent design". PhDs it seems can believe all manners of nonsense outside their areas of specialty.

There are even cases PhD nut jobs beliveing lunacy with in their areas of specialty. there's Tom Chalko a physics PhD who thinks global warming will make the World explode and Michael Behe a biochemist who believe in imntrlligrnt design.

Reynolds too believes all manners of lunacy, he doesn't believe the Twin Towers were hit by planes.

So go ahead trot this whacko out as a poster boy for your cause.
Rove's shill
Here are a couple of seismic links I found Benson.



Here

Here

I don't know if they will help you.
adoucette
QUOTE
He started on Sept 4, 2001 and thus had only been on the job 4 days.
<br>Well THERE you have it.

The CUT OFF for getting the memo explaining the reason why we needed to blow up the WTC towers (and thus being IN ON IT) was Aug 31st.

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Arthur
tikay
QUOTE (Christophera+May 8 2006, 06:24 PM)
QUOTE (adoucette+May 8 2006, 05:29 PM)
QUOTE (christophera+)
you guys are just getting too full of shiit and too far from anything having to do with physics or what is important.

<br> laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Haven't had a post that makes me LMAO in a while.

Thanks

Arthur

THX for confirming that you have no interest in determining how 3,000 fellow Americans died. I had a feeling you might laugh at my effort to create reasonable focus for the uses of physics to understand what did, and did not happen.
Dont worry Author follows me about buggering me too. He prob'ly likes us too much! biggrin.gif
tikay
QUOTE (Christophera+May 8 2006, 06:24 PM)
[/QUOTE]
THX for confirming that you have no interest in determining how 3,000 fellow Americans died. I had a feeling you might laugh at my effort to create reasonable focus for the uses of physics to understand what did, and did not happen.
MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY!
yesitdid
QUOTE (brian+May 8 2006, 06:54 PM)
QUOTE (yesitdid+May 8 2006, 05:49 PM)
Reynolds is touted as an expert for two reasons.
1 ) He is a Ph.D.
2 ) He is a former Whitehouse appointee.


Well Ph.D or not his expertise as an economist means that he should be good at ,,,  arithmetic. Hardly more than Foxx or metamars or Arthur or I has in the way of expertise. So scratch that value.

He may also have been in the Bush team, as it were, but there is no evidence to suggest that he learned anything about plans such as he proposes the Bush administration carried out on 9/11 so he certainly was not an insider in any plot. So scratch that value.

What you are left with is ,,,,, nothing!

The reality is you need not be anything other than reasonably intelligent and familiar with the evidence to know that -

"It is already possible to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, one very important thing: the destruction of the World Trade Centre was an inside job, orchestrated by terrorists within our own government."

- if your an American that is. We Scots just add a y to our.

The heartening thing about the Reynolds claim is that he must have connections that give him reason to believe some may be willing to come clean. As he said, many would know they were involved in something but only the true extent of what they were involved in would become clear afterwards.

And once the rats start to desert the sinking ship .....

What are we left with .. SEPTEMBERGATE?

I am reasonably intelligent and in that quote I see a bold statement but nothing to back it up. When one examines Reynold's evidence anyone who is reasonably intelligent can deduce quite quickly that the man is a wrong on many counts.

Furthermore, although Reynolds comes right out and blames some unnamed faction of the USA gov't he has no evidence at all to link any particular faction of the gov't to 9/11 events. At best it is a leap of intuition.

He may believe that someone who knows the inside story will come forward but if his past pronouncements are any indication he has no reason to, other than a desire for something like this to occur.

We Canadians spell the contraction of "you are" , " you're " while we reserve "your" as the possessive of the word "you".

If nothing happens in September will the CT's have to change the name or will they simply state that it will happen in 12 more months?
yesitdid
How did 3000 people die on 9/11/01, Christophera? A group of terrorists hijacked 4 planes and flew 1 into the ground when the passengers attempted to retake control of the aircraft and flew the other three into structures that are very easily seen from the air and which are symbols of American strength.

Reverend
I'm new around here, but I've looked at those seismic records and something that appeared odd sparked my curiosity.

The first impact appears to have an excessive amount of energy to it for a plane hitting the building, not just in comparison to the other plane impact, but by itself.

Has anyone estimated how much energy was in the impact, compared to how much energy is revealed in the seismic vibrations that match the time?

Do the other seismic events related to the 1st and 2nd collapse actually have roughly equivalent energy to what might be expected, or are they much more than that?

Alan (ex elevator man)
ALAN - Is it possible there was lead, zinc, magnesium, tin, brass or brone in the elevators? If so how much?
=====================

Len, there could be brass fixtures inside the cab (actual car you ride in). It's mostly stainless steel though, like the door jambs, transoms and car panels (where the buttons are). As for the others, I wouldn't know... except for the babbitt contains mostly lead with tin and copper. It comes out to us onsight in bars alot like bullion. Set one or two in the pot and fire it up... it starts melting pretty fast. Are any of those you listed included in the solid state cards on the controllers?
Sorry, I wish I had more info on that to share, but alas... I was just a blue-collar construction worker.
David B. Benson
Rove's shill --- Thank you! The first one is quite useful. smile.gif

reverend --- First, the energy supplied by the airplane strikes is easily determined once you know the mass, M, and speed, V, of each airplane: E = 1/2 x M x V x V. Both M and V for each airplane have been estimated, but I don't have the numbers just now...

But the imponderable is the amount of energy which actually goes into shaking the ground. This is a relatively small proportion of the total both for the strikes and the collapses. Somebody here estimated it is only about 1% of the total. I will guess that it is larger for the first airplane strike, which was much the less energetic even as the airplane was flying more slowly, because the first airplane struck the core rather more square on. So more of the energy would go into producing pressure pulses in the box columns and thus onwards into shaking the ground.

However, this is only guesswork. As there are no strictly comparable seismic events, AFAIK, there is no other data to compare against these records. There are roughly comparable events. If you go back 2 to 4 pages you will find the link that Arthur supplied. The link includes an article by seismologists which makes some rough comparisons.
adoucette
QUOTE (Reverend+May 8 2006, 07:09 PM)
I'm new around here, but I've looked at those seismic records and something that appeared odd sparked my curiosity.

The first impact appears to have an excessive amount of energy to it for a plane hitting the building, not just in comparison to the other plane impact, but by itself.

If you look at them again you will see that the collapse and the impact are NOT on the same scale. The Collapse scale is TEN times the magnitude of the Impact scale.

http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/WTC_20010911.html

Arthur
Reverend
QUOTE (adoucette+May 9 2006, 12:23 AM)
QUOTE (Reverend+May 8 2006, 07:09 PM)
I'm new around here, but I've looked at those seismic records and something that appeared odd sparked my curiosity.

The first impact appears to have an excessive amount of energy to it for a plane hitting the building, not just in comparison to the other plane impact, but by itself.


If you look at them again you will see that the collapse and the impact are NOT on the same scale. The Collapse scale is TEN times the magnitude of the Impact scale.

http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/WTC_20010911.html

Arthur

Yes, I'm aware of this. Yet the energy involved still appears excessive for a plane impact, not just compared to the second plane impact, but the first plane impact alone, by itself in other words.

Just so you know where I'm coming from; I'm not a professional scientist, although I had a great deal of interest in physics and adv.math when I was a lot younger. I have studied a great deal about seismic disturbances, volcanism, earthquakes etc... I used to run a construction company with my father, so I have a lot of experience with buildings. I also worked as a private investigator, did security work, was involved in some paramilitary business (in that grey area of legality, and the thoroughly illegal). I have had a "colourful past" and "interesting life" as people say. I still work as a consultant for unusual people. One of my clients knew that 9/11 was going down in June 2001 (at least) and asked curious questions about certain effects (without being too clear as to exactly what he knew). This particular client was associated with a rather wealthy (extremely wealthy) old man in France who did a lot of that short-selling before the attacks. So, a lot of people knew, and a lot of wealthy people turned a profit from that knowledge - even if they only knew that something really big was going down at a certain place on a certain time of year.

In any case, from a former private investigator's perspective, if there's an apparent oddity, it should be checked out. Not dismissed as "well those squiggly lines aren't in scale with those other squiggly lines, so just ignore them" sort of thing.



David. B. Benson ((But the imponderable is the amount of energy which actually goes into shaking the ground. This is a relatively small proportion of the total both for the strikes and the collapses. Somebody here estimated it is only about 1% of the total.))

Can't stand "imponderables". Would a geologist have any better idea of the amount of energy involved?

I might go and ask around on a few of their sites, as somebody might know.
adoucette
The simple problem is the seismic devices weren't designed to measure plane impacts and buildings collapsing.

The second issue of interpreting seismic energy and waves are damn complicated.

The third issue is they are only measuring energy transmitted into the ground.

The two plane impacts registered .9 and .7 on the Richter scale.

The two collapses registered 2.1 and 2.3 on the Richter scale.

To put it in perspective consider that 1 on the Richter scale is equal to ~ 30 lbs of TNT being set off UNDERGROUND, while 2.1 is equal to ~ 2 tons and 2.3 ~ 4 tons of TNT being set off underground.

These however ONLY measure the PEAK, then there is the amount of energy in total released. Again, much greater for the collapse than the impacts.

Arthur
Christophera
QUOTE (yesitdid+May 8 2006, 10:44 PM)
How did 3000 people die on 9/11/01, Christophera? A group of terrorists hijacked 4 planes and flew 1 into the ground when the passengers attempted to retake control of the aircraft and flew the other three into structures that are very easily seen from the air and which are symbols of American strength.
That is a lie, please do not spread it. it cannot be the truth because planes and fires cannot take the towers down, they did not create free fall. Try again.
Christophera
QUOTE (Reverend+May 8 2006, 11:09 PM)
I'm new around here, but I've looked at those seismic records and something that appeared odd sparked my curiosity.

The first impact appears to have an excessive amount of energy to it for a plane hitting the building, not just in comparison to the other plane impact, but by itself.

Has anyone estimated how much energy was in the impact, compared to how much energy is revealed in the seismic vibrations that match the time?

Do the other seismic events related to the 1st and 2nd collapse actually have roughly equivalent energy to what might be expected, or are they much more than that?
There were explosions in the basement at plane impacts. The walls were missing in the parking garage, strewn all over the floors.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html#anchor1205439

artie will say, "typical plane damage."
yesitdid
QUOTE (Christophera+May 9 2006, 02:35 AM)
QUOTE (yesitdid+May 8 2006, 10:44 PM)
How did 3000 people die on 9/11/01, Christophera?  A group of terrorists hijacked 4 planes and flew 1 into the ground when the passengers attempted to retake control of the aircraft and flew the other three into structures that are very easily seen from the air and which are symbols of American strength.

That is a lie, please do not spread it. it cannot be the truth because planes and fires cannot take the towers down, they did not create free fall. Try again.
My mistake. One need only know that the plot to blame Muslim extremists was hatched in the 1970's when the towers were under construction and some spook somewhere said to someone in power, "hey, why don't we surreptitiously plant C4 in the concrete of the towers and then rewrite descriptions of the construction of the towers to hide the fact that they had all concrete walls over steel columns in the cores of the buildings. That way sometime in the future when we want to have a fake attack on the USA all we need do is set up the detonators and a cover story and kaboom, the towers will fall completely and at a free fall rate".

Explosives planted during the construction of the towers is a lie, please do not spread it. Try again.
adoucette
QUOTE (Christophera+May 8 2006, 10:39 PM)
artie will say, "typical plane damage."
If the TYPICAL plane is an almost fully fueled 767 flying at ~450 MPH and there are a number of elevator shafts that run from the point of impact all the way to the basement.

Then YES.

Arthur
reasonwhy
QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 8 2006, 04:24 AM)
QUOTE (reasonwhy+May 8 2006, 06:07 AM)
Elevators were locked and could only  be opened from the elevator roof. The people trained to open the elevators were ordered to leave.

<br>There is no clear evidence they WERE ordered to leave, even the president of Ace said they left on their own. The only person saying they were ordered to leave is not a disinterested party but one of the mechanics. He doesn't say specifically who gave the order. IF an order to leave was issued it probably came from the bosses at Ace.

Also as Alan pointed out they aren't rescue workers. When cops or firemen sign up they know they will be asked to put their lives on the line to save others that's not the case with mechanics. Did you bother to look at that thread I provided the link to? The posts are overwhelmingly supportive of the mechanics (it's an elevator industry forum) people say that they were right to leave not that they were ordered to.

Sure some lives could have been saved if the mechanics hadn't left but then a large number of them would have been killed. Can you honestly say you wouldn't have left if you were one of them? Have you ever risked you life to save strangers?

There are door locks that could have been opened from the outside but as was explained in the article those models didn't fit the WTC's elevators. This might not have made much of a difference because as the article indicateds many opputunities were passed up to save people in the elevators. THAT should be investigated.

QUOTE
The elevators were supposed to open at the lobby during an emergency. At least 50 elevators in one building did not. 
<br>I agree with you that should be / should have been looked into

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
The elevators were supposed to open at the lobby during an emergency. At least 50 elevators in one building did not. 
<br>I agree with you that should be / should have been looked into

Nobody appered to know the emergency plans and who was responsible for the elevators.
<br>Not supported by the evidence, there was disagreement between the PA and Ace

QUOTE
USA TODAY estimates that at least 200 people died inside World Trade Center elevators, the biggest elevator catastrophe in history.
<br>Which was part of the largest structural collapse in history and the deadliest terrorist attack in history and the deadliest attack on the US in history. As I already pointed out most of them would have died any way. It's hard to protect elevators from having all their cables cut simultaneously or being engulfed by fireballs
<br>Len, I think you just like to argue. You are agreeing that an investigation should have been done on two of my points. Then arguing against an investigation on the other two?blink.gif

All the people interviewed were not disinterested parties . That is why it should also have been investigated . This is what a member of the port authority said:

But the Port Authority says the emergency plan called for mechanics to stay and help with rescues. "The manuals consider many emergency scenarios and describe the role of the mechanics in detail in responding to them," Port Authority spokesman Allen Morrison says. "There was no situation in which the mechanics were advised or instructed to leave on their own. They were, depending on the situation, to be dispatched to various emergency posts or to respond to various passenger entrapments and to assist police, fire and other rescue personnel."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002-0...ator-usat_x.htm
w
Christophera
QUOTE (yesitdid+May 9 2006, 03:06 AM)
QUOTE (Christophera+May 9 2006, 02:35 AM)
QUOTE (yesitdid+May 8 2006, 10:44 PM)
How did 3000 people die on 9/11/01, Christophera?  A group of terrorists hijacked 4 planes and flew 1 into the ground when the passengers attempted to retake control of the aircraft and flew the other three into structures that are very easily seen from the air and which are symbols of American strength.

That is a lie, please do not spread it. it cannot be the truth because planes and fires cannot take the towers down, they did not create free fall. Try again.

My mistake. One need only know that the plot to blame Muslim extremists was hatched in the 1970's when the towers were under construction and some spook somewhere said to someone in power, "hey, why don't we surreptitiously plant C4 in the concrete of the towers and then rewrite descriptions of the construction of the towers to hide the fact that they had all concrete walls over steel columns in the cores of the buildings. That way sometime in the future when we want to have a fake attack on the USA all we need do is set up the detonators and a cover story and kaboom, the towers will fall completely and at a free fall rate".

Explosives planted during the construction of the towers is a lie, please do not spread it. Try again.
You can't do what you are trying to do until you come up with a credible explanation for free fall.

Nothing was re written,

http://concretecore.741.com/

They just made new fake half a*sed documents

User posted image

that morons believe were the basic structure that left this.

User posted image

Or disinfos spend gigbytes of bandwidthovre millions of fourum pages year after year, with no evidence, trying to more completely convince those who are not morons that the morons are correct.



reasonwhy
QUOTE (Alan (ex elevator man)+May 7 2006, 11:45 PM)
Elevators were locked and could only be opened from the elevator roof. The people trained to open the elevators were ordered to leave.

That's by design, and that won't change.  As for leaving... these are mechanics, not firemen or first responders. 


Really, then why did only half of the elevators have restrictors?

You don’t appear to be the expert you claim. cool.gif I would expect a union (ex elevator man) to support his fellow workers and demand an investigation so they don’t go down in history as cowards.

reasonwhy
QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 8 2006, 04:43 AM)
QUOTE (reasonwhy+May 8 2006, 03:06 AM)
QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 7 2006, 06:26 PM)

With people from Ace backing his version it not fair to call the writer a liar. Newspaper do occasionally get things wrong, sometimes this is  intentional (Judith Miller) but sometimes people make stuff up and sometimes people don’t understand what they read.

There is a 8000+ message thread on the topic

http://www.liveboards.com/mb/server/thread...50&S=1550&SID6=

The only mainstream news I believe comes from Stephen Colbert. biggrin.gif

QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 7 2006, 06:26 PM)

Reasonwhy, if you are going to make a claim in a forum you should provide links to articles that support not contradict it.

Len

Len , it is hard for me to remember what you do not know and have not read. That was not the reason I posted the article link. tongue.gif

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the Jones interview has come up on this thread before, if not how could you assume that I or anybody else was aware of it? If so please provide a link to the post where it did. When a person makes a claim and a link follows it's understood that the linked page will collaborate not contradict that claim

As for Colbert apparently he went on the Today show and insinuated that the mechanics were cowards so he's probably an as$hole but you have yet to produce convincing evidence that he was wrong about them leaving on their own. That version was confirmed by the president of Ace. It's ironic that you provided the link to support your claims and then you turn around and try to impeach the credibility of the author.

I forgot to ask you this a couple of weeks back, you said something about the elevators or shafts being "hermetically sealed", what was that all about?

Also you denied that any fireballs went down the elevator shafts but the article you linked provided additional evidence they did.

Len

<br>If I post a quote and it contradicts what I say, you have a good point. A link is different (it does not mean I agree with the entire article).

It was a joke about Stephen Colbert. Colbert is the only person in the news business allowed to tell the truth (doesn’t get censored through the editorial process) :

Bill Kristol Colbert PNAC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgYZ11pIGU4


I never said the shafts were “ hermetically sealed".

QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 8 2006, 04:43 AM)
That version was confirmed by the president of Ace.

Len

<br>So, that makes it true? tongue.gif I think he is covering his ***
reasonwhy
QUOTE (adoucette+May 8 2006, 05:55 AM)


YOU ARE SAYING the elevator guy is lying.

they told him what to think

Arthur

tongue.gif tongue.gif tongue.gif tongue.gif

Does this make everyone that believes the (OCT) liars?
reasonwhy
QUOTE (Common Sense+May 8 2006, 06:52 AM)

As opposed to reading a real conspiracy theory web site where they told you what to think. From that point on anyone who disagrees with you is brainwashed right? PLEASE...

Your the one with a conspiracy theory web site telling people what to think.

http://www.geocities.com/debunking911

QUOTE
What a real conspiracy looks like. Real conspiracies have very little players and even then they are usually exposed. Enron, Watergate, Iran/Contra and the rest have few people involved and someone always comes out to blow the whistle.
<br>You have something in common with Bush. Obviously, Neither of you studied history or let facts stand in the way of your beliefs (Watergate went all the way up to the US president).

How far up the chain of command did Iran/Contra go?

FINAL REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL FOR IRAN/CONTRA MATTERS

Overall Conclusions:

The investigations and prosecutions have shown that high-ranking Administration officials violated laws and executive orders in the Iran/contra matter.
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/execsum.htm

Only “very little players” are prosecuted. Big players become president.
Alan (ex elevator man)
QUOTE (reasonwhy+May 9 2006, 05:30 AM)
QUOTE (Alan (ex elevator man)+May 7 2006, 11:45 PM)
Elevators were locked and could only be opened from the elevator roof. The people trained to open the elevators were ordered to leave.

That's by design, and that won't change.  As for leaving... these are mechanics, not firemen or first responders. 


Really, then why did only half of the elevators have restrictors?

You don’t appear to be the expert you claim. cool.gif I would expect a union (ex elevator man) to support his fellow workers and demand an investigation so they don’t go down in history as cowards.
Well, I never claimed to be an expert at anything. I was a construction elevator mechanic. We put the things together. Didn't do alot of add-on parts... that's for the maintenance guys, or if it was a big job (those 'restrictors' you talk about... which were really probably new designed door motors), then a service crew did it. Door motors were a little tough to set up (both doors in sequence, meet at the centerline of the opening, doors plumb and no gaps, both doors flush with the jamb when opened, etc...), but when done, the way the linkage from motor to door was ratio'd, just pulling on the doors to open them was next to impossibe. Whether thats what the retrofit was or 'restrictors' as you say (I'm betting the 'new' door operator/motors were standard equipment when I was building them), it was still an on-going job to upgrade all of 'em.

As for defending 'my brothers', I don't think they're worried about what you think of their manhood. *tips hat* and a "Better part of the day to you Sir"
Christophera
QUOTE (yesitdid+May 9 2006, 03:06 AM)
QUOTE (Christophera+May 9 2006, 02:35 AM)
QUOTE (yesitdid+May 8 2006, 10:44 PM)
How did 3000 people die on 9/11/01, Christophera?  A group of terrorists hijacked 4 planes and flew 1 into the ground when the passengers attempted to retake control of the aircraft and flew the other three into structures that are very easily seen from the air and which are symbols of American strength.

That is a lie, please do not spread it. it cannot be the truth because planes and fires cannot take the towers down, they did not create free fall. Try again.

My mistake. One need only know that the plot to blame Muslim extremists was hatched in the 1970's when the towers were under construction and some spook somewhere said to someone in power, "hey, why don't we surreptitiously plant C4 in the concrete of the towers and then rewrite descriptions of the construction of the towers to hide the fact that they had all concrete walls over steel columns in the cores of the buildings. That way sometime in the future when we want to have a fake attack on the USA all we need do is set up the detonators and a cover story and kaboom, the towers will fall completely and at a free fall rate".

Explosives planted during the construction of the towers is a lie, please do not spread it. Try again.

<br>You have not provided a credible, feasable explanation of how free fall was created. You cannot logically pretend to be seeking the truth of what happened while trying to dismiss the only plausible explanation of free fall until you have provided a competent alternative.



Try again.
Rove's shill
QUOTE (David B. Benson+May 7 2006, 11:45 PM)
A collapse scenario for WTC 7 --- The FEMA report on the collapse of WTC 7 appears to require 47 seconds from start to finish, much longer than the 18 seconds for the preliminary estimated time from the LDEO seismograph record. While the beginning of the collapse might not cause ground shocks, surely the final event, the collapse of the north wall, did. So this collapse scenario is just long enough to account for the 18 seconds of ground shocks. You may add more 'collapse' at the beginning if you wish. The events to be discussed occurred in the following order, with the stated times, taken from the previously posted video:

unobserved............................... 4 seconds
east penthouse sinks............... 5 seconds  (first 3 to disappear)
west penthouse sinks.............. 2 seconds
north wall falls........................... 7 seconds
---------------------------------------------------
total time................................. 18 seconds

Unobserved: The collapse is believed to initiate about floor 5--7. Some accounts state that floor 5 was burning most fiercely, others than it was floor 7. In either case, the fire was strongest in the eastern portion of the building, with flames coming out the windows in the east side. My choice of moment 0.0 is when enough of the lower portion of the east part of WTC 7 collapsed onto the ConEd station below to begin producing the seismograph trace of the entire event. Perhaps by this time up through floor 12, another floor with observed fires, had fallen. The east side continues to fall, from the bottom towards the top. The east curtain wall largely falls in, to the west. The east portion of the south curtain wall falls partly to the south, onto the street to the south.

East penthouse sinks: The east penthouse slowly sinks below the parapet of the north wall, developing a kink in the middle where the collapse of the penthouse and the roof is most pronounced. (The kink is not the 'kink' mentioned in the FEMA report. That one I will call a 'crease' and is not yet observed.) The east and south curtain walls continue as before; the north and west curtain walls are unaffected as yet. After the east penthouse has completely disappeared, it is possible to see daylight through at least one upper story window in the north wall toward the east end. This indicates that entire inner structure has fallen for the eastern approximately 1/3 of the building.

West penthouse sinks: This penthouse is about twice as long, east to west, as the other. It sinks out of sight behind the parapet of the north wall as the internal structure below it falls apart. At this stage the western portion of the south wall is falling as well. Again some goodly portion of it falls into the street to the south and some of the southwesterly-most portions actually end up on top of WTC 6 across the street to the south. Both the north and the west curtain walls continue to stand as the west penthouse disappears.

North wall falls: The north and west walls are now completely free of any connections except for the posts and beams of the curtain walls themselves. Also, the last remaining bracing below the curtain walls now fails. The north and west walls, largely in one piece at the beginning of the fall, fall freely. A substantial portion of the west curtain wall  falls to the west of the WTC 7 site. The north wall, however, falls somewhat southerly, hence ending up draped over the WTC rubble pile. After these walls have fallen about 10 stories, a crease appears in the upper left hand corner of the north wall. This crease rapidly races, as a growing line, across the face of the north wall, both down and to the right. This approximately 30 degree crease indicates that the segments of the north wall have lost all internal structural integrity as the wall falls freely.

So: the scenario agrees with the debris field, the videos, the seismograph records, the firemen's reports on Firehouse.com, and --- to an extent --- various descriptions such as the FEMA report and (perhaps) what various NIST investigators have said. I haven't restated all of that evidence here, but I am now ready for comments, complaints, and interpretations.

Unobserved is pure speculation.
QUOTE
The collapse is believed to initiate about floor 5--7. Some accounts state that floor 5 was burning most fiercely, others than it was floor 7.
<br>If collapse initiated on floors 5-7, why are they ommited from the newly contracted analysis? Contract Link

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
The collapse is believed to initiate about floor 5--7. Some accounts state that floor 5 was burning most fiercely, others than it was floor 7.
<br>If collapse initiated on floors 5-7, why are they ommited from the newly contracted analysis? Contract Link

In either case, the fire was strongest in the eastern portion of the building, with flames coming out the windows in the east side.
<br>These fires?

User posted image


QUOTE
My choice of moment 0.0 is when enough of the lower portion of the east part of WTC 7 collapsed onto the ConEd station below to begin producing the seismograph trace of the entire event. Perhaps by this time up through floor 12, another floor with observed fires, had fallen. The east side continues to fall, from the bottom towards the top. The east curtain wall largely falls in, to the west. The east portion of the south curtain wall falls partly to the south, onto the street to the south.
<br>Evidence?

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
My choice of moment 0.0 is when enough of the lower portion of the east part of WTC 7 collapsed onto the ConEd station below to begin producing the seismograph trace of the entire event. Perhaps by this time up through floor 12, another floor with observed fires, had fallen. The east side continues to fall, from the bottom towards the top. The east curtain wall largely falls in, to the west. The east portion of the south curtain wall falls partly to the south, onto the street to the south.
<br>Evidence?

East penthouse sinks: The east penthouse slowly sinks below the parapet of the north wall, developing a kink in the middle where the collapse of the penthouse and the roof is most pronounced.
<br>User posted image

QUOTE
The east and south curtain walls continue as before; the north and west curtain walls are unaffected as yet. After the east penthouse has completely disappeared, it is possible to see daylight through at least one upper story window in the north wall toward the east end. This indicates that entire inner structure has fallen for the eastern approximately 1/3 of the building.
<br>Evidence?

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
The east and south curtain walls continue as before; the north and west curtain walls are unaffected as yet. After the east penthouse has completely disappeared, it is possible to see daylight through at least one upper story window in the north wall toward the east end. This indicates that entire inner structure has fallen for the eastern approximately 1/3 of the building.
<br>Evidence?

West penthouse sinks: This penthouse is about twice as long, east to west, as the other. It sinks out of sight behind the parapet of the north wall as the internal structure below it falls apart. At this stage the western portion of the south wall is falling as well. Again some goodly portion of it falls into the street to the south and some of the southwesterly-most portions actually end up on top of WTC 6 across the street to the south. Both the north and the west curtain walls continue to stand as the west penthouse disappears.
<br>Show me.

QUOTE
North wall falls: The north and west walls are now completely free of any connections except for the posts and beams of the curtain walls themselves. Also, the last remaining bracing below the curtain walls now fails. The north and west walls, largely in one piece at the beginning of the fall, fall freely. A substantial portion of the west curtain wall falls to the west of the WTC 7 site. The north wall, however, falls somewhat southerly, hence ending up draped over the WTC rubble pile. After these walls have fallen about 10 stories, a crease appears in the upper left hand corner of the north wall. This crease rapidly races, as a growing line, across the face of the north wall, both down and to the right. This approximately 30 degree crease indicates that the segments of the north wall have lost all internal structural integrity as the wall falls freely.
<br>This seems to imply that the north and west walls wer just standing there like scenery in the back of a high school play. And yet they did not fall like that.

Eye witness O + A Show

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
North wall falls: The north and west walls are now completely free of any connections except for the posts and beams of the curtain walls themselves. Also, the last remaining bracing below the curtain walls now fails. The north and west walls, largely in one piece at the beginning of the fall, fall freely. A substantial portion of the west curtain wall falls to the west of the WTC 7 site. The north wall, however, falls somewhat southerly, hence ending up draped over the WTC rubble pile. After these walls have fallen about 10 stories, a crease appears in the upper left hand corner of the north wall. This crease rapidly races, as a growing line, across the face of the north wall, both down and to the right. This approximately 30 degree crease indicates that the segments of the north wall have lost all internal structural integrity as the wall falls freely.
<br>This seems to imply that the north and west walls wer just standing there like scenery in the back of a high school play. And yet they did not fall like that.

Eye witness O + A Show

So: the scenario agrees with the debris field, the videos, the seismograph records, the firemen's reports on Firehouse.com, and --- to an extent --- various descriptions such as the FEMA report and (perhaps) what various NIST investigators have said. I haven't restated all of that evidence here, but I am now ready for comments, complaints, and interpretations.
<br>Nope.

User posted image

User posted image

User posted image

Common Sense
Before collapse...

User posted image

In the following image the west penthouse falls...

User posted image

Now the east penthouse falls...

User posted image

Happy now? Of course not...

This...

User posted image

is the wrong tower and not the one that hit B7. This is the south tower collapsing in front of Bankers Trust. It's the black building infront of the collapse.

User posted image

http://www.geocities.com/debunking911/fig-1-7.jpg

The photo was most likely taken from trinity place on the lower right of the map.

So that make you and Janedoe fu<king MORONS once again!

http://www.geocities.com/debunking911/pull.htm
adoucette
QUOTE (Rove's Shill+)
If collapse initiated on floors 5-7, why are they ommited from the newly contracted analysis?

<br>They didn't.

Finding the INITIATING EVENT is a COLLABORATION which does not leave out any floors.


From NIST:
ARA will conduct analyses, in collaboration with NIST, to determine the location and cause of the initiating event (i.e., the first component or group of components that failed) that led to global collapse of WTC 7. The analyses will determine the series of component and subsystem failures subsequent to the initiating event that led to global collapse that are consistent with observations from video and photographic records and other evidence. NIST will conduct all fire analysis of the building and analysis of the structural response to fires in-house and supply ARA initiating event data based on the in-house analyses.


Further ARA is building models, the GLOBAL MODEL does not leave out Floors 1-7.

ARA will conduct nonlinear dynamic collapse analyses using LS-DYNA that include analyses of detailed full floor models and global models. The detailed floor analyses will determine likely modes of failure for Floors 8 to 46 due to failure of one or more supporting columns (at one or more locations), and aid the development of a more coarse model for use in the global analyses that captures essential behaviors and failure mechanisms. Two types of global analyses will be conducted. Sensitivity studies will be conducted to determine the response of WTC 7 to various scenarios of initiating events. Final analyses will support the determination of the location and cause of the initiating event, by incorporating data from NIST for simulating the initiating event, as well as the location and cause of subsequent failures that led to global collapse.


Arthur



lenbrazil
QUOTE (reasonwhy+May 9 2006, 05:30 AM)
QUOTE (Alan (ex elevator man)+May 7 2006, 11:45 PM)
Elevators were locked and could only be opened from the elevator roof. The people trained to open the elevators were ordered to leave.

That's by design, and that won't change.  As for leaving... these are mechanics, not firemen or first responders. 


Really, then why did only half of the elevators have restrictors?

You don’t appear to be the expert you claim. B) I would expect a union (ex elevator man) to support his fellow workers and demand an investigation so they don’t go down in history as cowards. <
b>why did only half of the elevators have restrictors?

That wasw explained in the USA Today article they were in e process of installing them on 9-11. There were 206 elevators (194 passenger, 14 freight) that's a lot of restrictors to install

I would expect a union (ex elevator man) to support his fellow workers and demand an investigation so they don’t go down in history as cowards.

They left the buildings just like every body else except they stayed in the area, that doesn't make them cowards. They might have been ordered to leave by Ace but that's not clear. If you're really interested you can read that 8600+ message thread I provided the link to. I imagine every concivable aspect of what hapened with the mechanics would be disscussed in it.
lenbrazil
QUOTE (reasonwhy+May 9 2006, 05:19 AM)
Len, I think you just like to argue. You are agreeing that an investigation should have been done on two of my points. Then arguing against an investigation on the other two?blink.gif

All the people interviewed were not disinterested parties . That is why it should also have been investigated . This is what a member of the port authority said:

But the Port Authority says the emergency plan called for mechanics to stay and help with rescues. "The manuals consider many emergency scenarios and describe the role of the mechanics in detail in responding to them," Port Authority spokesman Allen Morrison says. "There was no situation in which the mechanics were advised or instructed to leave on their own. They were, depending on the situation, to be dispatched to various emergency posts or to respond to various passenger entrapments and to assist police, fire and other rescue personnel."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002-0...ator-usat_x.htm
w
I think that's a sign I don't argue for the sake of arguement I agree that some things should be invetigated and not others.

As for what the emergency plan was that shouldn't be too hard to figure out, the PA says it's in the manuals that they stay and the Ace guys say it was for them to leave. If both parties would show the documents that support their version it shouldn't be too dificult to figure out the truth. You could try suggesting that some MSM outlets look into it, maybe even the USA Today guy.

Len
yesitdid
QUOTE (Christophera+May 9 2006, 05:29 AM)
QUOTE (yesitdid+May 9 2006, 03:06 AM)
QUOTE (Christophera+May 9 2006, 02:35 AM)
QUOTE (yesitdid+May 8 2006, 10:44 PM)
How did 3000 people die on 9/11/01, Christophera?  A group of terrorists hijacked 4 planes and flew 1 into the ground when the passengers attempted to retake control of the aircraft and flew the other three into structures that are very easily seen from the air and which are symbols of American strength.

That is a lie, please do not spread it. it cannot be the truth because planes and fires cannot take the towers down, they did not create free fall. Try again.


<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>You can't do what you are trying to do until you come up with a credible explanation for free fall.

Nothing was re written,

http://concretecore.741.com/

They just made new fake half a*sed documents

User posted image

that morons believe were the basic structure that left this.

User posted image

Or disinfos spend gigbytes of bandwidthovre millions of fourum pages year after year, with no evidence, trying to more completely convince those who are not morons that the morons are correct.
My mistake. One need only know that the plot to blame Muslim extremists was hatched in the 1970's when the towers were under construction and some spook somewhere said to someone in power, "hey, why don't we surreptitiously plant C4 in the concrete of the towers and then rewrite descriptions of the construction of the towers to hide the fact that they had all concrete walls over steel columns in the cores of the buildings. That way sometime in the future when we want to have a fake attack on the USA all we need do is set up the detonators and a cover story and kaboom, the towers will fall completely and at a free fall rate".
lenbrazil
deleted
adoucette
Len that's a pretty amazing article.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002-0...ator-usat_x.htm

I noticed this section:

USA TODAY made an intensive effort over the past six months to determine what happened to the World Trade Center elevators. Reporters interviewed more than 50 people who were in elevators at the time the jets hit or moments before. The newspaper also reviewed 2,500 pages of accounts written by survivors and reports in other media outlets, examined architectural plans and spoke to elevator experts and mechanics who worked at the Trade Center.

The result is the first in-depth look at an important but neglected part of the World Trade Center disaster.

USA TODAY found:

Safety locks trapped passengers

and

Elevators plunged

Sixty-four of the twin towers' 198 elevators had cables that ran through the floors devastated by the hijacked hijacked planes, and the cables were likely destroyed.

Forty-eight of these 64 elevators had no known survivors. Even in the elevators where people escaped — mostly because the doors happened to be open at the moment of impact — they left behind a large number of people who were burned to death or were killed when the buildings collapsed.

The loss of life was almost complete inside the south tower's 10 giant express elevators, which were shuttling evacuees from the 78th floor to the ground floor after the north tower was hit. Only four people survived.

The four survivors — two each from adjacent elevators — were in elevators that plunged and were stopped by the emergency brakes 6 to 10 feet above the lobby floor. About 40 people died in those two elevators. Doomed passengers called loved ones from two other south tower express elevators stuck near the 12th floor in one case and the 19th floor in another.

The express elevators in the north tower had eight survivors in two elevators. In the other eight express elevators, nobody is known to have lived.

People who escaped from elevators high in the buildings saw people left behind burn to death and some elevators plunge to the ground.



What they DIDN'T MENTION was ANY EVIDENCE OF CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.

What they DIDN'T MENTION was ANYTHING that suggested that the devastation was not caused by the impact of the high speed jets.

As they said:

the elevator shafts also became the circulation system of the disaster, carrying death and destruction throughout the towers.

Elevator shafts worked like chimneys, funneling unbearable smoke to floors above the crashes. The shafts also channeled burning jet fuel throughout both towers. Fire moved not only up and down but also side to side, from shaft to shaft, unleashing explosions in elevator lobbies and in restrooms next to the shafts.


Arthur



billybats
Best.Video.Evar

Watch Gypsy @ Work - The 911 Kean Commission Comes to SF Bay Area, was played @ the Loose Change 2nd Ed West Coast Premiere @ Oakland, CA Grand Lake Theater. Gypsy is a serious activist fighting to get the word out about 911. She as well as my self believes that the Government is behind 911 and is covering it up. The 911 Kean Commission was just another tool to be use to help keep a tight leld on 911. «
adoucette
Now Billybats, THAT was convincing. When will she be on SNL or Comedy Central?

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Arthur
Rove's shill
QUOTE
As they said:

the elevator shafts also became the circulation system of the disaster, carrying death and destruction throughout the towers.

Elevator shafts worked like chimneys, funneling unbearable smoke to floors above the crashes. The shafts also channeled burning jet fuel throughout both towers. Fire moved not only up and down but also side to side, from shaft to shaft, unleashing explosions in elevator lobbies and in restrooms next to the shafts.

Arthur
<br>B^llshit.
adoucette
OK,

Add USA TODAY reporters as being IN ON IT.

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Arthur
Rove's shill
QUOTE (billybats+May 9 2006, 08:44 PM)
Best.Video.Evar

Watch Gypsy @ Work - The 911 Kean Commission Comes to SF Bay Area, was played @ the Loose Change 2nd Ed West Coast Premiere @ Oakland, CA Grand Lake Theater. Gypsy is a serious activist fighting to get the word out about 911. She as well as my self believes that the Government is behind 911 and is covering it up. The 911 Kean Commission was just another tool to be use to help keep a tight leld on 911. «
Nice link billybats!!!! THIS IS WHAT IT TAKES! Until more start asking questions, nothing will get done. And time marches on.
brian
QUOTE (billybats+May 9 2006, 08:44 PM)
Best.Video.Evar

Watch Gypsy @ Work - The 911 Kean Commission Comes to SF Bay Area, was played @ the Loose Change 2nd Ed West Coast Premiere @ Oakland, CA Grand Lake Theater. Gypsy is a serious activist fighting to get the word out about 911. She as well as my self believes that the Government is behind 911 and is covering it up. The 911 Kean Commission was just another tool to be use to help keep a tight leld on 911. «
Yes, simple truths versus utter bullshit - no contest.
adoucette
Best.Fu<kin.Video.Evar.Watch.Gypsy.Work

You guys don't even realize that you are a collective LAUGHING STOCK.

In fact probably the best one EVAR

laugh.gif

Arthur




yesitdid
[removed
lenbrazil
QUOTE (reasonwhy+May 9 2006, 05:50 AM)
QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 8 2006, 04:43 AM)
QUOTE (reasonwhy+May 8 2006, 03:06 AM)
QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 7 2006, 06:26 PM)

With people from Ace backing his version it not fair to call the writer a liar. Newspaper do occasionally get things wrong, sometimes this is  intentional (Judith Miller) but sometimes people make stuff up and sometimes people don’t understand what they read.

There is a 8000+ message thread on the topic

http://www.liveboards.com/mb/server/thread...50&S=1550&SID6=

The only mainstream news I believe comes from Stephen Colbert. biggrin.gif

QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 7 2006, 06:26 PM)

Reasonwhy, if you are going to make a claim in a forum you should provide links to articles that support not contradict it.

Len

Len , it is hard for me to remember what you do not know and have not read. That was not the reason I posted the article link. tongue.gif

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the Jones interview has come up on this thread before, if not how could you assume that I or anybody else was aware of it? If so please provide a link to the post where it did. When a person makes a claim and a link follows it's understood that the linked page will collaborate not contradict that claim

As for Colbert apparently he went on the Today show and insinuated that the mechanics were cowards so he's probably an as$hole but you have yet to produce convincing evidence that he was wrong about them leaving on their own. That version was confirmed by the president of Ace. It's ironic that you provided the link to support your claims and then you turn around and try to impeach the credibility of the author.

I forgot to ask you this a couple of weeks back, you said something about the elevators or shafts being "hermetically sealed", what was that all about?

Also you denied that any fireballs went down the elevator shafts but the article you linked provided additional evidence they did.

Len

<br>If I post a quote and it contradicts what I say, you have a good point. A link is different (it does not mean I agree with the entire article).

It was a joke about Stephen Colbert. Colbert is the only person in the news business allowed to tell the truth (doesn’t get censored through the editorial process) :

Bill Kristol Colbert PNAC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgYZ11pIGU4


I never said the shafts were “ hermetically sealed".

QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 8 2006, 04:43 AM)
That version was confirmed by the president of Ace.

Len

<br>So, that makes it true? tongue.gif I think he is covering his ***
If I post a quote and it contradicts what I say, you have a good point. A link is different (it does not mean I agree with the entire article).

You wrote:

QUOTE
Another peculiar item is that all the elevator maintenance workers were ordered to leave the building after the second plane hit knowing they were the only ones that could open the elevators. They had recently installed Door restrictors that only could be activated from the roof of the elevator.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002-0...ator-usat_x.htm
<br>I think most people would assume that both points were supported by the linked article. In this case you made an assertion without providing evidence. There was no way you could assume that I or anybody else had read an obscure interview, with and an obscure footnote from 9-11 in an obscure paper.

It was a joke about Stephen Colbert. Colbert is the only person in the news business allowed to tell the truth (doesn’t get censored through the editorial process) :

Bill Kristol Colbert PNAC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgYZ11pIGU4


I have no idea who he is should I? I never heard of him till I read the article. Is he some shill for Kristol?

The link doesn't work.

I never said the shafts were “ hermetically sealed".

Sorry that was RS.

So RS what's this about the elevator shafts being hemetically sealed?

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
Another peculiar item is that all the elevator maintenance workers were ordered to leave the building after the second plane hit knowing they were the only ones that could open the elevators. They had recently installed Door restrictors that only could be activated from the roof of the elevator.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002-0...ator-usat_x.htm
<br>I think most people would assume that both points were supported by the linked article. In this case you made an assertion without providing evidence. There was no way you could assume that I or anybody else had read an obscure interview, with and an obscure footnote from 9-11 in an obscure paper.

It was a joke about Stephen Colbert. Colbert is the only person in the news business allowed to tell the truth (doesn’t get censored through the editorial process) :

Bill Kristol Colbert PNAC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgYZ11pIGU4


I have no idea who he is should I? I never heard of him till I read the article. Is he some shill for Kristol?

The link doesn't work.

I never said the shafts were “ hermetically sealed".

Sorry that was RS.

So RS what's this about the elevator shafts being hemetically sealed?

Len, everybody has seen the fireballs outside the towers and how quickly they dissapated. Where is your evidence of this for the hermetically sealed elevator shafts?

Integrity of investigations

QUOTE
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
That version was confirmed by the president of Ace.

Len
<br>So, that makes it true? tongue.gif I think he is covering his ***
<br>It doesn't prove anything but it's furthur evidence in favor of Colbert's version. All you have is one mechanic who doesn't even saw who ordered them to go. From your statement above it sounded like it was an indisputable fact.
lenbrazil
QUOTE (Rove's shill+May 9 2006, 09:14 PM)
QUOTE
As they said:

the elevator shafts also became the circulation system of the disaster, carrying death and destruction throughout the towers.

Elevator shafts worked like chimneys, funneling unbearable smoke to floors above the crashes. The shafts also channeled burning jet fuel throughout both towers. Fire moved not only up and down but also side to side, from shaft to shaft, unleashing explosions in elevator lobbies and in restrooms next to the shafts.

Arthur
<br>B^llshit. I supposed you have evidence that was BS?
tikay
QUOTE (Rove's shill+May 9 2006, 09:14 PM)
QUOTE
As they said:

the elevator shafts also became the circulation system of the disaster, carrying death and destruction throughout the towers.

Elevator shafts worked like chimneys, funneling unbearable smoke to floors above the crashes. The shafts also channeled burning jet fuel throughout both towers. Fire moved not only up and down but also side to side, from shaft to shaft, unleashing explosions in elevator lobbies and in restrooms next to the shafts.

Arthur
<br>B^llshit. WHY wouldn't they act like a chimney. i totally get that. The whole scene makes sense.
newton
QUOTE (adoucette+May 9 2006, 09:18 PM)
OK,

Add USA TODAY reporters as being IN ON IT.

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Arthur
absolutely correct.
the publishing company of usa today, gannett publishing, made up a MAJORITY of the pentagon 'witnesses', whose testimony is used repeatedly to 'prove' that a commercial plane hit the pentagon. it was them and people who work at the pentagon, mostly.

good one, arthur. well spotted.
adoucette
QUOTE
  Another peculiar item is that all the elevator maintenance workers were ordered to leave the building after the second plane hit knowing they were the only ones that could open the elevators. They had recently installed Door restrictors that only could be activated from the roof of the elevator.
<br>http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002-0...ator-usat_x.htm


This passage I think is a better explanation of what happened. Trying to make the elevator mechanics out as cowards is pretty fu<kin low:

On Sept. 11, ACE Elevator of Palisades Park, N.J., had 80 elevator mechanics inside the World Trade Center.

Following the Port Authority's emergency plan, after the first jet hit the north tower, elevator mechanics from both towers reported to the fire safety desk in the south tower lobby for instructions from police or firefighters. About 60 mechanics had arrived in the south tower lobby and others were in radio contact when the second jet struck that building.


==> So ~ 60 or the ~ 80 mechanics MADE IT TO THE Fire Safety Desk, they didn't run.

"We were standing there trying to count heads when the second plane hit (the south tower)," said Peter Niederau, ACE Elevator's supervisor of the modernization project. "Parts of the lobby and glass were coming down around us, so we all got out of the lobby as fast as we could."

==> What were they SUPPOSED to do? Another plane just hit the building they were in and set IT on fire. Clearly sticking around in that building was NOT a good idea.

They left in different directions. Some went through the underground shopping mall. Others went out onto Liberty Street. ...
"(We) went out to the street to assess the damage and come back in as needed," says James O'Neill, ACE Elevator's supervisor of maintenance. The plan was to return to the building later in the day to help with rescues.


==> So it would appear that there was no SECONDARY meeting point. If I was a mechanic I think I would assume that I would be called by the FDNY when the Fires were under control or WHEN NEEDED.

But I think that the KEY is noone at this time thought the towers were going to collapse. So it wasn't like the people stuck in elevators were thought to be in serious danger.

As the article says: They remembered the 1993 truck bombing that trapped some people inside Trade Center elevators for 10 hours.

This was FAR greater than that, and so I'm ASSUMING that they figured that this would be an ALL DAY type affair.

Arthur




adoucette
QUOTE (newton+May 9 2006, 06:34 PM)
QUOTE (adoucette+May 9 2006, 09:18 PM)
OK,

Add USA TODAY reporters as being IN ON IT.

laugh.gif  laugh.gif  laugh.gif

Arthur

absolutely correct.
the publishing company of usa today, gannett publishing, made up a MAJORITY of the pentagon 'witnesses', whose testimony is used repeatedly to 'prove' that a commercial plane hit the pentagon. it was them and people who work at the pentagon, mostly.

good one, arthur. well spotted.

They made up a MAJORITY of the witnesses?

Really?

Oh, and by the way, the PHYSICAL evidence PROVES a 757 hit the Pentagon.

MORON

Arthur
David B. Benson
reverend --- In case you are still here? Geologists are unlikely to know this empirical coupling between an airplane strike in a high tower and the resulting ground movement. If it is any help, the controlled demolition of the KingDome produced a seismograph reading of about the same intensity as WTC 2 & 1. See Beyles, "Rubble".

Rove's shrill --- "These fires?": Not sure, the visuals I am referring to was posted here by Common Sense some way back by now. "Daylight": Visual from same poster. "Show me": Show you what? Back aways is a visual of WTC 6, or maybe from 911 Research, of a vid-clip from a helicopter video. It is clear to me that the columns draped over the top are from WTC 7. "Eye witness O+A Show": I have no means to play/watch/listen to this. The only witness reports I know about are from Firehouse.com, together with the two different videos and at least one still camera. Without exception, everyone was standing to the north or northwest of WTC 7 when it collapsed. "Nope." What are you referring to? The debris field spread is clear from the FEMA report, which I followed in my reconstruction.
tikay
QUOTE
Arthur
Oh, and by the way, the PHYSICAL evidence PROVES a 757 hit the Pentagon.

MORON

Arthur
<br>
hey
I dint really have $#!+ to say but I wanted to be on top of page *)).... gee I can see the elevator shafts from up here...lol


Keep talking boys i am reading your best efforts to convert the other fellow, with much interest.
(No kidding here) wink.gif




make that 800...up there *)) rolleyes.gif


uhg! it didn't work did it? oh well...
tikay
THE CONVERT THE OTHER GUY comment was a bit of sarcasm....sorry. I wish someone would just give in sometimes and agree that just ,maybe this or that could be on target....thats all.

Without all the resistance who would learn from your posts...it's all good. laugh.gif
adoucette
Tikay,

Are you just posting so you can start out page 800?

Arthur
Christophera
QUOTE (tikay+May 9 2006, 11:29 PM)
THE CONVERT THE OTHER GUY  comment was a bit of sarcasm....sorry. I wish someone would just give in sometimes and agree that just ,maybe this or that could be on target....thats all.

Without all the resistance who would learn from your posts...it's all good. laugh.gif

It is hard to believe but artie and CSpam (common sense), as well as a few others, are not reasonable.

They think it's okay to believe the cores of the towers had to be as FEMA says they are, and that discussion on elevators and the temperature of fires, planes, seismicity, anything is more important than determining what the true structure was. They and rewhine actually conspired to try and divide or separate my information from their popourri of "whatever" by wstarting another thread "just for concrete core" info. As if they could actually do physics without knowing the basic structure.
Reverend
QUOTE (adoucette+)
My mistake. One need only know that the plot to blame Muslim extremists was hatched in the 1970's when the towers were under construction and some spook somewhere said to someone in power,

<br>Well, they would've blamed the Cubans or the Russians back then, but hey nothing like have a contingency plan smile.gif

QUOTE (adoucette+)
 
"hey, why don't we surreptitiously plant C4 in the concrete of the towers

<br>Built-in demolition measures aren't that bad an idea. It makes a lot of sense to at least plan ahead on HOW to bring down such huge buildings since they'd have to be demolished one day anyway. You wouldn't want the general public to know that there were huge quantities of explosive in the building either. They'd be most upset.

QUOTE (adoucette+)

and then rewrite descriptions of the construction of the towers to hide the fact that they had all concrete walls over steel columns in the cores of the buildings. 

<br>Has anyone seen the plans made publicly available for study?

QUOTE (adoucette+)

That way sometime in the future when we want to have a fake attack on the USA all we need do is set up the detonators and a cover story and kaboom, the towers will fall completely and at a free fall rate".

<br>Well, if you happen to have a building all wired-up and ready to go, and it's not making money, why not just do an insurance job? Kill two birds with one stone, as the owner's buddies in the US government can help out to blame some Islamic nation or terrorist group as a pretext to war.
Reverend
QUOTE (adoucette+May 9 2006, 02:01 AM)
The simple problem is the seismic devices weren't designed to measure plane impacts and buildings collapsing.

The second issue of interpreting seismic energy and waves are damn complicated.

The third issue is they are only measuring energy transmitted into the ground.

The two plane impacts registered .9 and .7 on the Richter scale.

The two collapses registered 2.1 and 2.3 on the Richter scale.

To put it in perspective consider that 1 on the Richter scale is equal to ~ 30 lbs of TNT being set off UNDERGROUND, while 2.1 is equal to ~ 2 tons and 2.3 ~ 4 tons of TNT being set off underground.

These however ONLY measure the PEAK, then there is the amount of energy in total released. Again, much greater for the collapse than the impacts.

Arthur
Thanks for that, it could've given a lead there on it. Somebody in the mining industry might have a better idea of it, but it does appear it's going to be very much an awful guesstimate.
adoucette
QUOTE
Built-in demolition measures aren't that bad an idea.
<br>ONLY if you are a COMPLETE NUT JOB.

I see we have a Reverend from the TIN FOIL HAT CHURCH visiting us.

Arthur

PS: None of the quotes he attributed to me in his next previous post were mine.
lenbrazil
QUOTE (newton+May 9 2006, 10:34 PM)
QUOTE (adoucette+May 9 2006, 09:18 PM)
OK,

Add USA TODAY reporters as being IN ON IT.

laugh.gif  laugh.gif  laugh.gif

Arthur

absolutely correct.
the publishing company of usa today, gannett publishing, made up a MAJORITY of the pentagon 'witnesses', whose testimony is used repeatedly to 'prove' that a commercial plane hit the pentagon. it was them and people who work at the pentagon, mostly.

good one, arthur. well spotted.
the publishing company of usa today, gannett publishing, made up a MAJORITY of the pentagon 'witnesses'


I don't suppose you have any evidence that Gannett made those quotes up do you?

it was them and people who work at the pentagon, mostly

Obviously a majority of the witnesses to any event at the Pentagon would be people who work there. laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif Most of them were but several weren't

http://web.archive.org/web/20041022115307/...pb/witness.html

OR

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evide...esses/bart.html
tikay
QUOTE (adoucette+May 9 2006, 11:33 PM)
Tikay,

Are you just posting so you can start out page 800?

Arthur
hunh? I answered before you asked it silly!
tikay
QUOTE (adoucette+May 9 2006, 10:36 PM)
QUOTE
  Another peculiar item is that all the elevator maintenance workers were ordered to leave the building after the second plane hit knowing they were the only ones that could open the elevators. They had recently installed Door restrictors that only could be activated from the roof of the elevator.
<br>http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002-0...ator-usat_x.htm


This passage I think is a better explanation of what happened. Trying to make the elevator mechanics out as cowards is pretty fu<kin low:

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

But I think that the KEY is noone at this time thought the towers were going to collapse. So it wasn't like the people stuck in elevators were thought to be in serious danger.

As the article says: They remembered the 1993 truck bombing that trapped some people inside Trade Center elevators for 10 hours.

This was FAR greater than that, and so I'm ASSUMING that they figured that this would be an ALL DAY type affair.

Arthur
I AGREE...that was a very LoW blow...imagine being in their position on that day...sheesh!
adoucette
QUOTE (tikay+May 9 2006, 10:12 PM)
QUOTE (adoucette+May 9 2006, 11:33 PM)
Tikay,

Are you just posting so you can start out page 800?

Arthur

hunh? I answered before you asked it silly!
I know, I was just posting so I could start page 800.

wink.gif

Arthur
Amused
800 pages of pure nonsense? Maybe someone should start an 800 page thread about how the holocaust or the moon landing was faked.

After all, who needs the engineers at the NIST when you have the credibility of someone who payed $15 to register www.911conspiracy.com?
yesitdid
QUOTE (newton+May 9 2006, 10:34 PM)
QUOTE (adoucette+May 9 2006, 09:18 PM)
OK,

Add USA TODAY reporters as being IN ON IT.

laugh.gif  laugh.gif  laugh.gif

Arthur

absolutely correct.
the publishing company of usa today, gannett publishing, made up a MAJORITY of the pentagon 'witnesses', whose testimony is used repeatedly to 'prove' that a commercial plane hit the pentagon. it was them and people who work at the pentagon, mostly.

good one, arthur. well spotted.
I've been told that pointing out the vast number of people 'in-on-it' or who would be able to deduce that it was a gov't plot, is a 'straw man'.

................ But you just keep adding to the list and making it so easy...........
yesitdid
QUOTE (Reverend+May 10 2006, 01:48 AM)
QUOTE (adoucette+)
My mistake. One need only know that the plot to blame Muslim extremists was hatched in the 1970's when the towers were under construction and some spook somewhere said to someone in power,

<br>Well, they would've blamed the Cubans or the Russians back then, but hey nothing like have a contingency plan smile.gif


quote=adoucette ?????
The Reverend demonstrates the precise nature of any research he does. biggrin.gif
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...940&#entry88799

QUOTE
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
 
"hey, why don't we surreptitiously plant C4 in the concrete of the towers
<br>Built-in demolition measures aren't that bad an idea. It makes a lot of sense to at least plan ahead on HOW to bring down such huge buildings since they'd have to be demolished one day anyway. You wouldn't want the general public to know that there were huge quantities of explosive in the building either. They'd be most upset.
<br>On the contrary, building in explosives during construction is a very bad idea on many levels. The idea that any structure has to be built with its eventual deconstruction in mind is idiotic to start with but assuming that it should be done by CD for a structure this large goes beyond idiotic.

QUOTE
QUOTE (->
QUOTE

and then rewrite descriptions of the construction of the towers to hide the fact that they had all concrete walls over steel columns in the cores of the buildings. 
<br>Has anyone seen the plans made publicly available for study?
<br>IIRC anyone, anyone at all, can buy those plans. That is as public as most things in this world get.

QUOTE
QUOTE (->
QUOTE

That way sometime in the future when we want to have a fake attack on the USA all we need do is set up the detonators and a cover story and kaboom, the towers will fall completely and at a free fall rate".
<br>Well, if you happen to have a building all wired-up and ready to go, and it's not making money, why not just do an insurance job? Kill two birds with one stone, as the owner's buddies in the US government can help out to blame some Islamic nation or terrorist group as a pretext to war.
<br>This always amazes me. Some gov't spook agency is tasked with killing thousands of Americans in order to garner support for the President's agenda, an action that would be the single most egregious crime ever perpetrated in the USA and which would bring the death penalty for all involved if found out BUT they decide to call up a developer, the owner of the buildings that will be destroyed and ask, "You want in on this Larry? "

Give your head a shake Reverend.
reasonwhy
QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 9 2006, 01:58 PM)
QUOTE (lenbrazil+May 7 2006, 06:26 PM)

With people from Ace backing his version it not fair to call the writer a liar. Newspaper do occasionally get things wrong, sometimes this is  intentional (Judith Miller) but sometimes people make stuff up and sometimes people don’t understand what they read.


I have no idea who he is should I? I never heard of him till I read the article. Is he some shill for Kristol?

The link doesn't work.


<b> This all started because I said the press lies. I should have just said the press does not ask the right questions and presents the side of those paying the bills. Colbert does not care and he gets away with it because of being a comedian (so far).

Colbert is the only person I am aware of that has questioned Bill Kristol about his ties to PNAC:

Colbert shakes up Bill Kristol over PNAC ties

Bill Kristol, who is one of the major players in the group called PNAC, joined the set of the "Colbert Report," and I think was taken off guard right at the outset of the show because he had to answer questions that our media never asks. PNAC envisioned America attacking the Middle East since the middle '90's and for some inexplicable reason (that was a joke) the media never questions him or his members which have lined the walls of Bush's cabinet about PNAC and how it influenced our foreign policy, which led us to attack Iraq.

Colbert immediately called him on it and Kristol was quite embarrassed talking about it.

Colbert: Speaking of thinking alike, you were a member, or are a member of the New Project for the American Century, correct?

Kristol: I am.

Colbert: Were or am, am?

Kristol: Were and am.

Colbert: How's that project coming?

Kristol: well. it's..(stammering)

Colbert: How's the New American Century, looks good to me?

Kristol: Ahh--I think...hehe yea--I'm speechless..

Colbert: Really?

Kristol: Yea...we've sort of...the Project for the New American Century is just a few people..

Colbert: Come on, it’s a terrific New American Century, right?

Kristol: Well I think we do OK.

Colbert: You Rummy Wolfowitz, Cheney, Pearle, Feith, all you guys right?

Kristol (responds timidly): Well, we fought back after 9/11..

Just watch as Colbert turns every argument Bill has made about the Iraq war around on his head. As Pac says: "He left Kristol smoldering in ashes."
full transcript
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/04/28.html


Cobert is also the person that ripped the press for not doing their job at the White House Correspondents Dinner ( was not reported in the mainstream media of course):

The greatest thing about this man is he's steady. You know where he stands. He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday. Events can change; this man's beliefs never will.

As excited as I am to be here with the president, I am appalled to be surrounded by the liberal media that is destroying America, with the exception of Fox News. Fox News gives you both sides of every story: the president's side, and the vice president's side.

But the rest of you, what are you thinking, reporting on NSA wiretapping or secret prisons in eastern Europe? Those things are secret for a very important reason: they're super-depressing. And if that's your goal, well, misery accomplished.

Over the last five years you people were so good -- over tax cuts, WMD intelligence, the effect of global warming. We Americans didn't want to know, and you had the courtesy not to try to find out. Those were good times, as far as we knew.

But, listen, let's review the rules. Here's how it works: the president makes decisions. He's the Decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Just put 'em through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know - fiction!

Because really, what incentive do these people have to answer your questions, after all? I mean, nothing satisfies you. Everybody asks for personnel changes. So the White House has personnel changes. Then you write, "Oh, they're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." First of all, that is a terrible metaphor. This administration is not sinking. This administration is soaring. If anything, they are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg!
Full transcript [B]a
adoucette
So, WHY did Colbert not weigh in on "THE DEFINING ISSUE OF OUR TIME"

OH NO.

HE's NOT IN ON IT TOO????

Say it isn't so.

Oh, the HUMANITY.

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Arthur
reasonwhy
QUOTE (adoucette+May 9 2006, 02:36 PM)


This passage I think is a better explanation of what happened. Trying to make the elevator mechanics out as cowards is pretty fu<kin low:


Arthur

It is more then that. We have the elevator mechanics claiming they were ordered to leave. We have the Ace management claiming they left on their own and there were no set procedures in place. The Port Authority claims not only were set procedures in place, none called for the elevator maintenance workers to leave. 200 – 400 people die and some were feet away from the people that could save them.

Then the only investigation is by a newspaper. I cannot find an investigation in the NIST, FEMA or 9/11 commission reports. Why?

The regular 50 elevator mechanics were the same people that worked for Otis that risked their lives in dangerouse conditions saving people in the 1993 bombing:

"When the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993, Otis Elevator's mechanics led the rescue of 500 people trapped in elevators. Some mechanics were dropped onto the roofs of the twin towers by helicopter. Others, carrying 50-pound oxygen tanks on their backs, climbed through smoke to machine rooms high in the towers. On Sept. 11, the elevator mechanics -- many of the same men involved in the rescues in 1993 -- left the buildings after the second jet struck, nearly an hour before the first building collapsed.

"At the time the elevator mechanics left, dozens of people were trapped in stuck elevators. Other people lost their lives trying to rescue those trapped in elevators, including a mechanic from another company who rushed to the Trade Center from down the street.

"The departure of elevator mechanics from a disaster site is unusual. The industry takes pride in rescues. In the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, elevator mechanics worked closely with the firefighters making rescues.

""Nobody knows the insides of a high-rise like an elevator mechanic. They act as guides for firefighters, in addition to working on elevators," says Robert Caporale, editor of Elevator World, a trade magazine."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2001/1...t-mechanics.htm

Who is Ace Elevator?

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey give the maintenance contract to a small company, ACE Elevator. Then in 1999, ACE Elevator undertook what was perhaps, one of the largest, most sophisticated elevator modernization programs in the industry's history reported in March of 2001.

They made large structural changes around the machine rooms, floors and walls in the area. This was also not in the NIST model or report.

http://web.archive.org/web/20030926031958/...df/0103-002.pdf

Were is Ace Elevator today? I believe they are no longer in business.
Alan (ex elevator man)
ReasonWhy said...

They made large structural changes around the machine rooms, floors and walls in the area. This was also not in the NIST model or report.


The .pdf was a nice link. Thanks for posting it. Ok, what you said above isn't quite true. What they described weren't "large structural changes".
They welded a plate between two beams to put the rectifiers on. Routing ductwork with the electrical cables up 7 floors wouldn't be "large" either, though it would make more 'holes' through floors. The reason for all this was... let's see, how to begin... There was a good picture of the machine and it shows the electric spring-loaded brake. They didn't replace them. Those do the hoisting, and you seen were they weigh 52,000 lbs. (I never installed one that big) What they did away with was the MG sets. Those are 480v (ac) motor/generators that put out DC current for the elevator operation. These are right there nearby the machines, so I don't know why they didn't show a picture of them. They installed the 'rectifier system' to get DC power to do away with the MG's. Seems to me, if they would've just knocked a wall down in the machine room to remove the MG's and add the rectifieres in their place, they would've saved alot of hassle putting the power supply 7 floors away!
Those systems didn't become too popular, at least down here in Houston. I only seen one personal, and I didn't work there. My teacher in 'elevator school' was one of the adjusters (come in behind installers and fine tune everything on that job and it was almost finished. He had somehow fkn lost my test for the Solid State Electronics course and I met him in the machine room of that building and retook it while he was working overtime programming. It was a pretty cool set up though, and the first one I had seen with a modem where the maintenance guys could call up from home to troubleshoot and alot of times fix the problem without leaving home. Those were Westinghouse elevators though, and the 'rectifier' setup is quieter, but hotter.
K, the big blue machine in the picture is a 'gearless' machine. They're faster than geared. On the left end is the armature, etc... then in the middle you see the grooved drive sheave and the cables going down, and on the right end of it is those spring-loaded electric clamping brakes. You only see one side, but it's a thinner blue steel and with the other side, is shaped similiar to a wishbone, with a spring connecting the top 'open' end of the wishbone. There's a picture of the top of one car where you see the springs at end of the shackles (other end has the babbitt/end of cable rosette) but they aren't in the view. You can see it under the yellow short beam in an 'elevation' view (though it looks like the camera is laying flat on the roof of the cab). Oh yeah, the stats said it was roped 1:1 with a double wrap... so if the car has 6 hoist cables, that drive sheave has 12 grooves. Cables would deflect down through the floor to a hanging deflector sheave (hangs off the bottom of the machine beams the machine is sitting on top of), around it and back over the machine, then back down to deflect to the center 'pick point' of the counterweights. The down cables on the machine side would be a straight drop to the centerline/pick point of the cab.
K, so this to me doesn't help on any discussion topic that I can see here (those rectifiers sitting on a plate is no biggie), but the .pdf was interesting and I thought I'd 'splain some of it. Hey

Guest
I must say, the most fascinating part of this discussion is the sheer volume of output from arthur doucette. The guy is a tireless workhorse, posting nearly continuously at all hours of the day. I've never seen anything like it on any other forum. Of course, a large number of his posts just contain an over abundant use of emoticons followed by "MORON", but nevertheless, if he is not being paid to do this I wonder where he finds the time to work. It is quite the prodigious, though not usually impressive, output. Anyway, just a quick observation on the way through (I should not leave out that voluminous "common sense?" guy but he's a little nasty so I will let that pass).
Alan (ex elevator man)
The down cables on the machine side would be a straight drop to the centerline/pick point of the cab.

That should read... The down cables on the car side, instead of "machine".
The side we see would be a straight drop the car and the other side towards the wall, the cables would go to the counterweights. Another quick thing... any elevator hatch that is above an occupied floor has to have safeties on the counterweights too, so there would be two governors and two governor cables per car.
More classroom? Ok (Ha!), a simple point... when the car is going up, the counterweights are going down. To offset the weight of the cables (if the car was at the top, then all the weight of the cables would be down the length of the shaft to the counterweights), they set up 'compensating cables' that tie into the bottom of the car and go down to the pit to a deflector sheave to go back up to the bottom of the counterweights. Result as you can see is, same amount of cable weight no matter where the car is in the hatch. Also, the counterweights are heavier than the car, even with a capacity load of people. In effect, a 'runaway' elevator (if those big brakes on the machine failed) would fall up if the cables weren't cut.
Rove's shill


QUOTE
Rove's shrill --- "These fires?": Not sure, the visuals I am referring to was posted here by Common Sense some way back by now. "Daylight": Visual from same poster. "Show me": Show you what? Back aways is a visual of WTC 6, or maybe from 911 Research, of a vid-clip from a helicopter video. It is clear to me that the columns draped over the top are from WTC 7. "Eye witness O+A Show": I have no means to play/watch/listen to this. The only witness reports I know about are from Firehouse.com, together with the two different videos and at least one still camera. Without exception, everyone was standing to the north or northwest of WTC 7 when it collapsed. "Nope." What are you referring to? The debris field spread is clear from the FEMA report, which I followed in my reconstruction.
<br>Rove's Shrill ??? Impressive coming from a retired professor. Nice to see you getting in the spirit of CSpam. Always makes a discussion more fun, I guess.

Obviously I think your overview is crap. More homework Prof. Come back when you have something solid.
Common Sense
800 pages and STILL not one long standing member of this board has been converted to the CD side... You got to love it!!!

I have to mark every 100 pages with 14 font. wink.gif
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.