How can a 600,000 pound beam fly thru the air laterally a couple hundred feet and still have enough energy left to lodge in a concrete skyscraper? (Note: Like many things surrounding 9/11, there seems to be conflicting stories about the weight of the beam, but the picture says a 1,000 words... or maybe this pic is worth 2,900.)
Source: 9/11 Digital Archive
Whether the beam was 600,00 pounds or some other lesser figure, how does it fly thru the air and lodge in a building nearly 400 feet away?
"This building was damaged by the explosions caused by terrorist attacks near the World Trade Center site."
Really? What explosions? The initial ones caused by the jet fuel burning off that was 500 feet away, in the sky?
How does a collapsing building turn human bones into fragments so small, they can fit into a test tube? And cause them to fly thru the air almost 400 feet?
Human Remains Discovered in 2006And how does a structure fire reach out thru space and incinerate a bus (and numerous other vehicles) located nearby the WTC complex? A fire that burnt so intensely, the vehicles look like they had been scorched with a blowtorch. Click here for more photos.
About a year after the official program to identify victims had ended, more human remains turned up on top of the Deutsche Bank Building, which stands about 400 feet to the south of the location of the former South Tower. According to the Associated Press, more than 300 human bone fragments were recovered from the roof of the 43-story skyscraper as workers removed toxic debris in preparation for a floor-by-floor take-down of the building. Most of the fragments were less then 1/16th inch in length.
Maybe someone at NIST could explain these peculiarities?
Selling Out the Investigation by Bill ManningFire Engineering Magazine has been around for 133 years and I can personally attest, from having read and studied numerous editions over my 20 years in the fire service that it is an excellent magazine.
Fire Engineering Magazine, January 2002
Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the "official investigation" blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure. Except for the marginal benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by ASCE investigation committee members- described by one close source as a "tourist trip"-no one's checking the evidence for anything.
As things now stand and if they continue in such fashion, the investigation into the World Trade Center fire and collapse will amount to paper- and computer generated hypotheticals.
However, respected members of the fire protection engineering community are beginning to raise red flags, and a resonating theory has emerged: The structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers.
Clearly, there are burning questions that need answers. Based on the incident's magnitude alone, a full-throttle, fully resourced, forensic investigation is imperative. More important, from a moral standpoint, for the safety of present and future generations who live and work in tall buildings-and for firefighters, always first in and last out-the lessons about the buildings' design and behavior in this extraordinary event must be learned and applied in the real world.
To treat the September 11 incident any differently would be the height of stupidity and ignorance.
The destruction and removal of evidence must stop immediately.
Just don't try and find a link to FE at Wikipedia.
Computer generated hypotheticals? LIke NIST making up a term that was to be used for the WTC collapse and that collapse alone?
NIST never tested for explosive residues despite indications, including many eyewitness accounts from first-responders and people who escaped the buildings, that explosives and incendiaries were present. Strikingly, eight years after the event, NIST still argues "there is no hard evidence to warrant such testing" and refuses to order fairly inexpensive tests, doing so even in the face of the 2008 independent study that claimed to find traces in reputed WTC debris of the military incendiary thermite, which cuts through steel. This controversial study has been reinforced by the results published in April in the Open Chemical Physics Journal. Many technical professionals call the failure to test a science research "travesty."