Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KonKilo who wrote (603)	5/10/2003 8:53:04 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

ShilohCat, Thanks for the link to "Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics!". I've seen that page before, and I find it a curious blend of skepticism, fact and half understood principles of engineering. One criticism I have of J. McMichael's analysis is that he seems unclear on the fact that structural steel doesn't need to be at the melting temperature in order to lose tensile strength. I find that the explanation provided by the official engineering assessment is quite plausible. That the floor trusses on the levels where the fires burned out of control would sag over time and thereby break free from their point of attachment at the columns. Once this occurred, a progressive collapse became an inevitability. Mr McMicael also overstates the degree to which the concrete in the structure was reduced to "dust". I've seen footage of the debris sorting facility that was built up at Fresh Kills, and the material was a mix of rubble, with not all concrete reduced to the fine aggregate size he implies. That said, it is still clear that the FBI, FEMA and others prevented independent investigators onto the site in the critical period immediately following the collapse. The plausible explanation is that they were necessarily attempting to maintain order in a decidedly chaotic situation. The skeptic's position was that a cover-up was being carried out by high governmental officials. I tend to find it hard to believe that a cover-up could have occurred on something of this scope and nature. However, tantalizing assertions, such as the "pools of molten metal" purported seen at the bottom of the excavation would be clear red flags. Do we have any photographic proof or official analysis of this molten structural steel? Not to my knowledge. OTOH, we also don't have proof that such molten metal actually existed. All I've seen is hearsay. I'm trying to keep an open mind on the events of 9/11. I'm more troubled by what appears to be fraud with regard to the Pentagon attack, than with the skepticism about how the WTC towers collapsed. -Ray