Basic Physics, Correct Analysis of WTC Towers Collapse

Hi a_ht,

I salute your bravery in contributing to this forum and if it is compromising you in any way, I applaud you for honestly debating the issue and presenting your views and data for discussion.

There are a great number of people, I suspect, who are in a similar position to yourself. This is partly what makes it such a horribly unbelievable situation. I know I am stating the obvious but basic physics is pretty unforgiving of politics etc - I know that sounds a bit trite as well, but there you go.

If it's any consolation to any one reading who has a similar situation to a_ht (wish I knew your firstname or something more friendly), there are plenty of others out there like you. I do (despite how it might seem) have some appreciation for this sort of situation. I am in a position which gives me a bit more freedom to try and offer what I consider to be objective commentary (others may disagree), but it is important for me (and others) to keep in mind that not everyone has this luxury.

I am pleased the way that this thread has developed into a good, honest debate with facts and data presented to support the points that have been made. I hope it can continue in this vain (vein??).

a__ht,

i am a civil engineer. What would you believe is the best course of action? Play a part in the (I believe) cover up or instigate and assist in a reviewing of the evidence into complicity by the US Government into a catastrophic event, that served the catalyst to the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan & Iraq.

It is a VERY difficult choice. Look at all the FBI & CIA agent who have have their careers blanked whilst those exhibiting complicity have been promoted.

I believe that the tide is turning and the evidence will leak out bit by bit and the realisations will be made over time

Iif you are a civil engineer (or you just work in the publicity department), then please present some of these points to your engineering colleagues.

My previous post was more of a statement, but since you are interested in questions, I would be pleased if you could comment on any of the following:


1. Why was the primary evidence of the 3 largest structural failures in history, the structural steel, removed and destroyed as quickly as possible, preventing rigorous analysis of this catastrophic event? The evidence destruction operation was conducted over the concerted objections of victims' family members and the fire fighting community.

2. The theory explaining the collapse mechanism (Bazant & Zhou) assumes that all columns on a floor were raised to 800º C. The behaviour of steel in fires is a complex mechanism (see http://www.corusconstruction.com/page_480.htm ) Steel columns would fail by gradual buckling. The fires did not cover an entire floor area in either tower. The maximum temperature of hydrocarbon fires burning in the atmosphere without pressurization or pre-heating is 825º C (1517º F). The melting point of steel is 1535º C (2795º F). Even assuming that the fires reached a temperature to produce a gradual reduction in the steel’s (compressive & tensile) strength at temperatures up to the melting point, the mode of collapse initiation and free-fall of the whole structure would not fit in with this explanation. There would have been a gradual toppling/leaning of the structure towards the elevation where the fires (temperatures) were hottest. The collapse initiation did not indicate this. In fact, there are moving picture images showing steel beams that were projected horizontally out from the building as the floors collapsed.
.
3. Corus Construction performed extensive tests subjecting un-insulated steel-frame car-park structures to prolonged hydrocarbon-fuelled fires. The highest recorded steel temperatures were 360º C. All 287 columns would have to have weakened to the point of collapse in an instant to cause the telescoping seen in North Tower. Asymmetric damage cannot produce such a symmetric result.

4. Even if simultaneous column failure caused the building to start crushing itself straight down, it would either stop, or be deflected to the side and topple. Of collapse causes other than controlled demolition, only earthquakes can cause the simultaneous damage needed to cause total collapse.

5. A theory to explain the collapse mechanism ‘Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?—Simple Analysis’ by Zdenek P. Bazant & Yong Zhou, was produced on 13th September 2001 without any investigation of the remaining steel components at the accident scene. Such an analysis would have/should have taken months. Not 2 days. Any engineer would concur with such a view.

6. In respect of the Truss Failure Theory, eagerly championed by Professor Thomas Eagar, this hypothesis relies on the theory of progressive total collapse or ‘Pancake Theory’. The only structures where this theory has been cited in relation to total collapse are as follows:
The WTC North Tower
The WTC South Tower
WTC Building 7

7. Other indications of demolition of the structures include:
· The towers' concrete was pulverized in the air.
· The steel superstructures of the towers provided no more resistance to the falling rubble than air.
· The volume of the dust clouds produced by the collapses indicates heat energy far in excess of gravitational energy.

Please read & research for yourself, don't ignore the evidence.

Thanks for reading this far

INVENTING TERRORISM

On September 11 2001, in New York City, the twin buildings of the World Trade Centre, hit by aircraft which could have only caused localised damage, perfectly vertically imploded. Building 7, of the WTC complex, hours later, came out in sympathy and also collapsed in a heap. This was the first, second, third and only times in history and all on the same day, that this phenomenon had occurred without a planned, professionally-executed, ground-based demolition operation.
The trillion-dollar US air safety and defence systems, active at all other times, were stood down on the morning of Sep. 11. The automatic hijack alert codes were not transmitted from the aircraft. The “19 hi-jackers” were quickly identified : 19 photographs appeared : their cars were quickly found. The passport of the “chief conspirator”, Atta, survived the crash and fire and was “found” 3 blocks away from the crash impacts. Atta’s rent-a-car was found not at the airport where he was alleged to have first taken off but at the airport of the intermediate flight – the one that crashed. His baggage, with the “incriminating evidence”, “missed the flight”.
The WTC security meeting, scheduled for Sep 11, was cancelled on Sep 10. NYC and Federal agents removed vast amounts of debris before the investigation team arrived : the planes’ black boxes and everything else were “pulverised by the collisions.” and on and on …
New York’s Columbia University seismographs recorded huge underground disturbances at the start of the building collapses. * Video footage shows plane-launched missiles hitting the towers and shows windows blown out due to internal bombs. Later, the Pentagon was “hit by a Boeing 757” : this left a 65ft. hole up to 9 ft deep in the steel-reinforced concrete walls. The plane, lock, stock and landing wheels, 124ft wingspan, 155ft long ang 44ft high then dematerialised. **No trace was seen on any film, photograph or video. An eye-witness reported “It was like a cruise missile with wings. It slammed into the Pentagon .. huge explosion .. great ball of fire.” and on and on …

The attacks : were the US-commissioned “new Pearl Harbor” : they provided the excuse to invade Afghanistan and take control of the strategically-oil-critical area : restored the heroin trade : reinforced the spurious arguments for the invasion of Iraq : destroyed large amounts of criminal evidence, against some very big Bush-friends, on the FBI and SEC floors of the WTC buildings : facilitated the pay-back of huge sums of election-donated money to the arms and pharmaceutical industries and allowed the Bush administration to create an even more tyrannically-controlled police state in the USA and kidnap, imprison and tortue innocent “terrorists”
“ ..the government is then authorized to enforce the quarantine of individuals and entire cities, confiscate property from anyone who resists and take control of roads into and out of your city and state, in case anyone might try to leave town to avoid being medicated or vaccinated.
The government can also confiscate all communication devices such as telephones or computers, and can seize your house, car, food, clothing and firearms. The military is authorized to enforce the law, presumably holding down anyone who resists vaccination and escorting resisters or those too ill to take the shots to jail or the quarantine area for isolation, with the length of time to be determined by the state. An “actual” event of bioterrorism isn’t even necessary ; a “potential” emergency will suffice .. “ Lynne Born International Socialist Review, January 2004.

The Blair govt. is using the same phony reasons to push ID cards, imprisonment without trial and move further towards a police state.

missing Boeing
http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pen...e/erreurs_en.ht

You got it right about everything except the plane-launched missiles. That has been disproved.

Sorry
Sent in an outdated document.
NEW PEARL HARBOUR
“ Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th ; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from … the guilty. ” George W Bush Nov 10 2001
On September 11 2001, in New York City,
the twin buildings of the World Trade Centre, hit by aircraft which could have only caused localised damage, perfectly vertically imploded. Building 7, of the WTC complex, hours later, came out in sympathy and also collapsed in a heap.
The trillion-dollar US air safety and defence systems, active at all other times, were stood down on the morning of Sep. 11. The automatic hijack alert codes were not transmitted from the aircraft. The “19 hi-jackers” were quickly identified : 19 photographs appeared : their cars were quickly found. The passport of the “chief conspirator”, Atta, survived the crash and fire and was “found” 3 blocks away from the crash impacts. Atta’s rent-a-car was found not at the airport where he was alleged to have first taken off but at the airport of the intermediate flight – the one that crashed. His baggage, with the “incriminating evidence”, “missed the flight”.
The WTC security meeting, scheduled for Sep 11, was cancelled on Sep 10. NYC and Federal agents removed vast amounts of debris before the investigation team arrived : the planes’ black boxes and everything else were “pulverised by the collisions.”
New York’s Columbia University seismographs recorded huge underground disturbances at the start of the building collapses. Video footage shows windows blown out due to internal bombs. and on and on …

The attacks : were the “new Pearl Harbor” which the oil-boys had said they needed : provided the excuse to invade Afghanistan and take control of the strategically-oil-critical area : restored the heroin trade : reinforced the spurious arguments for the invasion of Iraq : destroyed large amounts of criminal evidence on the FBI and SEC floors of the WTC buildings : facilitated the pay-back of huge sums of election-donated money to the arms and pharmaceutical industries and allowed the Bush administration to create an even more tyrannically-controlled police state in the USA.
“ ..the government is then authorized to enforce the quarantine of individuals and entire cities, confiscate property from anyone who resists and take control of roads into and out of your city and state, in case anyone might try to leave town to avoid being medicated or vaccinated.
The government can also confiscate all communication devices such as telephones or computers, and can seize your house, car, food, clothing and firearms. The military is authorized to enforce the law, presumably holding down anyone who resists vaccination and escorting resisters or those too ill to take the shots to jail or the quarantine area for isolation, with the length of time to be determined by the state. An “actual” event of bioterrorism isn’t even necessary ; a “potential” emergency will suffice .. “
Lynne Born International Socialist Review, January 2004.
The UK government is also trampling on human rights and democracy through it’s phony “War on Terror.”
Film, photographs and eye-witness reports of the events were seen ONCE on live State US network television and then quickly buried by the US authorities, BUT NOT QUICKLY ENOUGH.
.There were no “hijacked commercial airliners” involved : the
WTC buildings were hit by remote-controlled military aircraft
and were demolished by explosives from within and below.
A missile hit the Pentagon.
Confronting the Evidence : DVD
2 hours 40 mins. £2.00 post paid
NEMESIS PO Box 73 Chesterfield S41 0YZ

URL : copy/paste : hunt the missing Boeing
http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pen.../erreurs_en.htm

www.911inplanesite.com

I suppose they were carrying nuclear explosives in their rucksackswhich brought the towers down...jeez give me strength,why can't people open their friggin eyes that this was an inside demolition job...whats up,scared you might upset some of your masonic friends/colleagues?

So is your posting on this forum on or off the clock?

This is the same ASCE that was involved in the cover-up of the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.

http://www.pubs.asce.org/WWWdisplay.cgi?9803576


Brig. Gen. Benton K. Partin, a military ordnance expert, was called in to investigate the aftermath of the bombing as well. He discovered clear evidence of demolition charges being placed in the building, criminal removal of evidence by the feds, and that it was physically impossible by an order of magnitude for the fertilizer bomb in the Ryder truck to cause the damage observed. Partin then tried to get congress and anyone who would listen to take up the case. He has hand-delivered the report to hundreds of congress members and authorities within the government and military. He was, and is to this day, completely ignored and even silenced in indirect ways.

Your organization has been compromised at some level, as NIST appears also to have been. (FEMA it seems is simply rotten from the ground up). If you are not paid to be here and value justice at all, I would do some investigating yourself into how much your employer values the truth.


You can read General Partin's report here:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/P.../PARTIN/okm.htm

And here is a video of a presentation he gave personally (104Mb, but worth every byte):
http://www.lastingnetworks.com/alexvideos/parton-ok.wmv

Just for reference, NIST's report is probably the best resource available for external observations and data regarding the construction of the WTC towers and the collapse on 9-11, although much of it is fallacy in regards to the collapse mode, the projected damage to core columns, and the concluded intensity of the fires. NIST places the collapse time at 12s +/-0.5 for each tower.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/reports_june05.htm

I'm a software engineer and it takes us more than two days to DESIGN a login page, one of the most simple parts of a website.

The article is bunk.


The failure of the building was at the *impact points*, not the top of the building - the failures commenced from there, with the top structure riding down in freefall a fair way before disintegrating. Thus negating the entire demolition/pseudo-physics argument based on timing from the TOP of the building.

Asides from which the timing required for this proof is BS; it requires the timing of the TOP of the building hitting the ground - observation of which to the accuracy required to imply "implosion" is impossible due to the debris cloud.

The timing of the collapse during the period when the tops of the buildings are visible follows the progressive collapse theory just fine. And after the collapse of the top of the building has started, total destruction is inevitable.


The steel used in the WTC's strength is roughly halved at the temperatures generated in the fires. Uneven heating also increases the stress loading.

Bowing of the external structural beams - F*CKING OBVIOUS on the film footage - were obviously going to be responsible for some kind of failures; as it happens, disconnection of the floors, causing their failure onto the floors below them.


The buildings design has been shown in experiment and simulation to also have a design-specific vulnerability to the extended temperatures (softening/bowing of the external beams and floor truss' leading to their disconnection).


Read the wikipedia article if you want to understand it. In particular the section titled "The two towers collapsed in markedly different ways, indicating that there were in fact two modes of failure."


Failure times of floors under the falling juggernaut are obviously going to offer no significant increase in time to the duration of the collapse. The first floor to fail was hit with 45,000 tons of the failed structure above it. The floor designs were for 1500 tons. The exterior columns were held in place by the floors and to each other, so the floors failure disconnected the exterior columns.

This is F*CKING OBVIOUSLY seen with large pieces of exterior struture progressively peeling away and falling.


The footprint of the buildings debris in *no way* showed paths consistent with high-speed ejection of debris accompanying an explosion at the time of collapse.

Indeed, portions of the exterior columns can be seen STILL STANDING for short periods *during* the collapse. This is EXACTLY what youd see as the floors failed, falling inside the 'tube' without managing to pull in all the exterior columns. Of course eventually the exterior columns are knocked over or pulled in by failing floors.


The large volumes of air expelled propelled a cloud of debris out - but only at mechanically-induced speeds. (Go look at the collapse videos again and think of the volume of air in a floor being squeezed out in ~1/20th of a second per floor).


As for the other 'arguments' - the main *structural* material of the building - steel columns - wasn't "pulverised to a powder".

There were 6 million feet of internal walls. This gypsum panel cladding *was* throughly crushed and expelled and this was the primary constituent of the dispersed cloud.

The thin 4" poured load-spreading concrete floors were also thoroughly destroyed, but this is expected as they were ONLY 4" thick structurally-unreinforced concrete. The destruction of the concrete corresponds to the destruction of the floors it was poured on. The majority of the concrete debris was confined to the collapse area.


Tower 7's collapse was similarly largely the result of fire and impact damage. Some beams recovered from 7 showed signs of 1000'c exposure. With no fire-supression activity taken, the buildings failure due to the combination of structural damage from the collapse of the WTC and fire was also inevitable - though in a different fashion to the WTC collapse. Tower 7's collapse is analysed in the NIST documents at

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%20Part%20IIC%...pse%20Final.pdf

What's interesting is the progress of the collapse of WTC7 takes place over 8 seconds BEFORE the global collapse - if you know where to look.




Rather than more IDIOTIC conspiracy theories, what should be thought about is what improved design requirements should be legislated (increasing the costs of buildings) and who should foot the bill.

Engineer,

I believe the most of the points you made have already been mentioned in this thread - and many items of data have been presented to refute them.

Whatever NIST or FEMA have said, I for one stick with the basic view that:

It is not possible for things to fall through the air as quickly as it is for them to fall through melting / bending / cracked / softened / plasticised or buckled steel. To get near the freefall time, all of the supporting structure must essentially "disappear" - or collapse in synchronisation. All the evidence supports that this is what happened. The amount of energy required for this to happen in the situation of WTC 1 & 2, however, simply can not be provided by the kinetic energy of the jet impacts combined with the total potential and combustion energy of those things which burned in the resulting fires. Such calculations have been attempted already (clearly, they can only be done with some margin of error).

These articles focus on the science of this particular aspect of the demolition:

http://911research.wtc7.net/papers/dustvolume/volumev3.html

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...wtc/how-hot.htm

This type of evidence has nothing to do with conspiracies, as I have tried to make clear above. You have to focus on the video and physical evidence, then other conclusions flow from that. Stating the obvious, this is the essence of scientific method, is it not?

If you immediately assume it was the jet fuel and impacts alone which caused the collapse and will not examine the evidence which shows this assumption is wrong, then you are bound to come to a conclusion which is incorrect. i.e. all the evidence and data must be considered carefully before dismissing a particular conclusion as "a theory" etc.

To refute these analyses, you need to present hard data and arguments - we can prove, using basic physics, the official reports are wrong, however many times links to them are posted, or references to NIST and FEMA are made. Their basic physics is wrong - despite the $$ spent on simulations and computer animations.

Thanks for reading.

I haven't studied the NIST document, but certainly the FEMA "explanation" is a Fairy Tale. Even FEMA admits (in Chp 2) that "The heat produced by this burning jet fuel does not by itself appear to have been sufficient to initiate the structural collapses." Never mind, for now, that FEMA never attempts to quantify how much energy you need to effect a global collapse of WTC 1 & 2, when they try to argue that there was sufficient energy to initiate collapse, what tried and tested technique do they rely on?

Well, FEMA waives it's hands, that's what it does!.


Everybody should read Chapter 2 of the FEMA report to see what a laugher it is. Just when they get to the "good stuff" - which is "explaining" where the extra energy comes from - they suddenly become as scientific as the flat earth people. Specifically:

Got that? 7,000 gallons of kersone fuel, representing the what remained of the estimated 10,000 gallons that did not erupt in the impact fireball outside of the WTC wasn't enough to to collapse the weakened structure. But add in all that burning paper, carpeting, and plastic, and you've got something "estimated to have been comparable to the power produced by a large commercial power generating station". How many KW this hypothetical power station puts out and how they got this amazing figure, FEMA DOESN'T SAY. No reference, nothing. (I quote the references for FEMA Chp. 2 at the end of this post. *)

Furthermore, the picture of a woman standing in the gaping hole left by one of the planes, WHICH IS IN THE FEMA REPORT ITSELF, (other photos of the same woman is linked to below) gives the lie to this ridiculous claim. There is obviously no proper shielding of this hypothetical "large commercial power generating station", yet this woman is standing there, as calm as can be. Her hair is not on fire, her clothes are not on fire, she is fine. Indeed, as you can see in the middle picture, she is waiving.




Unfortunately for the US Government's Fairy Tale version of collapse, and it's supporters, even back of the envelope calculations making absurdly generous assumptions in FEMA's favor show you that the FEMA non-explanation is energetically impossible, certainly by an order of magnitude, and more realistically by two orders of magnitude. To a sufficiently great degree of accuracy, we know how much kinetic energy was in the plane, how much chemical energy was in the fuel, and, most importantly, how much potential energy was stored by the mass of the buildings themselves. Comparing these energy sources to the energy sinks puts the lie to the FEMA report.

(Oh, and by the way, if you still believe in the FEMA Fairy Tale, and believe that WTC 1 & 2 could have collapsed without the use of explosives, you can win $1,000,000 by proving that's the case. See reopen911.org for details of the contest. But I digress)



Jim Hoffman has looked at the energy sink reprented by the pyroclastic flows of the dust cloud that enveloped WTC 1 & 2 during collapse, and this energy sink alone exceeds the energy sources mentioned above. Please visit his site for details (911research.wtc7.net) Hoffman is obviously very smart, very successful, and very eloquent. Certainly not a crank. His work has been featured in articles in Science News, Scientific American, Science Digest, and Nature. You can hear extensive interviews of him on this subject at:

http://kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=4344&page=3&type=all
http://kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=5608&page=3&type=all

As for my humble back of the envelope calculation, wherein I ignore the energy sink of pyroclastic flows (because I know nothing of their physics ), and in which I pretend that all of the heat energy from 7,000 gallons of burning fuel magically go into the steel (so as to weaken it maximally - this is a ludicrous assumption which obviously favors FEMA), is reproduced below. ( In point of fact, Im sure most of the heat energy from the burning get fuel went into heating air, which simply vented out the building.) While I can be rightly accused of ignoring the heat from secondary fires, I'm certainly not ignoring it any more than the woman in the photos. Although I haven't done it, a reasonable way to put that nonsense to rest is to assume that 15 percent of the volume of the office space in, say, 15 of the WTC floors is filled with a combustible, such as copier paper, and calculating the heat energy released by that in a fire.

===========================================

* References from Chp. 2 of the FEMA Fairy Tale, wherein they justify their ludicrous assumptions that secondary fires were sufficient to provide the missing energy needed to initiate the collapse of the WTC buildings NOT AT ALL. As you can see, most all these references are nothing more than first person accounts of survivors.

My name is Jon Pratt: Sometimes I post under the name Plectic.

I have a HND in civil engineering, a first class degree in communication design and a master of arts (MA) in Multimedia.

During 5 have helped construct many structures and roads, as structural engineer and setting-out engineer. I have a keen interest in occult science (with emphasis on science), and philosophy and media theory.

If one group of people can help resolve this problem it is the physics community, because invariably the paradigm change will first spread from the physical sciences to the other "communities" . The real war is between the empiricals and what I refer to as the de-cens or relativistic (in every sense of the word). Some occultists refer to the "empirical" as

Ahrimanic.Ahrimanis the symbol of matter, crystallization, formation of boundaries and limitations, solidification in all regions. Ahriman is the tendency for the animate to become inanimate, for motion to become stillness. Ahriman is thus identified with unconsciousness, materialism, and stasis. Because matter is 'mute' Ahriman can be considered to be the enemy of non material abstractions like morality and ethics.

It´s the death throe´ of epistemology, because of the fraudulent scientific practice that denies the reliance of it´s method on axioms* (*axiom is a self-evident truth upon which other knowledge must rest, from which other knowledge is built up) . The story that some rag-headed urban legend/multi-millionaire/ex-cia/business partner of many influential Americans co-ordinated a simultaneous multi-target hijacking, scoring 3 direct hits under the auspices of (supposedly) the most-protected country in the world is in itself a conspiracy.

http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/sciencewars2/


Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
One of the most famous challenges against empiricism is Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), which built upon Norwood Russell Hanson's Patterns of Discovery (1958). In this, he argues that theory change is actually developed through paradigm shifts, where a new idea is offered that doesn't follow on existing theories but instead offers a unique, creative solution to existing problems. Scientific thinking, in Kuhn's view, goes through revolutions, instead of gradual theory development through testing and experimentation. After the revolution occurs, scientists can see things they weren't able to see before in the former framework. Kuhn also questioned whether scientific experimentation is truly unbiased and neutral since the experimenter had previous theories and preconceptions which could affect what experiments are chosen and the way in which the results are interpreted. Kuhn also questioned whether we can trust the reliability of our senses, and cited the famous illusions printed in Hanson's 1958 book.
The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions

Dearest a_ht, thankyou for the bombastic revelation. Why should we care about the politicians not wanting "another scandal"? Do you not feel obligated to do/say something?

Is it Einstein vs Newton ? 100 years later ?

We now turn to a structural analysis of modern false-flag terrorism of the type that is
commonly sponsored by factions or networks embedded in the secret intelligence
agencies of modern states. This discussion draws on the work of Andreas von Bülow,
Gerard Wisnewski, Gianfranco Sanguinetti, and on my own research on the Moro
assassination, the Red Brigades, and Italian terrorism in general.

Hi, I studied only pre-med level physics at a prestigious university, but am quite good at math.

Check out www.911Proof.com for first-hand eyewitness testimony regarding destruction of the world trade centers.

Can physics explain the phenomena described in the absence of controlled demolition?

Great to find this impassioned yet eminently reasonable discussion of the enormous questions that remain (and only seem to grow) surrounding what actually happened on 9/11/2001. I find myself thinking about these questions all the time.

Some good relevant writing at:
Taking a Closer Look: Hard Science and the Collapse of the World Trade Center
by Dave Heller

I myself wonder, first and foremost, why there seems to be so much obfuscation and fear around even discussing these questions -- particularly by government agencies, but also by the media.

Focusing on just the science allows us to remove any political or emotional prejudices we may have.

Shucks, that's an easy one. Once you realize that that the FEMA/US Gov't. versions of the collapse of WTC 1 & 2 is a Fairy Tale, (because it's energetically impossible), you then have to ask yourself who could have supplied this source of energy.

The figures I've seen indicate you'd need at least the energy equivalent of 14 tons of explosives. "

That tells you immediately that this was an inside job, since Osama Bin Laden could not have supplied this much of an energy source.

Which means that agencies within your own government not only countenanced this murder of American citizens, it means that they essentially Made It Happen On Purpose. (MIHOP)

Not a pleasant thought....

In principle, yes, but scientist are often not as rational as they presume they are. It hasn't helped that the overwhelming majority of the evidence was destroyed.

However, the nice thing about energy source / energy sink calculations is that you can still do them to a great enough degree of accuracy to make firm conclusions, even after all this time. Which ain't too hard, since the government/FEMA version was so wildly off. Too bad for us that they used a jetliner instead of a Cessna, which made their ruse more convincing. Otherwise we would have caught on much sooner.