Lazarus > Another one. Here we go again
As you say. But thank you for the links -- some I have already seen, some don't work and some are new.
It is clear that you are satisfied that burning jet fuel was the cause of the "collapse" of the WTC, presumably, as per this link:
civil.usyd.edu.au
>>Tim Wilkinson, Lecturer in Civil Engineering
(This is an initial suggestion on one possible reason for failure, and should not be regarded as official advice)<<
However, it is well that Wilkinson covered his report with this rider because it, in fact, is incomplete and does not explain a number of events which occurred.
1. The building did not simply "collapse" -- it exploded
This picture demonstrates this well and not only does it show the voluminous clouds of pyroplastic dust which accompanied the "collapse", it also shows the shower of reinforced steel fragments.
civil.usyd.edu.au
This picture shows an overview of the site
justiceforwoody.org
2. The presence of an enormous amount of pyroclastic dust.
This is not ash and occurs as result of the actual physical destruction of the concrete by heat and pressure. Other than in a volcano, it can happen only with the use of explosives which simultaneously heat and compress the concrete. This analysis by Hoffman discusses the physics involved....
justiceforwoody.org
... and comes to this conclusion:
>>The amount of energy required to expand the North Tower's dust cloud was many times the entire potential energy of the tower's elevated mass due to gravity. The over 10-fold disparity between the most conservative estimate and the gravitational energy is not easily dismissed as reflecting uncertainties in quantitative assessments.
The official explanation that the Twin Tower collapses were gravity-driven events appears insufficient to account for the documented energy flows. <<
3. Evidence for an accompanying explosion
This article presents evidence of a massive explosion which preceded the collapse of each of WTC1 and WTC2.
serendipity.li
>>The Palisades seismic record shows that — as the collapses began — a huge seismic "spike" marked the moment the greatest energy went into the ground. The strongest jolts were all registered at the beginning of the collapses, well before the falling debris struck the earth. These unexplained "spikes" in the seismic data lend credence to the theory that massive explosions at the base of the towers caused the collapses.
A "sharp spike of short duration" is how seismologist Thorne Lay of Univ. of California at Santa Cruz told AFP an underground nuclear explosion appears on a seismograph.
The two unexplained spikes are more than twenty times the amplitude of the other seismic waves associated with the collapses and occurred in the East-West seismic recording as the buildings began to fall. <<
3. Evidence of a controlled demolition
This URL has many links
home.comcast.net
And here are some videos to demonstrate the "squibs" which, in demolition parlance, mean the series of explosions which precede the fall of any structure.
Message 20360347
4. The smoking gun
starseedtv.com
>>We know that the term 'pull it' means to bring the building down by means of explosives because in the same documentary a cleanup worker (in December 2001) refers to the demolition of WTC Building 6 when he says, "...we're getting ready to pull the building six."
Click here to listen to the clip.
This means that in direct contradiction to the official FEMA report, the goal of which was to find out why the building collapsed, the federal government had in fact demolished the building on the day of 9/11. <<
I think that's enough for now. I'll leave the other events for another time. |
