Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Poll Analyses
Share on Facebook 32 Share on Twitter 3 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEdNews:
Sci Tech   

Why Were the WTC Twin Towers Destroyed That Way: Explaining the Mechanism of Their Destruction on 9/11

By       (Page 3 of 3 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page. (View How Many People Read This)   107 comments
Author 511086
Message Wayne Coste

Figure 8 shows the continued progression of the demolition down the building with the activation of the propellant between floors "D" and "E". Floor "B" near the core is unsupported and begins to fall towards Floor "C".

With connections at
With connections at 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D' separating due to the momentum impact of the propellant and accelerated office contents against the perimeter wall, the separation at connection 'E' begins.
(Image by Wayne Coste, PE)
  Details   DMCA

Figure 9 shows the same conditions as Figure 8 but also includes the opposite side of the tower to illustrate the reactionary forces. The orange arrows represent the reactive forces, which are a necessary result of the propellant force. As shown in the top group of orange arrows, the propellant traversing across the core will not be constrained between upper and lower floors and will be directed upward as the stream continues outside the tower on the opposite side. This upward direction of the reactionary propellant would provide an observable feature during the destruction in the form of "rooster-tails".

Newtonian reactionary forces (orange arrows) travel in the opposite direction across the core into, and above, the collapsing structure to create the observed
Newtonian reactionary forces (orange arrows) travel in the opposite direction across the core into, and above, the collapsing structure to create the observed 'Rooster Tails.'
(Image by Wayne Coste, PE)
  Details   DMCA

As shown in Figure 10, the directionality of the propulsive forces and "rooster-tail" hypothesized in this scenario match the observations captured in aerial photos of the destruction of the North Tower.

The majority of the propulsive forces in the cardinal directions creating
The majority of the propulsive forces in the cardinal directions creating 'rooster tails' with significantly less propulsion in the ordinal directions.
(Image by Detective Greg Semendinger, N.Y.P.D.)
  Details   DMCA

The paper covers this mechanism in more detail. It also describes the mechanics behind a number of other aspects of the destruction of the Twin Towers.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

Must Read 4   Interesting 2   News 1  
Rate It | View Ratings

Wayne Coste Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Licensed Professional Engineer dealing with energy issues. Active in promoting the ethics of the engineering profession by calling on ASCE to retract the papers by Bazant et al they have published (and continue to stand by - in contradiction to (more...)
 

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The Pentagon on 9/11: 2019 Brings Closure to the Ongoing Controversy

Answering the 9/11 Consensus Panel Challenge: "Explanation of the Evidence at the Pentagon on 9/11"

Why Were the WTC Twin Towers Destroyed That Way: Explaining the Mechanism of Their Destruction on 9/11

Why "Russiagate" Still has Legs; How Misinformation Propagates

Comments Image Post Article Comment and Rate This Article

These discussions are not moderated. We rely on users to police themselves, and flag inappropriate comments and behavior. In accordance with our Guidelines and Policies, we reserve the right to remove any post at any time for any reason, and will restrict access of registered users who repeatedly violate our terms.

  • OpEdNews welcomes lively, CIVIL discourse. Personal attacks and/or hate speech are not tolerated and may result in banning.
  • Comments should relate to the content above. Irrelevant, off-topic comments are a distraction, and will be removed.
  • By submitting this comment, you agree to all OpEdNews rules, guidelines and policies.
          

Comment Here:   


You can enter 2000 characters. To remove limit, please click here.

Please login or register. Afterwards, your comment will be published.
 

Username
Password

Forgot your password? Click here and we will send an email to the address you used when you registered.
First Name
Last Name

I am at least 16 years of age
(make sure username & password are filled in. Note that username must be an email address.)

10 people are discussing this page, with 107 comments  Post Comment


Dwain Deets

Become a Fan
Author 18571
Follow Me on Twitter
(Member since Jul 14, 2008), 6 fans, 2 articles, 33 comments, 5 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

This article explains why the flows of remains are limited to the four cardinal directions. I consider that an important new insight into the demolitions of the two Twin Towers.

Submitted on Wednesday, Mar 25, 2020 at 1:58:45 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
Indent

Lance Ciepiela

Become a Fan
Author 14196
Follow Me on Twitter (Member since Apr 4, 2008), 53 fans, 58 articles, 188 quicklinks, 4933 comments, 214 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Dwain Deets:   New Content

Yes, of course, a federal, state, or city, Special/Grand Jury needs to be empowered to 'take a look' at all the #evidence so far - the New York City US Attorney Geoffrey Berman already has stated he 'will comply' with a petition filed by the Lawyers Committee for 9/11 Inquiry notifying him that 'the crimes reported here involve bombings of places of public use and government facilities, in this case, WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7, by the use of pre-planted explosives and/or incendiaries'. #PrimaryInsideExplosives. #RedPillExpo. "I want to show you the three towers coming down" - President David Meiswinkle, Lawyers Committee For 9/11 Inquiry @ 18:54 minutes.

Submitted on Wednesday, Mar 25, 2020 at 3:38:00 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (3+)
Help
IndentIndent

Dwain Deets

Become a Fan
Author 18571
Follow Me on Twitter
(Member since Jul 14, 2008), 6 fans, 2 articles, 33 comments, 5 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Lance Ciepiela:   New Content

To your comment Lance Ciepiela, the Lawyers's Committee submittal to the Federal Attorney spoke of explosives used in the demolition of the Twin Towers. Coste, in this article clarified that, explaining nano-thermite propellant could have provided the needed force.

Submitted on Wednesday, Mar 25, 2020 at 4:33:51 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Lance Ciepiela

Become a Fan
Author 14196
Follow Me on Twitter (Member since Apr 4, 2008), 53 fans, 58 articles, 188 quicklinks, 4933 comments, 214 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Dwain Deets:   New Content

Yes, 'contrary to the conclusions of NIST, the UAF research team finds that the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11 was not caused by fires but instead was caused by the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building' - #FinalReport #VIDEO. #MaterialWitnesses. #GetSomeJustice - The people who knocked these buildings down' President W Bush shouts into his 'bullhorn' on 9-14-01 except of course 'it wasn't the Iraqis'.

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 1:04:58 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (2+)
Help
IndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Lance Ciepiela:   New Content

Lance:

The problem is that the evidence for "explosives" at the Twin Towers is quite limited (almost non-existent for molecular explosives ("e.g., high explosives").

However, there is ample evidence that the destruction of the Twin Towers was not a gravity-only collapse after structural trauma from aircraft impact and the subsequent fires. The evidence shows an enormous energy release. Additionally there is evidence of a highly engineered incendiary-propellant-explosive material in the form of red-gray chips in the dust.

"Niels Harrit Discusses NanoThermite and Activism," click here

and

"Red/Gray Chips, 10 Years Later", click here

This overview of the central hypothesis of the paper suggest that the Lawyers Committee will be defeated by the lack of evidence for its central, unqualified, claim of "explosives."

Submitted on Wednesday, Mar 25, 2020 at 11:58:57 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Lance Ciepiela

Become a Fan
Author 14196
Follow Me on Twitter (Member since Apr 4, 2008), 53 fans, 58 articles, 188 quicklinks, 4933 comments, 214 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Yes, there was no 'after structural trauma from aircraft impact' at Building 7, not hit by any aircraft. Of course, there were no 'nineteen hijackers' or any 'hijacked planes' from anywhere in the world either who could have come to New York City at exactly 5:20 PM to 'pull down' Building 7 in 6.5 seconds. 9/11 'had to be someone' with 'access to all three towers' and 'knew how to do it" - Prof Dr Niels Harrit about nanothermite on 9/11. #PrePlantedExplosives 'used on 9/11 say Commissioners'. Final WTC 7 Report - Dr Leroy Hulsey UAF. #GrandJuryPetition - 'add your name'.


Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 12:51:31 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (4+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

David Watts

Become a Fan
Author 10429
(Member since Jan 31, 2008), 16 fans, 29 articles, 29 quicklinks, 2555 comments, 28 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Wayne I have not had a chance yet to look closely at your article. You are aware of the following of course, could you please leave a comment about the following? And would you let me know what your opinion is as far as Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) possibly being used on 9/11. Not necessarily by themselves, but possibly being used in conjunction with explosives and what you talk about in your article.

MANY cars and vehicles parked blocks away from the towers were in twisted and molded shapes that could only have have been caused by extreme(!) heat. And one thing I want to point out is the automobile glass. In every vehicle or virtually every vehicle the glass is gone entirely. The glass was not broken or busted leaving broken pieces lying on the ground. In car after car there is NO glass at all, the glass is gone. There is even NO glass in the window frames that you or anyone can verify easily. Broken or busted windows always leave shards of glass in the window frames. But not the cars on the streets on 9/11 parked blocks away from the demolitions. Therefore, the glass had to have "vaporized." Automobile glass windows melt or vaporize at 2,600 to 2,900°F or 1427 to 1593°C. I say there is no other explanation than Directed Energy Weapons..

Toasted cars 9/11 (Images)

NBC Melted Cars 9/11. (Start watching @ 1:20.)

9/11 Melted cars - ABC Diane Sawyer

The Spire, Where did the Twin Towers go By Dr.Judy Wood/Flat Earth/Truth/Blood over Intent

Peter Jennings and George Stephanopolis, ABC news, September 12, 2001, 12:44 pm, Where's all the rubble gone?

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 2:30:19 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

David:

It is clear that you haven't looked at the paper and I will be brief regarding the key issue you raise.

Your advocacy of "DIRECTED" energy weapons and talking about melted windshield damage for many blocks around leads one to ask: DIRECTED at what? From what you suggest, the "target area" consists of not just the Twin Towers alone, but many blocks around.

Your fixation about street level vehicles with melted windshield seems to ignore the undamaged windows in the building one or two floors above those same blocks? If the DIRECTED energy weapons you advocate about "resonated-with" and "melted" the car windows, the effect would seem to, by extension, necessarily affect the glass windows in these upper floor windows. But this is not observed.So another mechanism must be at play.

It is a much more supportable hypothesis that the ubiquitous ongoing small fires in the streets caused the parked vehicles to catch fire. It is also consistent with the hypothesis of the paper that these small fires were caused by still reacting nano-thermite particles that landed on the streets with the enormous amounts of office papers. The post collapse videos I've watched suggest these numerous fires and vehicles in some post-collapse photos are intact-and-unburned and later, after because of nearby paper fires, are burned.

I think this rules out your DIRECTED energy weapon hypothesis. What other question did you have that wasn't addressed by this response?

I will also note that you have not addressed the central argument of the article (and underlying paper) that the floor-truss-to-channel bolted connections were the weak point of the tower that allowed the perpetrators of the demolition to successfully utilize outward energetic propellant forces to dismember the Twin Towers.

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 3:30:09 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

David Watts

Become a Fan
Author 10429
(Member since Jan 31, 2008), 16 fans, 29 articles, 29 quicklinks, 2555 comments, 28 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

I said I had not had a chance to look closely at your article. For sake of discussion, this comment is not about your article.

Look at the all the photos below including many on "Toasted Cars 9/11" webpage.

Question: Do you think "ubiquitous ongoing small fires in the streets" was the cause of all of that damage and type of damage?

Forget the window glass melting. I see no evidence of melting. If they had melted there would be "puddles" of glass after the glass had cooled.

No glass in the cars or bus:

Note: this is only one picture but there are many(!) more showing the same exact same thing; there is no glass in the window frames or on the ground or inside the car. If the glass had been broken or busted, there would be glass on the ground and shards of glass in the window frames. Automobile glass windows vaporizes at extremely high temperatures - 2,600 to 2,900°F or 1427 to 1593°C!

The glass is gone. No glass on the ground and no shards of glass in the window frames.

I say the only reasonable possible explanation is the glass vaporized.

Question: Do you agree? If you do not agree, what other reasonable possible explanation is there for there being no evidence at all of any glass remaining?

Note: this is only one picture but there are many(!) more showing the same exact same thing; there is no glass in the window frames or on the ground or inside the car. If the glass had been broken or busted, there would be glass on the ground and shards of glass in the window frames.

Toasted cars 9/11 (Images)

What did this?

Paper fires did this?

No glass in the cars or bus

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 9:28:36 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

David:

I've analyzed the destruction of the Twin Tower and described the probable mechanism of destruction of them in more detail than anyone before.

I have not made a study of these toasted cars. I have looked at them in my overview of the events. I have see nothing in them that is related to the mechanism of destruction -- my primary focus.

Please focus on the article -- the area in which I have some expertise -- and the area in which (if you read the paper) I say more inquisitive questions and analysis is needed.

The mechanism of destruction is extraordinarily interesting and, in my opinion, it supersedes these other ancillary questions.

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 3:27:38 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Lance Ciepiela

Become a Fan
Author 14196
Follow Me on Twitter (Member since Apr 4, 2008), 53 fans, 58 articles, 188 quicklinks, 4933 comments, 214 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Yes, Building 7, just "remember", "81 columns/2 seconds" at #freefall - Dr Daniele Ganser, Zurich, Switzerland. #MasterClass. The Hulsey report and supporting materials can be found on UAF's Institute of Northern Engineering website at http://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7 and on the AE911Truth website at https://www.ae911truth.org/wtc7.

*

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 3:41:24 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Lance Ciepiela

Become a Fan
Author 14196
Follow Me on Twitter (Member since Apr 4, 2008), 53 fans, 58 articles, 188 quicklinks, 4933 comments, 214 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Former NIST employee Peter Michael Ketcham joins host Andy Steele to share his thoughts on the University of Alaska Fairbanks final report on World Trade Center Building 7. Ketcham contends that it is now incumbent upon NIST as a scientific agency with a duty to the public to address these new findings and explain why they diverge so greatly from NIST's own 2008 report on WTC 7 - "eyewitness evidence".

Submitted on Friday, Apr 3, 2020 at 9:21:37 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
Indent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Dwain Deets:   New Content

Dwain:

While many others have talked about this directionality of destruction, the method of destruction has never been talked about. While there are aspects of the central hypothesis -- a nano-thermite based propellant of significant thickness around the core -- that need to be verified or refuted, the hypothesis fits the observations.

Submitted on Wednesday, Mar 25, 2020 at 11:35:03 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

I continue to wonder why some people just can't seem to accept certain simple likelihoods and realities, continually stomping upon poor departed friar William of Ockham's razor to the point that it's as mangled as some of those WTC steel girders.

In fact going in the opposite direction. Ever more complicated and unlikely mechanisms. First, conventional explosives. Then thermite, then nano-thermite.

Meanwhile, there's mountainous evidence that a group of brain-washed religious bigots conspired to throw several massive, explosive wrenches into the creations of those they so intensely hated. There's dozens and dozens of similarly sinister actions by them around the world, a veritable chorus of their intentions and determination.

It was actually a rather simple operation, just scaled up. Nearly anyone could have done it, but nearly everyone lacks what a certain few don't: A cold-blooded willingness to die for a cause, often taking those you despise and hate with you. We've all witnessed it in other contexts. School mass shootings, the Oklahoma City bombing, the Las Vegas massacre from a hotel window. The Holocaust. Stalin's starvation orders. None complicated, but all well established in the annals of human behavior borne of pure hate, or despair.

The collapses seemed odd at first to most everyone. But when you come to understand how the massive kinetic energy of the upper blocks of the buildings was suddenly released upon the lower blocks, it all makes perfect and logical sense. There's your bombs. There's your explosive collapses. There's all the energy you're looking for, and more.

A rather simple combination of hate, cold blood, structural damage, heat, structural failure, and gravity. So strange there's never any entertaining of the much more sensible scenario, by comparison, which would have fellow terrorists planting the explosives to insure the buildings' destruction. Friar Ockham might at least somewhat approve of a theory like that.

Submitted on Wednesday, Mar 25, 2020 at 7:12:23 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
Indent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

Regarding your comment explaining the collapse, "A rather simple combination of hate, cold blood, structural damage, heat, structural failure, and gravity."

The destruction of the Twin Tower was not a gravity-only collapse subsequent to structural trauma and fire. A gravity-only collapse would leave all the office contents and structural material within the footprint of the building. The 13 survivors in the fourth floor stairwell would not see blue sky above them. They would be buried under 106 stories of debris. But there was nothing above them. What happened to the building.

click here

Submitted on Wednesday, Mar 25, 2020 at 11:46:38 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

"A gravity-only collapse would leave all the office contents and structural material within the footprint of the building. The 13 survivors in the fourth floor stairwell would not see blue sky above them. They would be buried under 106 stories of debris. But there was nothing above them. What happened to the building."

I have no idea what makes you think you somehow magically know all this.

My basic question remains: Why are you so reluctant to accept what the vast majority of structural engineers, fire engineers and physicists understand about the collapse? Why hasn't any long established chapter, society or association of structural engineers, or any manner of engineering or related scientific organizations for that matter, come out and chimed in in agreement with your bizarre contentions?

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 12:51:56 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

You raise a really good question. There are no clear answers about what happens when evidence hits a professional society. But here are a hints:

I was able to get a paper accepted at the 2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science and Technology: Ethics and the Official Reports about the Destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers (WTC1 and WTC2) on 9/11: A Case Study, by John D. Wyndham, Wayne H. Coste and Michael R. Smith, 2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science and Technology. See also the poster for the paper presentation in Chicago, May 23-24, 2014. But a follow-up paper at their second conference was declined.

A second paper was accepted at the 2015 European Engineering Educators Association SEFI entitled: The World Trade Center Analyses: Case Study of Ethics, Public Policy and the Engineering Profession, by W. H. Coste, M. R. Smith, and R. M. Korol, June 2015. Peer Reviewed, Accepted; The paper was included in Conference Book and the presenter (me) was refused entry to conference at last minute. (more details at: soredbysefi.org/ )

A foreign student, Ansgar Schneider, had an accepted peer reviewed paper accepted at the annual congress of the International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE) in New York City. Schneider's paper, "The Structural Dynamics of the World Trade Center Catastrophe," The paper can be viewed in the conference proceedings and is also available for free on arXiv, the e-print server of the Cornell University Library.

An article by AE911Truth provides some background material, "New Paper on WTC 'Collapses' Adds to Literature Refuting Progressive Collapse Theory," click here

Professional societies are organisms of popular culture where people who have an alternative narrative are silenced.

There are many more examples.

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 2:53:25 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

"Professional societies are organisms of popular culture where people who have an alternative narrative are silenced."

But that implies that alternative narratives, just by virtue of being alternative, should be granted some kind of special consideration. Alternative thinking can be good, but only if said alternatives are based in, presumably, good science and engineering.

The buildings and bridges you've gone up and down in and criss-crossed without concern for decades are evidence that these "organisms of popular culture" have gotten things very, very much right.

Why would you so cavalierly dismiss all of this so all of a sudden? Yes, that is the question. Why, once again? We await.

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 6:17:40 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

Again you raise a good question about Professional Societies. They all have stated codes of ethics. Even journalists and lawyers have such codes of ethics that decry fraudulent behavior (but that doesn't stop some of their members from acting unethically).

Everyone drives across bridges and walks into tall buildings -- infrastructure that everybody agrees must be safe. The professional societies actively support these missions.

What we are talking about regarding the investigations into disaster is finger pointing and usually in the direction of people in high places (unless there is an obvious lower-level scapegoat).

Here is a paper I presented about disaster investigations a few years ago at the 2014 Forum on Philosophy, Engineering and Technology (fPET).

Neglecting Peer Review: A Case Study of Engineering Ethics and the Official Reports about the Destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC7) on 9/11, Wayne H. Coste, PE and Michael R. Smith Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, 2014 Forum on Philosophy, Engineering and Technology (fPET), Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 27-29 May 2014. You can see the paper here => here.

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 12:57:06 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
Indent

Philip Kraske

Become a Fan
Author 70183
(Member since Aug 17, 2011), 5 fans, 169 articles, 114 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook Page Twitter Page Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

If you continue to wonder why people just can't accept the conventional theory, it's because anywhere -- anywhere -- you look into it a little further, it falls apart. Thousands of physicists, chemists, high-building specialists, architects and all manner of scientists have signed on to the theory that the two towers and Building 7 were felled not because of impacts and fires but because of pre-planted devices to help the buildings tumble.

Let's move on to poor Friar Occum.

Why put explosives, or as Mr. Coste carefully explains (bravo!), incendiaries to help the buildings go down? Because, well, what do you have if they don't fall? Three or four two-second videos, out of focus and poorly framed, of the two impacts, and these depending on the quick reflexes of cameramen. That's all. Two months later the buildings are repaired, businesses re-started, and a foot-square plaque commemorating the event is attached to the entrance of the North Tower. The End.

Occam. The simplest explanation, in my view, is this: a group of powerful people of like political views, some American and some not, orchestrated this event to propel America into a campaign of domination abroad and oppression at home. Not only is this the simplest explanation, it is entirely in keeping with a history of false-flag attacks in American history, the Tonkin Gulf incident, which started the Vietnam War, being the latest of note.

I wrote an essay about this very subject for the tenth anniversary of 9/11, and it still gets 25-30 reads a month. Click here.

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 4:54:10 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (2+)
Help
IndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Philip Kraske:   New Content

"Thousands of physicists, chemists, high-building specialists, architects and all manner of scientists...."

They're a fringe group Philip. There's nearly 2 million engineers and 120,000 architects just in the U.S. And when you pair these "thousands" down, there's probably not more than a handful who are truly qualified to even begin to understand the structural, thermal and force dynamics involved. As an example we have Mr. Coste here. He's part of this group, yet he appears only to possess a B.A. in electrical engineering, which doesn't really qualify him professionally to render a judgement here.

Your "simple explanation" is really not that simple. It wouldn't be a simple proposition to pull off something like this on such a grand demolition/rigging scale, not to mention keeping the whole operation secret from the world for all these years. Not a soul's come forward to tip off their involvement, not even anonymously. No reports of any remnants of explosive-related materials, unexploded charges, wires, etc. by any of the hundreds involved in rescue/clean-up/recovery. Nothing. I guess that's why we see the evolution to smaller, almost ghost-like 'nano' agents, which apparently conveniently totally disappear once their job is done.

Who would risk such a thing, that nobody would say anything? What level of confidence would they have had that the Saudi terrorists they presumably conspired with would even be successful at getting there, much less hitting the buildings at just the exact spots they had the explosives installed, where the collapses initiated? That they wouldn't back out and blow their cover?

And no it doesn't fit in with past events. There's never been an example of this country, and/or power-brokers within it, deliberately murdering people, not to mention potentially tens of thousands of people, to advance some political agenda.

No, it's you Philip who is making this way more complicated than it really was. Your version is much more entertaining, fascinating and book selling, but it's not based in the comparitively boring actual evidence and realistic appraisals.

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 11:16:42 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

The absolute key point is that the both Towers had very little debris material within the footprint of the building after their demolition. The destruction of the Twin Towers was not a gravity-only collapse - which is what a fire-induced weakening would cause.

Here is the account of survivors in the fourth floor stairwell of the North Tower: The Most Compelling 9/11 Story: The Miracle of Ladder 6

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:54:00 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Wait wait wait now. For years, we heard that the main reason this was a "controlled demolition" was because the buildings fell "in their own footprint".

But now suddenly you want to claim the opposite, that because they didn't, that means it was a CD. Just trying to keep up.

But seriously; how in the world can you so confidently and authoritatively make some of these proclamations you do? We're asked to accept that there was some kind of nefarious explosive force beyond the normal kinetic kind, because you can somehow divine how an extraordinarily chaotic collapse, of a quarter mile high skyscraper, of a quite unique and unconventional design btw, can or cannot end up after it's top 1/3 - 1/4 was sent crashing down among the rest?

You showed great wisdom and I guess courage when you came out against the 'missile in the Pentagon' nonsense. Why are you advancing an equally specious theory here regarding the towers?

Once again -- what is it exactly that makes what happened that day, according to the vast majority of the world, so gosh darn unpalatable and unacceptable to you and others here?

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 6:41:01 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

There were three skycrapers that were destroyed on 9/11 at the World Trade Center.

WTC Building 7 did fall into its own footprint at 5:20 in the and was not hit by a plane. There were only scattered (minor from a structural perspective) office fires.

The other two, the Twin Towers, were an entirely different matter. Their demolition was very outward energetic. There photos do not show anything doing the crushing.There is nothing at the top pushing down.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA


Becky: Can you point to the image and say, "this is the object whose potential energy is being converted to kinetic energy and is destroying the building structure below it?"

I cant find it ... possibly you can ...

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 7:38:21 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Just how exactly would you expect those megatons of lightweight concrete floors, drywall, ceiling tile, carpet and particle board to react to gigajoules of kinetic energy descending down upon them? That they would just sit there for you and do nothing?

Even normal high density concrete by itself tends to cause a run on feather dusters in the neighborhood.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 7:26:46 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

You missed the question.

The question was whether you could look at the photo and point to the intact material that is falling and hitting / breaking up the structure below it.

Here is a photo where I have drawn in the missing part of the building that is critical to your explanation. But it isn't there.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 1:55:53 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Richard Pietrasz

Become a Fan
Author 6357
(Member since Jun 7, 2007), 13 fans, 1 quicklinks, 3014 comments, 1 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

"There's never been an example of this country, and/or power-brokers within it, deliberately murdering people, not to mention potentially tens of thousands of people, to advance some political agenda."

Have you ever heard of war? You comment as if you never have, or it is such a minor detail you forgot about it, despite the fact that war is the explanation accepted by everybody for why this event happened.

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 6:52:22 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Richard Pietrasz:   New Content

Richard:

Your reply to Becky about this was good,

"And no it doesn't fit in with past events. There's never been an example of this country, and/or power-brokers within it, deliberately murdering people, not to mention potentially tens of thousands of people, to advance some political agenda."

but I want to expand the definition a bit from "deliberately murdering" to "destroying lives."

Note that we have put millions of citizens through the prison-industrial complex with the war on drugs. The purpose was definitely to "advance some political agenda."

Come to think of it, the war on drugs created the beginnings a huge police surveillance state. But it was a follow-up to the though police of the Red Scare of McCarthism.

But this gets us away from discussion of the "weakness" of the floor truss to channel bolted connections that were central to destroying the Twin Towers.

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:42:02 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Richard Pietrasz:   New Content

You may have missed where I said "deliberately murdered". But even in war, the U.S. military has always gone to great lengths to protect the lives of their own soldiers. Why are you conflating the two?

What actually really truly did happen though is that Al-Qaeda deliberately murdered thousands, with a hope that it would draw us into war with them. You simply got things reversed!

These kinds of things you bring up illustrate that you're looking at all this through a political, ideological lens. Not at all a scientific and logical one.

I think that would probably pretty much apply to most people clinging to these nonsensical 'theories'.

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 7:36:14 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

At a minimum, you seen to downplay:

1. The effects of Agent Orange in Vietnam,

2. When I was a kid, a neighbor of mine (best friend's dad) died from cancer -- my father said he was order to physically watch the Trinity atomic bomb blast.

3. After blanketing southern Iraq with depleted uranium, the coalition soldiers entered that area and returned with measurable levels of DU. Many of those had serious health effects.

So much for the US Government being the watchdog over health and safety.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 2:58:59 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

You too Wayne are conflating deliberate, premeditated murder as part of a 'false flag' in order to advance an agenda with the obvious and unfortunate consequences of war.

Depleted uranium, however and btw, is not really one of them:

"With the exception of the elevated urine U excretion, no clinically significant, expected U-related health effects have yet been identified in veterans with or without embedded fragments, though subtle changes in renal function and genotoxicity markers in soldiers with urine U concentrations greater than 0.1"μg−1 creatinine have been observed."

But thank you for lifting the veil a bit regarding your true motivations for advancing let's just say 'alternative' theories regarding 9/11.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 7:43:15 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Philip Kraske

Become a Fan
Author 70183
(Member since Aug 17, 2011), 5 fans, 169 articles, 114 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook Page Twitter Page Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Your misunderstanding of American history and the 9/11 issue shine brighter with every comment you make, and I will not argue with you any further than to say this:

-- 9/11 scientists a "fringe group"? How many scientists and engineers are attracted to "fringe groups," especially when they put their reputations at risk by joining?

-- "No reports of any remnants of explosive-related materials, unexploded charges"? Another flop. Read Neils Harrit, et al.

-- "Who would risk such a thing, that nobody would say anything?" Many people did, you just don't read of them in the New York Times. Imagine how many people did go to mainstream media and reporters, seeing a Pulitzer for the taking, saw their stories tossed out? Or do you really think those kindly folks at the Times, CNN, etc., want to see revolution in the streets?

-- " There's never been an example of this country, and/or power-brokers within it, deliberately murdering people, not to mention potentially tens of thousands of people, to advance some political agenda." Ooooof! That's the biggest lolapalooza of all: Iraq, all Latin America, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iran.

I'm sorry to be cutting, Becky, but this is an issue that everyone else commenting here has read a lot about, and you're simply out of your depth.

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 8:39:12 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (4+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Philip Kraske:   New Content

"9/11 scientists a "fringe group"? How many scientists and engineers are attracted to "fringe groups," especially when they put their reputations at risk by joining?"

I think if you were somehow able to drill down into the life situations of this miniscule fraction of total engineers/architects, you'd find that most of them are in a place in their careers where they don't really have that much to lose professionally. For example, the head guy, Richard Gage, has recognized there's a great personal opportunity for profit in appealing to a fringe audience. He may not be qualified or credible to the vast majority of people, but he's still found a way to appeal to a certain audience, not unlike any number of other charlatans out there.

"Read Neils Harrit, et al."

Harrit is of course another member of the fringe. He's only been able to insert his nonsense beliefs via bogus integrity-challenged journals. No Neils, it was just paint.

"Many people did, you just don't read of them in the New York Times. Imagine* how many people did go to mainstream media and reporters, seeing a Pulitzer for the taking, saw their stories tossed out?"

As you allude to, strictly in your *imagination I suspect. If not, please provide some kind of proof.

"Iraq, all Latin America, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iran."

There's that inapplicable conflation between war casualties and the supposed willingness of leaders of this country to deliberatley murder their own citizens to advance an agenda. There's many examples of the former, but few to none of the latter. But thank you for confirming that your position and arguments are based in political and ideological agendas, and not legitimate science of any kind.

"I'm sorry to be cutting, Becky, but this is an issue that everyone else commenting here has read a lot about, and you're simply out of your depth."

Depth indeed. More like projection on your part. The real problem is that people here have read way too much nonsensical conspiratorial nonsense that conforms to their political and ideological biases, and not enough actual detached scientific analyses.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 12:14:49 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

Regarding your comment, "No Neils, it was just paint," it appears that you have either look deeply and are still mis-informed, or are good at cutting and pasting and have no idea what is in your clipboard.

All the evidence I've seen suggest the red-gray chips are active thermitic materials.

Red/Gray Chips, 10 Years Later

Niels Harrit Discusses NanoThermite and Activism

What do you know that I dont?

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 3:31:11 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Apparently what I know that you don't is that one should not rely on biased, agenda-driven organizations to provide one with anything resembling the actual truth on something.

Believing "911tap", or Neils Harrit himself for that matter, would be like thinking phillipmorris.com or the Marlboro Man are fountains of accurate information on lung health.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 8:00:48 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

I do have an agenda driven perspective. It is the preeminence of science and rational thought and rational investigation for generating public policy decisions. I find fantasy and wishful thinking (or worse) to be unacceptable for public policies.

I believe that for your explanation about what happened to the Twin Tower to be real -- there needs to be an observable part of the building doing the crushing.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA


What is your explanation for the destruction of the Towers now that you see there is no top of the building to do the crushing? Or are facts irrelevant?

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 2:06:27 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndent

David Watts

Become a Fan
Author 10429
(Member since Jan 31, 2008), 16 fans, 29 articles, 29 quicklinks, 2555 comments, 28 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Philip Kraske:   New Content

"If you continue to wonder why people just can't accept the conventional theory, it's because anywhere -- anywhere -- you look into it a little further, it falls apart."


That is correct. There are literally dozens and dozen and dozens of things if not many more, that have to be explained away for the official story to have any chance of being true. But Becky, you are on to something. You think Occam's razor is the answer. Invoke Occam's razor and it becomes so clear what the truth is. I agree, it does. Using Occam's razor then is the correct approach.

Invoking Occam's razor is all that one must do to single-handedly(!) explain each and every seeming anomaly and each and every seemingly impossible oddity including violations of Isaac Newton's laws of motion and also all of the dozens and dozens and however many things there are that seem not able to be exlained away in any sort of reasonable, rational, and logical manner: Everything explained: Occam's razor - It was an inside job / false flag attack.


Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:51:42 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (2+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

David:

I like your closing comment, "Everything explained: Occam's razor - It was an inside job / false flag attack."

Also, as described in the article, the weak point of the building that was exploited to destroy each Tower was the floor-truss to channel bolted connections.This mechanism is described briefly in this OPED News article -- and in more detail in the associated paper.

The underlying 57 page paper describes many more aspects of the structural damage from the plane impacts / thermite ignition and the destruction process.

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 3:13:54 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

"In philosophy, a razor is a principle or rule of thumb that allows one to eliminate ("shave off") unlikely explanations for a phenomenon, or avoid unnecessary actions."

"Occam's razor: Simpler explanations are more likely to be correct; avoid unnecessary or improbable assumptions."

How likely or probable is it that some shadowy group rigged the towers with explosives, coordinating with terrorists to put on apparently a sort of pre-show -- for the final event of detonating the explosives, and expertly bringing down the buildings so as to make it look like it was all the terrorists' fault? How likely or probable is it that all this happened without anyone involved saying anything for nearly 20 years now, or any tangible evidence of it being found by any of the hundreds of hands combing and sifting through the rubble?

And then moving on to WTC7. How likely or probably is it that these same villains apparently thought: "For an extra punch and to be darn sure Bush invades Afghanistan and Iraq so we can take over the world, let's rig WTC7 with these same new nano-bombs so right when everyone thinks it's safe, we'll take that building down too. Of course we'll need to rig every column in the building, like Leroy told us, or it won't come down. We just need to remember which color button to push for each building. Ya know I'm thinking now .... why not just label them 1, 2 and 7? Who's got some tape?"

No David -- Occam's not the droid you're looking for.

Submitted on Monday, Mar 30, 2020 at 4:17:41 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

Regarding your "what are the probabilities"comment, the answer is 100 percent certain they were not gravity-only collapses subsequent to fires.

The Twin Towers displayed a vast amount of energetic propellants that cannot be explained by potential energy.

The mechanics of the destruction of Building 7 show that this building was destroyed by simultaneous destruction of the core columns followed a few seconds later by destruction of the curtain wall columns.

100 percent certain.

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 12:12:24 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Philip Kraske:   New Content

Philip:

Thanks to the link to your article, again.

I especially like your insights into the magnitude of the situation:

As Vaclav Havel said at his inauguration as president of Czechoslovakia, "When I talk about the contaminated moral atmosphere...I am talking about all of us. We had all become used to the totalitarian system and accepted it as an unchangeable fact and thus helped to perpetuate it. In other words, we are all - though naturally to differing extents - responsible for the operation of the totalitarian machinery. None of us is just its victim. We are all also its co-creators...We have to accept this legacy as a sin we committed against ourselves."

and

"Once more with feeling: 9-11 was anything but an inside job. It was a national effort."

... and it continues to be a national effort. Apparently that is the easy way.

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 3:03:15 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

"When I talk about the contaminated moral atmosphere...I am talking about all of us. We had all become used to the totalitarian system and accepted it as an unchangeable fact and thus helped to perpetuate it. In other words, we are all - though naturally to differing extents - responsible for the operation of the totalitarian machinery. None of us is just its victim. We are all also its co-creators...We have to accept this legacy as a sin we committed against ourselves."

"Once more with feeling: 9-11 was anything but an inside job. It was a national effort."

Feelings indeed. Yet more evidence and confirmation that this whole 9/11 "truth" movement is based not in detached science, evidence and logic, but biased and ideological feelings. Makes interesting reading and story telling, but that's about it.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 12:22:45 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

Regarding "this whole 9/11 "truth" movement is based not in detached science, evidence and logic, but biased and ideological feelings."

Here is the most recent analysis that shows the official explanation about 9/11 is based on baloney, while (the credible parts) of the 9/11 "truth" movement is based on detached science and evidence, "University of Alaska Fairbanks WTC 7 Final Report | Presented by Richard Gage AIA & Roland Angle PE" tu.be/KOooHlaA0pE .

I need to emphasize the phrase "credible parts" because of my review of the statements by a very vocal member of the 9/11 Truth Movement regarding Barbara Honegger's pathetic, unscientific presentation last September, "Peer Review of Barbara Honegger's Parallels Between the WTC and Pentagon Evidence and Why It Matters"

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 3:14:09 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

You neglected to mention that this study was not only presented by, but paid for by, Richard Gage. It's like the Marlboro man paying for a study that concludes that lung cancer can be caused by any number of things, smoking being way, way down on the list.

Look, it's not like NIST couldn't be wrong about what initiated the collapse of WTC7. Nobody really knows for sure what happened in there behind the view of anyone. But why in the world is the only possible explanation the nefarious planting of explosives, especially given that there's no tangible evidence of such a thing?

You're an engineer, someone who should base their opinions on fact-driven likelihoods, not imaginative wishful thinking! They're two entirely different rows in the library. Take your clear thinking on the Pentagon, and transfer it to the towers.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 8:27:50 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

Because you are asserting that whoever pays for a study drives the results, we need a review of who paid for the NIST NCSTAR study that said normal office fires created the thermal expansion that pushed girder A-2001 off of its seat at column 79.

The NIST study was funded by the US Congress and directed by the Executive Branch which was under the control of George W. Bush (and his very active Vice President Dick Cheney).

Your argument that: whoever funds a study may have influence, is certainly true in the case of the NIST NCSTAR reports.

In the event of a conflict, it is science and engineering that resolve the conflict. In the following figure you can see the key difference that the Husley Team found -- that the thermal expansion (under NIST fire modeling assumptions) would have pushed the west face outward by 6 inches.

The NIST assumptions were that the Hand-Of-God kept the west face from moving outward so it couldn't move at all and restrained the east half of the building so it couldn't move at all -- then all the forces were artificially directed at column 79.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Your observation about who pays matters ... but science and engineering says it is the US Department of Commerce, under the Bush Administration that paid NIST and its subcontractors a lot of money for a fantastical story (e.g., a cover-up).

Here is the Hulsey Report. It reviews the NIST and other reports about WTC7

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 2:34:53 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
Indent

911TRUTH

Become a Fan
Author 15356
(Member since Apr 29, 2008), 26 fans, 3067 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Just a small town girl, but not from south Detroit.

Becky, Becky, Becky......

Tell us. Who pays you to troll your nonsense?

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 4:46:03 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
Indent

Lance Ciepiela

Become a Fan
Author 14196
Follow Me on Twitter (Member since Apr 4, 2008), 53 fans, 58 articles, 188 quicklinks, 4933 comments, 214 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

The damage to the building was accomplished with internal demolitions rather than an aerial assault
The damage to the building was accomplished with internal demolitions rather than an aerial assault
(Image by 911review.com)
Details DMCA

In the minutes following the attack the FBI confiscated from nearby businesses video recordings that might have captured the attack. In contrast to the well-documented tower crashes and collapses in Manhattan the story of Flight 77 crashing into the Pentagon had no corroborating pictures only eyewitness accounts and photos of the building's damaged facade. And those post-collapse photos convinced many researchers that no Boeing 757 crashed into the building. In early 2002, the Pentagon released a series of five images from a security camera, supposedly showing the moments of impact. However, the images show evidence of manipulation.

Submitted on Saturday, Apr 4, 2020 at 12:46:16 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Lance Ciepiela:   New Content

Lance:

This discussion thread is about the events at the Twin Tower.

The events at the Pentagon have been addressed previously and extensively in the series of topics (totaling five hours) in 18 chapters at:

speakout.org/wayne-coste/

David Chandler narrates this lecture in seventeen separate 10 20 minute chapters at: speakout.org/wayne-coste

Chapters and Descriptions
1: Preface / Overview: Introduction to the lecture, the scientific method and a review of the 9/11 Consensus Panel points about the Pentagon

2: Endless Pentagon Debates; How Did We Get Here: This section reviews the numerous misstatement that have been made in 9/11 documentaries that have created confusion and allowed unsubstantiated assertions to propagate.

3: Size of the Opening in the Pentagon: This chapter reviews the size of the opening caused by the impacting aircraft. It documents an opening of 100 feet wide where the facade was destroyed including 90 continuous feet of opening where the outside column row "AA" was missing.

4: Design, Construction and Destruction of E-Ring Wall: This chapter describes the construction of the outer E-Ring wall. There was no steel reinforced concrete in the wall except for the original 1942 era columns.

5: The Tree at Column 16: A large tree that had been in front of column 16 was severed approximately 5-7 feet off of the ground. The severed trunk was kicked at least 100 feet to the north with the rest of the tree branches visible in front of the north end of opening. The movement of this severed tree can only be explained by a large plane impact.

6: Review of the C-Ring Exit Hole at the Pentagon: This analysis finds the C-Ring exit hole was created consistent with heavy aircraft material impacting the weak, two-brick-thick infill wall that was not reinforced. Corrections to prior analyses shows that there are at least three direct paths through the columns.

7: Plane Approach Path: This section reviews the Radar and FDR data to establish an approach path toward the Pentagon. It is corroborated by a witness at 1400 South Barton, the shadow captured on the Citgo security camera, the notch in the tree adjacent to Washington Boulevard, the five light poles that were damaged, the right wing's impact to the diesel generator trailer, the left wing's impact to the retaining wall and, finally, impact into column 14.

8: Plane Impact Analysis: This section reviews the damage done by the impacting plane and shows that it is consistent with a large 757 aircraft. The bent and bowed column 9AA and the adjacent steel window support post illustrate the deceleration of the "light" wing end supporting the wing being dragged into the building. The right wing pivoted around column 18AA, which is seen leaning in the opposite direction from what would be expected from the impacting mass. The bashed-in point of column 19 on the second floor establishes the location of the initial wing impact in this area.

9: A Comprehensive Review of the Lloyd's Accident Scene: This review identifies all of the major parts of lamp post #1 and #2 and shows that their pre and post locations are consistent with Lloyd's Survivor Fund story.

10: Analysis of the CITGO Security Cameras: This analysis reviews the shadow captured in the Citgo security camera. This validates the location of the approaching aircraft as it passes the Citgo and just prior to clipping the tree along Washington Blvd.

11: Pentagon Security Camera Analysis: This analysis, backed by a review of Mickey Bell's truck across the Pentagon lawn, establishes the difference in timing of the Security Cameras to be 4/30th of a second. From this the speed of the plane in the two security cameras can be used to estimate that the approaching aircraft is traveling at approximately 542 mph (+/- measurement error).

12: Debris: Debris is reviewed and this debris analysis shows that only a large plane impact could have created the debris seen at the Pentagon. The dispersal of the small "confetti-like" debris can only be explained by a trailing air mass that would have been following the impacting aircraft. A leading wing slat is identified approximately midway between the location of light pole #3 and the impact point.

13: Evidence of Explosions: A review of possible internal explosions is reviewed and no evidence is found that such explosions caused the damage.

14: The April Gallop Lawsuit: The story of April Gallop and her son is reviewed and the impossibility of her "making her way through a blasted opening in the outside wall" is established using photographs and initial accounts.

15: Ground Effect and Yaw Rotation: Reviews the question of what happens if a plane flies low over terrain and concludes that an approaching aircraft would not get ejaculated up before striking the Pentagon wall.

16: Porter Goss and the Sonic Boom: Provides the basis for demonstrating the boom recorded at 10:10:03 AM on 9/11 was a sonic boom heard at the US Capitol and Pentagon at the same time jets were flying overhead.

17: Citizen Investigation Team Interviews: Reviews contradictions within the CIT videos and prior statements of the witnesses.

Submitted on Saturday, Apr 4, 2020 at 2:57:03 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Also, any alternative to a large plane impact requires explosive detonations to create any significant damage at the Pentagon. In spite of high profile personalities, such as Barbara Honegger, making such claims -- all of those claims are completely unfounded.

Peer review by Wayne Coste, PE, of a presentation entitled, "Parallels Between the WTC and Pentagon Evidence and Why It Matters." Barbara Honegger gave this presentation at the conference, "911 Perspectives: Public Master Class on The Events of September 11, 2001," in Zurich Switzerland on September 11, 2019.

Here is: "Peer Review of Barbara Honegger's Parallels Between the WTC and Pentagon Evidence and Why It Matters"
tu.be/7nxdThV4egA

"Peer Review" Video Contents:

0. Introduction and Overview

1. Following Scientific Lead of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth? [Begins 3:57]

2. Parallels to Known Explosive Demolitions [Begins 5:19]

3. Error About Explosives in Behind the Smoke Curtain [Begins 9:17]

4. April Gallop [Begins 15:55]

5. Smell of Cordite [Begins 25:57]

6. Witnesses to Primary Explosions Inside Pentagon [Begins 29:12]

7. Asserted Death / Destruction In the "A" and "B" Rings [Begins 32:46]

8. Windows Bowed Out [Begins 42:50]

9. Molten Concrete [Begins 52:33]

10. Internal Explosive Detonations [Begins 56:16]

11. Massive Explosion Preceding Collapse of E-Ring Wall? [Begins 1:06:50]

12. Overall Conclusion of this "Peer Review" [Begins 1:18:52]

Submitted on Saturday, Apr 4, 2020 at 2:59:30 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help

Bill Willers

Become a Fan
Author 8025
(Member since Oct 1, 2007), 8 fans, 39 articles, 4 quicklinks, 210 comments, 4 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

It is astonishing that this article, with its focus on WTC 1 and 2, would appear on OpEdNews on the very day that the Final Report of the U of AK's 4-year study of WTC7 is released. The Report absolutely trashes NIST's contention that office fires brought WTC7 down.

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 4:09:46 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (2+)
Help
Indent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Bill Willers:   New Content

Bill:

I tried to get the paper finished and this highly condensed article published long before the Hulsey Report was released. But things take time and it was posted two days before (tomorrow's) press conference about the WTC7 report.

BTW: Here was my summary of one of Hulsey's interim reports (Sept 2017) click here

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 4:20:50 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndent

Bill Willers

Become a Fan
Author 8025
(Member since Oct 1, 2007), 8 fans, 39 articles, 4 quicklinks, 210 comments, 4 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Wayne: I was expecting the Final Report to say something more than "columns failed simultaneously", and "BTW, write Congress". Is there any possible way in Isaac Newton's universe that dozens of massive steel columns could fail simultaneously other than having been prepared? No? Well then, say it. SAY IT! What other conclusion is physically possible?

For all of us who waited for the logical conclusion from the engineering community that we could take to the public, this fails utterly.

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 5:20:48 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Bill Willers:   New Content

Bill:

The Hulsey report is an engineering report. It was not (explicitly) a "Cheney did it," although it does point to malfeasance by the "powers that be" at that time and the aftermath.

The Report talks about flange stiffeners that that NIST omitted in their analysis, wrong dimensions on the critical girder seat they said was too short, as well as numerous other technical flaws.

You can watch the March 26th overview presentation by Richard Gage and Roland Angle on Facebook.I assume it will be on YouTube soon.

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:34:16 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
Indent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Bill Willers:   New Content

It's yet another conspiracy Bill. You should know that by now.

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 26, 2020 at 6:34:10 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help

Richard Pietrasz

Become a Fan
Author 6357
(Member since Jun 7, 2007), 13 fans, 1 quicklinks, 3014 comments, 1 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

I had a career as an engineer. It was not in structural engineering, but I have experience in failure analysis of complex systems. I did not try to understand the detailed explanation of the collapse given in the article.

I find this article very consistent with the many articles published in a period beginning shortly after 9/11/2001 claiming controlled demolition using nanothermite devices was the cause of the fall of the towers. From my perspective, author Wayne Coste is overly concerned with the semantics of the term explosion.

The failure analysis done by NIST was grossly incomplete. It did not prove anything about what what, just that one hypothesis for why the buildings collapsed as they did might be plausible. They never investigated alternative hypotheses, because the most plausible explanation, controlled demolition, was not investigated with any level of competence. (NIST almost certainly did not have the funding or legal authority to competently investigate this.)







Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 6:32:53 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
Indent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Richard Pietrasz:   New Content

Richard:

Regarding, "From my perspective, author Wayne Coste is overly concerned with the semantics of the term explosion."

When it comes to the legal process, and the courts protecting the powerful, words matter as they can provide technical loopholes.

Additionally, if you have followed the 9/11 Twin Towers discussions over the past decades, you will notice that imprecise framing by the focus on "explosives" (e.g., detonations) led to paralysis of the understanding of the mechanism of destruction.

I may be a bit picky about the distinction between explosion and explosive detonations, but it is central to the issue of the Pentagon -- where sounds of things going "boom" and "bang" are then called (and interpreted as / translated into) explosions. These are then called proof of explosive detonation at the Pentagon. Here is my review of this issue regarding Barbara Honegger's pathetic, unscientific presentation last September, "Peer Review of Barbara Honegger's Parallels Between the WTC and Pentagon Evidence and Why It Matters"

Word matter.

-Wayne

Submitted on Friday, Mar 27, 2020 at 1:03:28 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndent

Richard Pietrasz

Become a Fan
Author 6357
(Member since Jun 7, 2007), 13 fans, 1 quicklinks, 3014 comments, 1 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

I do not think we disagree. Words do matter, but this is not a legal discussion.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 12:04:15 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Richard Pietrasz:   New Content

Richard:

Word matter in every instance. Whether it is by a scientist or a lawyer-- words matter.

They even matter in personal mattes where words create divorces -- and have ruined innumerable Thanksgiving Dinners.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 2:42:45 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
Indent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Richard Pietrasz:   New Content

Big waste of time and money that study. All they needed was a three word report, with a link:

"Here's what happened"

You see that incredible mass descending downward? That's your bomb. There's your energy. There's the cause of your "rooster tails", Wayne.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 8:43:59 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

Regarding your comment, "You see that incredible mass descending downward? That's your bomb. There's your energy. There's the cause of your "rooster tails", Wayne."

Where is the "incredible mass" in the picture? It doesn't exist.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

You need a new explanation. Your current one doesn't match the observations.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 2:38:21 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Is this seriously one of your key evidence points? You really think that at that rather late point of the collapse you'd still have the upper block fully intact, as if it were made of what ..... solid depleted uranium?

No it eventually disintegrated too, one would logically assume, as it met more resistance from below. It was made of the same materials as the rest of the building, I'm just guessing.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 5:09:06 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

I guess we finally have something to agree about.

I absolutely agree with the closing phrase of your comment, "... I'm just guessing."

At the stage captured in the above photograph, the height of the North Tower is about 50 stories high. There is no solid object visible to impact the 50 floor below it. All that possibly could be falling onto the lower 50 floors is loose material such as concrete chunks and some steel. All the perimeter columns were falling outside the footprint of the Tower so they can't impact the structure below.

The core columns can't be doing the damage because they remain standing for about 20 seconds after the North Tower is destroyed.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

The next in the sequence by Detective Greg Semendinger shows the core columns still upright. They did not fall and break the structure.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Do you have another guess -- one that fits the observations?

If you want some clues about what does fit the observations, see the paper that this article is based on, Investigating the Mechanics of Destruction at the Twin Towers on 9/11:The Case for Propelled Demolition.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 7:46:23 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

"All that possibly could be falling onto the lower 50 floors is loose material such as concrete chunks and some steel."

Each floor of concrete/truss system, minus any columns, weighed over 1500 tons, which in its totality would be close to the reported 200,000 tons of total steel used in each tower. This doesn't even include who knows how many more thousand tons of furniture, file cabinets, etc. Perhaps not characterize it as a "few concrete chunks and some steel?" Perhaps not so carelessly dismiss the enormity of this massive falling force?

From your report:

This paper has developed a "propelled demolition" hypothesis that suggests the interior of the elevator shafts were lined with panels of nano-thermite based propellant consisting of up to (possibly) 40 layers of red/gray material, providing a propulsive energy content of approximately 9.45 kJoules /cm2. This material was activated floor-by-floor in all directions to eject the perimeter columns which then simultaneously severed the bolted connections between the floor trusses and the channels (attached to the core). This process created the outward ejection of debris, some of which had propellant impinged onto it as documented in David Chandler's "Rocket Projectile" analyses.

I'm sorry Wayne. I see you worked really hard on this. But it would appear you've merely stolen the ridiculous "rocket projectile" and bomb theories from the Pentagon, and trucked them over to the WTC for your own purposes there.

Perhaps ask yourself ..... am I an engineer, or really more of a science fiction writer? Because your report's a real page turner, and I can envision it being made into an awesome movie thriller! I dunno dude. Boss says they're sound-proofing. I know, they're really heavy, weird, and I've never seen antennas on sound proofing. Whatever, let's just get this job done so we can get paid.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 9:42:46 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

I see that you are continuing to guess ... You don't seem to have a grasp of the physics or the evidence at the WTC.

First, there might be a lot of mass available to crush the bottom floor -- if it were contained within the foot print of the Tower -- but it wasn't. A large amount of the concrete was ejected outside the footprint of the building. The floor trusses were squashed into unrecognizable wads of metal -- that landed outside the footprint of the building.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA


The following image shows the footprint of the North Tower after the demolition. I don't see anything like 200.000 tons of concrete chunks and office contents and floor trusses in this area.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA


Go another guess?

Submitted on Sunday, Mar 29, 2020 at 3:02:29 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

"A large amount of the concrete was ejected outside the footprint of the building. The floor trusses were squashed into unrecognizable wads of metal -- that landed outside the footprint of the building."

"I don't see anything like 200.000 tons of concrete chunks and office contents and floor trusses in this area."

You seem to have an extraordinary talent for somehow just knowing stuff, Wayne. To the point of having scales for eyes. It's almost like you're really Columbo, and you were down there after the collapses with a tape measure, your eye scales, slide rule and cigar, taking inventory and slyly questioning people. Not sure how else you'd know that presumably almost all of the floor trusses landed outside the footprint, or that the exact amount of other debris within said footprint was insufficient to do the job, minus nefariously installed rocket panels.

"This paper has developed a "propelled demolition" hypothesis that suggests the interior of the elevator shafts were lined with panels of nano-thermite based propellant consisting of up to (possibly) 40 layers of red/gray material, providing a propulsive energy content of approximately 9.45 kJoules /cm2. This material was activated floor-by-floor in all directions...."

That puts mere guessing to shame. That's more in the category of reaching and stretching to the point of disfigurement.

Submitted on Sunday, Mar 29, 2020 at 3:58:54 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

I've been looking at the mechanics of destruction and the resulting debris fields for a long time. It appears you have not bothered to look.

So lets look at a simple physic example -- one that involves about 1/3 of the entire South Tower's structure.

In the following sequence we can follow the hinging of the South Tower and talk about where this 1/3 of the tower should have been found in a heap. (Note Figure 32 in the paper, Investigating the Mechanics of Destruction at the Twin Towers on 9/11:The Case for Propelled Demolition.)

Beginning with the first in the sequence, note the red lines (90 degrees to each other) and the red circle at the point that will be shown to be the pivot point for the hinging motion. There are still many stories of structure above this point.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Second in sequence shows the rotation beginning


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Third in the sequence shows the hinging motion continuing.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Fourth in the sequence shows the hinging motion continuing. Note that the lower point of the red line is moving inward -- into the Tower -- while the upper part is levered out, over the side.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Fifth in the sequence shows the hinging motion continuing. The top portion of the building continues to move to the left and has a non-zero velocity in the east direction. This velocity and momentum should continue now that it has started.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Sixth in the sequence shows the hinging motion continuing.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Seventh in the sequence shows the hinging motion continuing. The top portion of the building continues to move to the left and has a non-zero velocity in the east direction. This velocity and momentum should continue now that it has started.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Eighth in the sequence shows the hinging motion continuing. At this point the upper part has a significant momentum to the east and is mostly structurally intact.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

In the next frames of this video, this 1/3 of the building that is over the side of the structure disappears in a cloud of debris/material/dust that propelled outward in all directions.

According to simple physics and laws of mechanical motion, this 1/3 of the building should be found crashed into the ground in a heap. But is was dismembered before hit the ground.

Submitted on Sunday, Mar 29, 2020 at 2:10:32 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

"According to simple physics and laws of mechanical motion, this 1/3 of the building should be found crashed into the ground in a heap. But is was dismembered before hit the ground."

I'm just guessing here, but such toppling to the side was impossible because the horizontal reaction to the rate of angular momentum of the upper part would have exceeded the elastoplastic shear resistance of the story at least 10.3X. In other words, the center of gravity of the blocks was the boss.

Those blocks indeed were "dismembered", but not until after such time that overall collapse was initiated. And not until after they probably played a huge part in all the outward ejections sometimes erroneously attributed to explosives.

Submitted on Sunday, Mar 29, 2020 at 3:58:02 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

Here is another thing we agree upon. Your summary comment, "In other words, the center of gravity of the blocks was the boss."

Absolutely, the center of gravity of the block was over the side of the Tower in the moments after the following image.

Additionally, with the angular momentum and hinging -- there is no downward collapsing force on the west side -- because it had held up this side of the Tower. By the time of the onset of the demolition, there was nothing above the west side to do any crushing.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

There is nothing to support a gravity-only collapse of the Twin Towers. Nothing!

Submitted on Monday, Mar 30, 2020 at 1:23:19 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

"There is nothing to support a gravity-only collapse of the Twin Towers. Nothing!"

Nothing, except of course the overwhelming consensus by the structural engineering community, not to mention the fire engineering community, that gravity was indeed the only force involved, or needed for that matter, in the actual collapse proper. That's all. Just that.

If the pivot wall on the lower block had somehow been immovable and indestructible, you're right that the upper block would have continued to pivot and fall off to the side. But at least according to the experts, whom I'm sure you'd embrace were they to take your side, the lower part failed before the center was able to move sufficiently toward the edge.

I guess it's possible it did move slightly over the edge, not really sure about that, but even so, the lower building collapse had been initiated by then and at that point there was no more pivot point, so obviously it proceeded straight down.

I look at it this way: The fact that the second tower collapsed essentially in the same manner as the first should be looked at as confirmation, a second proof, that indeed a building of this particular design indeed will collapse this way when these particular kinds of forces and heat are applied in this particular manner. In an imaginary world, were we to replicate one of the towers somewhere else, and fly an airliner into it in the same way, we would be fairly confident that the very same thing would happen again. You didn't realize those jihadists were such careful experimental scientists, did you?

Submitted on Monday, Mar 30, 2020 at 5:32:05 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

Here is something else we agree on:

"I look at it this way: The fact that the second tower collapsed essentially in the same manner as the first should be looked at as confirmation, a second proof, that indeed a building of this particular design indeed will collapse this way when these particular kinds of forces and heat are applied in this particular manner."

And because the potential (gravity) energy of the Tower was insufficient to destroy the building, and because huge amounts of energetic activity was observed -- which cannot be explained by potential energy of the building alone -- this leads to the hypothesis in my paper that "these particular kinds of forces and heat are applied in this particular manner" destroyed the Twin Towers.

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 12:22:24 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help

Janet Supriano

Become a Fan
Author 90270
(Member since Oct 7, 2013), 13 fans, 2223 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

Two Pit Bulls sittin' at the bar, ......

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 28, 2020 at 11:57:37 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
Indent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Janet Supriano:   New Content

Janet:

I guess I'll "step into it" with this comment.

I'll say one the the pit bulls was named Einstein.

What was the name of the other pit bull?

Submitted on Sunday, Mar 29, 2020 at 2:38:41 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

One might hope that an "Einstein" would at least provide at least one equation.

Submitted on Sunday, Mar 29, 2020 at 4:04:30 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

David Watts

Become a Fan
Author 10429
(Member since Jan 31, 2008), 16 fans, 29 articles, 29 quicklinks, 2555 comments, 28 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

The equation is the conservation of angular momentum. You think the angular momentum just stops. Anti-scientific.

Anti laws of physics. Becky, you can't just preclude scientific laws of physics that have been in place since the beginning of time. You are just like all the others that just don't want to believe what is true, is true. Explain to me how Hani Hanjour was able to fly the Boeing 757 into the Pentagon so precisely and so perfectly.

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 5:03:13 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

David:

Thanks.

The demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7 is a showcase for observing the laws of motion and many aspects of physics.

David Chandler has many short segments on the topics of physics at the WTC on his website.

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 11:56:24 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (2+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

David Watts

Become a Fan
Author 10429
(Member since Jan 31, 2008), 16 fans, 29 articles, 29 quicklinks, 2555 comments, 28 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

I have looked at a lot of Chandler's work, all excellent.

I got in contact with David a long time ago and tried to convince him to consider a way to use my short simple proof that you know about that shows WTC7 was a controlled demolition. He said the proof is pretty much what he and AE911truth have been saying for years. But he was not interested in using the proof. I just think there have to be at least some people that will not spend any time at all looking into 9/11, that would take less than a minute to read and understand the truth. And I think there ought to be a way somehow to make use of it. But Chandler was not interested. Of course some people would say something like, "There has to be a catch. If it really were that simple, how come the whole damn world doesn't know 9/11 was an inside job/ false flag attack!?!"

Anyway, here it is again. You have seen this.

And Becky, care to comment on the proof?

A Very Short Simple Proof That Cannot Be Disproved. 9/11 was a False Flag Event

Wayne, I apologize. I have not yet taken the time to read your article closely, but I will.

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 8:37:58 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

David:

I reviewed your proof ... and yes: Q.E.D.

Regarding your comment, "most people are never going to believe the truth even when presented with so very many things that make it so obvious that the official story is absolutely not true."

From my experience, I would change "most" to "some."

Then I would say that "most" will "acknowledge (to themselves)" that something is not right and then go into one of two mode ... cognitive dissonance where they can't process the information, or revert to an outward silence with a "I see nothing ... I see Nothing" (NOTE: hat tip to Sgt Schultz of Hogan's Heroes).

The outward silence emanates from the question, "what can I do with this information?" And this is a tough question nearly 20 years later. But now they are aware that their news sources are not telling them the truth -- and once they know that they say, "what can I do with this information?"

There are a few other types too ... mostly they need to defend their world view.

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 12:44:48 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

David Watts

Become a Fan
Author 10429
(Member since Jan 31, 2008), 16 fans, 29 articles, 29 quicklinks, 2555 comments, 28 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Ok, I will change "most" to "some." You would know better than I.

But now they are aware that their news sources are not telling them the truth -- and once they know that they say, "what can I do with this information?"

Very good. That is an important point.

Maybe Hogan's Heroes was one of their brain washing exercises. Sgt Schultz, "I see nothing ... I see Nothing." Those that watched were being trained to "see . . . nothing."

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 5:08:49 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

Which begs the question: Do you think American Airlines flight 77, piloted by whomever, crashed into the Pentagon?

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 6:22:07 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

David Watts

Become a Fan
Author 10429
(Member since Jan 31, 2008), 16 fans, 29 articles, 29 quicklinks, 2555 comments, 28 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Good question Becky. I have my reasons for thinking that no, the airplane did not hit the pentagon. But Wayne posted an article quite a while back that made a strong case that the 757 did hit the pentagon. If I remember right, there were a couple of things I just could not agree with so I was left with thinking that no, the airplane did not hit the Pentagon. Wayne's article had a lot to think about.

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 7:04:40 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

Interesting that "1.8 million exploding ceiling tile" Jim Hoffman, and "1900 tons of exploding elevator shaft panels" Wayne Coste, and now apparently you, have somehow found it within yourselves to reject the "no plane at the Pentagon" theory.

What makes y'all so unwilling to let go of equally nonsensical and sans-evidence notions regarding the towers?

I'm guessing, again, but I think the towers are thought of as some kind of ideological central headquarters command center. If that goes, so goes a key 'column' supporting your worldview for the last 20 years. It's circle the wagon time.

It's pretty much equivalent to a religious person disavowing the existence of God, Allah, or whichever. OK, maybe the Earth is older than 6,000 years. OK, maybe there is such a thing as evolution. But the 6,000 was just a figure of speech, and God set evolution in motion. And Hani Hanjour was a bad pilot!

But don't tell me God doesn't exist! You'll have to tear that from my cold, dead hands!

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 10:12:46 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

David Watts

Become a Fan
Author 10429
(Member since Jan 31, 2008), 16 fans, 29 articles, 29 quicklinks, 2555 comments, 28 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky, I was trying to pay you a complement.

Are you talking to me? I do not reject the "no plane at the Pentagon" theory.

Your link, Hani Hanjour was a bad pilot!

Do you have any reason at all to think any of those people have any clue at all about what they are talking about? Becky, Blatant cherrypicking and confirmation bias.

The real deal with Hani Hanjour: "Hani Hanjour. Reported to have 600TT and a Commercial Certificate (see quotes right margin). Hani tried to get checked out in a 172 a few weeks prior at Freeway Airport in MD. Two seperate CFI's took Hani up to check him out. Baxter and Conner found that Hani had trouble controlling and landing a 172 at 65 knots. Bernard, the Chief CFI, refused to rent him the 172. I have instructed many years. I have soloed students in 172's when i had 300 hours as a CFI. How anyone could not control a 172 at 600TT and a Commercial is beyond me."

For background, let me let you know this: I have thousands of hours flying as a commercial pilot with an ATP with United Airlines, in all the Boeing airliners from the B737 to the B747-400 including the B757 and the B767 which are the planes said to have been used on 9/11. Let me tell you this. Those giving their opinions regarding Hani's flying skills do not have any clue at all.

About Pilots for 9/11 Truth:

Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe who have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day based on solid data and facts -- since 9/11/2001 is the catalyst for many of the events shaping our world today -- and the United States Government does not seem to be very forthcoming with answers or facts.

We do not accept the 9/11 Commission Report -- a Commission admittedly "set up to fail" according to the Chairman himself, nor "hypothesis" as a satisfactory explanation for the continued gross violation(s) of the United States Constitution being committed by Government agencies, and the sacrifice every American has made and continue to make -- some more than others.

We stand with the numerous other growing organizations of Firefighters, Medical Professionals, Lawyers, Scholars, Military Officers, Veterans, Religious and Political Leaders, along side Survivors, family members of the victims -- family members of soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice -- including the many Ground Zero workers who are now ill or have passed away, when we ask for a true, new independent investigation into the events of 9/11.

Thank you for taking the time to inform yourself.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pentagon.html

Becky, start here with these links to help you get up to speed with the Truth about what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11:

Boeing refuses to decode additional FDR data : 09/08/2006


American 77 maneuver according to Flght Data Recorder (please Note: The FDR data seems to be offset by 21-22 minutes in terms of Longitude. Latitude seems to be accurate. Inquiry is ongoing.)


Final Approach Path based on FDR data working backwards from the impact according to impact time of 9:37:45 as noted in the NTSB Flight Path Study. Times and Altitudes are presented for each segment. Each segment is calculated based on acceleration in feet per second.


Above Flight Path (csv file), was altered to match south approach.


Radar Altimeter confirms too high


Hijacker Timeline youtube video of final maneuver

Full analysis on Flight Data Recorder Animation Altimeter Settings

"White Jet" Analysis

Alternate Analysis for Light Poles working backwards from Impact Point at Pentagon

ASCE Pentagon Building Damage Report Analysis Excellent analysis

Debunking FDR Debunking Common Arguments Addressed. See Claim 4 in above link for information on how to obtain your own Data directly from the NTSB.

9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

Overwhelming Evidence Pentagon Aircraft Data Is Not From An American Airlines 757

Aircraft Departure Gate Positional Data Conflicts With Government Story

Flight Data Expert Confirmation: No Evidence Linking FDR Data to American 77

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 3:14:58 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

Sorry David I misread your comment. Guess I missed a 'not'.

I think I made quite a few comments under Wayne's Pentagon article, most focused on what people actually there, up close and personal, saw and reported on.

All those links at PFT trying to prove AA77 somehow didn't crash at the Pentagon are rendered rather meaningless and suspect given the simple fact that so many parts of that particular plane, most small but some big, and the remains/DNA of nearly all the registered passengers and pilots, were recovered and documented at the crash site, which was inside the building predominantly.

I really can't explain why certain pilots, including you, can either ignore or deny this simple, unsurmountable reality. Seems somewhat similar to the AE911 folks, representative of only a small fraction of the whole community.

I've been searching around on some other regular pilot forums -- There doesn't seem to be much support for, or even very much discussion on, the notion that Hani Hanjour didn't fly that plane into the Pentagon. But here someone brought it up.

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 8:08:44 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

David Watts

Become a Fan
Author 10429
(Member since Jan 31, 2008), 16 fans, 29 articles, 29 quicklinks, 2555 comments, 28 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky, this has occurred to me before. I want to tell you this, you come across as being bright and a person who can think well. But that puzzles me. It puzzles me because for some reason you are not able to see what seems so obvious to so many others about what really happened on 9/11. I have to wonder if you are refusing to see what we see and you don't realize you are doing so.

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 10:16:22 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

David:

I've been in many discussions with people who have a world view that is impervious to facts. It can be about the perceived perfection of the Obama administration or the perceived perfection of the Bush administration or the events of 9/11 or which God is the true God (after all there can only be one true flavor -- I mean one true set of authentically transcribed religious texts).

I've said that it is easier to convince a GW Bush "acolyte" that 9/11 was an inside job than to convince most truthers that an object with the dimensions of a 757 impacted the Pentagon on 9/11.

Becky reminds me of a young woman I met at an annual gathering of Occupy Wall Street in Philadelphia who insisted that the potential energy of a falling piece of steel from the top (with potential energy) could break this connection -- and then that connection -- and then this connection -- ad nauseam; without recognizing that once potential energy is expended as work (Force x Distance), it has lost its energy.

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 3:29:22 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

David Watts

Become a Fan
Author 10429
(Member since Jan 31, 2008), 16 fans, 29 articles, 29 quicklinks, 2555 comments, 28 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Wayne, that reminds me of a diary I posted in 2008. I would like both you and Becky to read it. I think it speaks directly to your comment Wayne.

Becky please read the diary and let me know what you think.

9/11 NIST: Heavy Dust Brought Down Twin Towers - Debate Hosted by Larry King

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 5:27:13 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

David Watts

Become a Fan
Author 10429
(Member since Jan 31, 2008), 16 fans, 29 articles, 29 quicklinks, 2555 comments, 28 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

Becky and Wayne, here are two more that I think are worth looking at to see how parody can be used to make a point.

9/11: Did Barbara Olson really call Ted Olson on 9/11? "Discussion" with Larry King.

9/11: Bill Maher Debates Willie Nelson. Hosted by Mr. Larry King.

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 5:42:33 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

Clever and entertaining writing David, but as far as the point through parody I assume you were trying to make, something like this?: All I see is dust, how could mere dust be enough to power the collapse

It's been reported/estimated that the total pre-9/11 weight of all the buildings destroyed on the site was ~ 2 million tons. It's been reported/estimated that the weight of debris carried off was ~ 1.8 million tons, so pretty close. Pictures of the aftermath depict massive piles of debris that could be described as anything but dust.

So while the collapse event at times appeared to the eye to be one big dust cloud, more floating than crushing, that cloud was merely shrouding the meat of the action. A lot of stuff was being ground down to small particles, but those particles were still large enough to contribute to the falling 'mass front', if you will. If one could somehow remove all the clouds of very fine particles from the picture, which were not contributing much, one would see a very different picture.

But yeah, funny stuff. That's gold Jerry, gold!

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 3:40:38 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to David Watts:   New Content

David:

Yup. Little Timmy did a great job correcting Mr. GNIST.

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 9:47:15 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

"It can be about the perceived perfection of the Obama administration or the perceived perfection of the Bush administration...."

Or, the perceived perfection of Leroy Hulsey?

The 'truth' movement has for a long time searched high and low for people of legitimacy to endorse their views. Now someone supposedly of that vein has done that, kind of, implicitly, but enough so to be held up as the ultimate, final authority on the matter. But what of the bulk of the iceberg of legitimate professional opinion below the view of pop culture web searches? Just because they don't come up, does that mean they aren't there, or are rendered weightless?

Attended an OWS gathering? You're making it clearer and clearer that the seductiveness of radical politics may have overcome your otherwise presumed good engineer's common sense.

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 8:20:30 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

Regarding your comment, "searching high and low for people of legitimacy to endorse their views."

The Hulsey Report explains how a real building performs under a fire. It shows that the building will expand in all directions and not be artificially constrained by air molecules (or was it "Heavy Dust") from expanding in all but one direction.

The NIST WTC7 analysis pined/fixed/set the outside part of the wall so it couldn't move in its simulation -- then applied heat and all the forced were directed into one spot. This isn't how building (or any physical object) behaves.

This figure below shows a competent analysis -- not the fiction that NIST spewed up that you appear to be attached to.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 10:06:14 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

So now that you've exhausted your complaints about my analysis of the Twin Towers, you retreat to changing the subject and switching to the Pentagon.

I'd rather stay focused on the Twin Towers in this thread. My review of both the Pentagon and the WTC are based on observations and the application of basic principles of science, physics and engineering.

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 12:50:30 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

Actually, there are some equations in this paper, but not many because it was written for a non-technical audience. If you need to see some equations they are embedded in the text in section 4 where I estimate the amount of nano-thermite that would have been necessary to provide the thermal energy in the observed pyroclastic flow.

Jim Hoffman estimated that the resulting cloud after each tower exhibited 1,500,000 kWh of energy which was 15 times more than the 100,000 kWh of potential energy in each tower.

Also, note that if potential energy is converted to kinetic energy and then does work (such a breaking bolts and bending and tearing steel or breaking up concrete slabs), this energy that did the work cannot be used to then heat up the air or do any more work. A joule (or kWh) of potential energy can only be used once.

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 11:49:00 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

"Jim Hoffman estimated that the resulting cloud after each tower exhibited 1,500,000 kWh of energy which was 15 times more than the 100,000 kWh of potential energy in each tower."

Jim's got a different idea than you:

Equipment Procurement

The following table lists the materials required for both Towers.

20"x20"x3/4" ceiling tile with embedded thin-film explosive and 2-channel wireless micro-detonator 1,000,000

12"x12"x3/4" ceiling tile with embedded thin-film explosive and 2-channel wireless micro-detonator 800,000

10-lb nano-thermite kicker charge with 2-channel wireless detonator in fire-protective capsule disguised as fire extinguisher 100

5 gallon thermate coating compound 20

spray applicator with flexible snake hose and integrated borescope 2

2-channel wireless high-temperature igniter 100

20-channel 200W RF repeater with UPS 240

So, 1.8 million exploding ceiling tiles. Just guessing again here, but I'd suggest 2,160,000 tiles (an extra 20%) to account for waste from cutting and fitting. But of course Jim may have already accounted for that.

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 6:17:04 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

The Hoffman hypothesis for the location of the energetic panels (hypothesis dated 2009) is not consistent with the observations, as I'll discuss in a moment). The reference to Mick West's analysis you used just shows how inconsistent Mick West is. In one sentence he says that there were not very high temperatures in the pyroclastic clouds -- and in the other he claims that mixing with ambient air did not happen (which cools the cloud).

Note this is already based on an unfounded assumption - that mixing with ambient air is "doubtful".

This claim can be debunked quite simply by the observation that no such temperatures were observed in the cloud of dust.

In section 1.2 of my paper, I describe how the assumed (Hoffman and/or others) placement of energetic material in ceiling tiles (or something similar) is inconsistent with the observations:

Observed contrary evidence: Synchronized detonations of such a material applied along the underside of the horizontal floor surface around the Tower would be loud and create primary forces in the vertical direction resulting in most of the material falling within the perimeter columns. Large horizontal forces ejecting multi-ton perimeter columns outward cannot be accounted for if the primary vertical forces were somehow transitioned into secondary horizontal forces. Destruction in the ordinal directions would be as strong as in the cardinal directions. Additionally, with such an energetic geometry, the forces would primarily be in the vertical directions. These forces would propel, downward, onto the next lower floor below such that these forces would destroy not only that floor but also the preparations underneath it for that floor's demolition. Disrupting the preparations on the lower floors would interrupt the progression unless the demolition proceeded vertically downward at a synchronized "explosive" speed.

If the amount of energy were less that 1,500,000 kWh of energy, this would reduce the average thickness of the propellant that I calculated in Section 4.0 of the paper.

As a final note, I see you are trying to move onto the Pentagon issue because you've lost every point you've tried to make about the Twin Towers and the paper.

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 3:10:23 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

"....and in the other he claims that mixing with ambient air did not happen...."

No, Mick is claiming that Hoffman claims mixing didn't happen, which Hoffman exactly did.

And you're right, the ceiling tile theory is pretty goofy. He got things 90 degrees off. He couldn't be more off, without being closer to vertical. So why are you citing him regarding his dust cloud energy theories?

"As a final note, I see you are trying to move onto the Pentagon issue because you've lost every point you've tried to make about the Twin Towers and the paper."

No, I've just been responding to points made regarding the Pentagon. I'm not trying to move on to anything or anywhere. And it's you who've failed to adequately rebut the vast majority of the engineering community, which perfectly understands there was no need whatsoever for anything other than gravity.

So just like Hoffman, you've got things exactly 90 degrees off, regarding both me and Mick!

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 4:59:42 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndent

Janet Supriano

Become a Fan
Author 90270
(Member since Oct 7, 2013), 13 fans, 2223 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Bucky.

Submitted on Sunday, Mar 29, 2020 at 3:39:20 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Janet Supriano:   New Content

Janet:

Because I'm not too fond of cats (for various reasons there are three that share my home), Bucky doesn't seen to fit me ...

.bullypaws.org/animals/detail?AnimalID=9150375

Submitted on Monday, Mar 30, 2020 at 1:25:54 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

David Watts

Become a Fan
Author 10429
(Member since Jan 31, 2008), 16 fans, 29 articles, 29 quicklinks, 2555 comments, 28 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

Bucky doesn't fit you? I just looked at the pictures of Bucky. Can't imagine a dog any cuter than Bucky. But I do know one that is just as cute, ... Packy.

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 6:21:45 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Janet Supriano

Become a Fan
Author 90270
(Member since Oct 7, 2013), 13 fans, 2223 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

I think you missed my word play, Wayne. Maybe I should have finished the joke, but I didn't really have a punchline. I was actually defending 'Einstein.' You. And suggesting he stop arguing with Bucky. I'm not into dog fights, esp. when they are so uselessly prolonged.

Adorable dog, Bucky. No doubt persistent. I have an adorable, but also very smart dog, too.

Submitted on Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 at 6:33:41 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help

Lance Ciepiela

Become a Fan
Author 14196
Follow Me on Twitter (Member since Apr 4, 2008), 53 fans, 58 articles, 188 quicklinks, 4933 comments, 214 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

"I wish the whole world would look at it, especially Americans look at it again, and again.."I want to show you the three towers coming down" - President David Meiswinkle, Lawyers Committee For 9/11 Inquiry @ 18:54 minutes. 9/11 evidence - #PrePlantedExplosives. #ShortSummary.

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 2:15:12 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (2+)
Help
Indent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Lance Ciepiela:   New Content

Lance:

Thanks for this video.

Submitted on Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 at 2:37:00 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

David asked above about conservation of momentum as related to the falling of the upper blocks of the twin towers:

"The equation is the conservation of angular momentum. You think the angular momentum just stops. Anti-scientific."

I'm afraid it's a little more complicated than that. It's over my head, to be sure, but this is what's really going on with the upper blocks tilting and falling:

"Since the top part of the South Tower tilted􏰀􏰁, many people wonder: Why didn't the upper part of the tower fall to the side like a tree, pivoting about the center of the critical floor? To demonstrate why, and thus to justify our previous neglect of tilting, is an elementary exercise in dynamics."

This is Appendix II on page 5. This is the kind of stuff I would think seasoned structural engineers are able to read and understand like the rest of us can understand "Hop on Pop". I would even venture to guess Leroy Hulsey would understand it, and presumably, accept it. But I can't see where he's ever commented on this, or even on the twin tower collapses at all. Maybe y'all have.

Submitted on Thursday, Apr 2, 2020 at 4:03:52 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
Indent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

I find it bizarre that you are so attracted to bad physics and engineering analysis about the World Trade Center on 9/11. Your elevating the Zdenek Bazant to anything above a complete fraud and incompetent is uniformed at a minimum and unconscionable if you have actually looked into what he has actually said.

So lets look at the Bazant paper you referenced (I assume because you think it is "hot stuff" instead of pure "dog-droppings."

Here is Figure 4 from the Bazant paper. I've added a few dotted red lines for reference. Note that in Figure 4(c) Bazant -- with no justification -- Bazant shows the base of the block scooting to the right. This allows him to assert that the center of gravity of the block was over the center of the Tower.

Apparently he either did not look -- or committed intellectual / academic fraud -- which the American Society of Civil Engineer Leadership (A.S.C.E.) allows (to its eternal shame).


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Below is a corrected version of Bazant's Figure 4 with screenshots of the supporting video that Bazant should have watched -- and if he did watch, he proved either his incompetence of the justifies the claim of fraud.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

In this augmented and corrected Figure 4, the center of gravity of the upper block is clearly outside the tower -- and completely invalidates Bazant's premise - even if he write down non-sensical equations.

If you don't think his equations are nonsensical, please provide an English language explanation for what they mean and then fill in the mathematical blanks that Bazant left for the students.

Match on!

Submitted on Friday, Apr 3, 2020 at 3:18:45 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

"This allows him to assert that the center of gravity of the block was over the center of the Tower."

I don't think Bazant/Zhou claimed that the COG of the upper block remained perfectly centered over the lower building, just that it didn't move far enough out before collapse in order for that whole block to have just toppled out away from everything, as you seem to claim it should have, sans-explosives presumably. Although it does appear that some portion did indeed topple over the edge and beat the main collapse to the ground, the bulk of the block fell down into the main building.

Your pictures just above are really fuzzy and don't show the edge of the building clearly through the smoke. In fact, I'm not really sure if those yellow lines you've drawn accurately represent where that edge/top really are at those particular times. The freezes you posted on Mar 29 at 2:10:32 PM indeed do clearly show the rightward movement of the left edge of the upper block. But you didn't depict the downward movement, and in fact you make it look like the bottom edge was stationary.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Here's the whole video so we can see the downward movement; the collapse begins around 1:25.

It appears to me that Bazant/Zhou had it pretty much correct in their depiction, and I would assume therefore also their formulaic proof. But like I said, it's all way above my head. I can just barely tell water from champagne!

Submitted on Friday, Apr 3, 2020 at 1:42:37 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help
IndentIndentIndent

Wayne Coste

Become a Fan
Author 511086
(Member since Apr 9, 2018), 1 fan, 4 articles, 210 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Becky Comstock:   New Content

Becky:

Thanks for selecting a video of your choosing for this discussion (Here's the whole video ). Now let's take a close look at it and see what it shows. I've kept the time-stamp in the image for better documentation. In the first figure, I've drawn the vertical lines and noted the width of the Tower. In the picture, the top block of the tower has begun the hinging motion.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

In the second figure, the top corner of the Tower has reached the maximum observable eastern tilt and has moved approximately 114 feet off the vertical reference line. The top corner of the Tower has moved 114 feet in about 4 seconds or -- at an average velocity of 24 ft per second (or about 20 mph). So it has significant momentum (NOTE: due to rotational acceleration, it is going fastest at the end of the 4 seconds).

I've revised the image in the previous post to align with this more precise measurement.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

The real fraud of the Bazant paper (that you seem to like defending) is that there is no movement to the right by the base of the block. Additionally his image dos not show the tower at its maximum eastward lean. It is fraudulent.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Also note that if you watch the video, that you selected as a good example, you will see "rocket projectiles" trailing white smoke propelled out of the top block as the Tower is being propelled to pieces. In a gravity-only collapse the building would not be so energetically demolished.

You can still believe that Bazant is infallible, but nobody who is informed will believe you.

Submitted on Friday, Apr 3, 2020 at 11:29:58 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (1+)
Help
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Becky Comstock

Become a Fan
Author 512956
(Member since Jan 23, 2019), 1 fan, 254 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Wayne Coste:   New Content

You still seem to be glossing over, in fact misrepresenting, the significant downward movement, Wayne. The bottom corner at the failure point has moved well to the right, and also looks to have descended several stories into the main building, way before it reaches maximum tilt. Stop the video right at initiation, actually about 1:35. Run it for about two seconds, while watching how far it moves both down and to the right. I guess we know by physics it's fallen about 65'. Six stories! (Free fall, right? That's what we're always told)

Your drawings simply don't match what is plainly visible in the video. By the time it's reached maximum tilt in your last drawing, about 4-5 seconds later, that block would have descended what ... 30-40 stories? You're still up at the top! I'd suggest scrapping the fuzzy images and best guess lines, and simply watching the video. Doing that confirms that Bazant/Zhou's sketch from way back in 2002 is pretty darn close to reality. Not that they necessarily meant for it to be an accurate scale masterpiece, but it's sure a heck of a lot closer to reality than yours!

"In a gravity-only collapse the building would not be so energetically demolished."

And you somehow just know that. While every legitimate long-standing association, chapter or society of professional engineers and architects somehow does not. Even demolition experts* don't know that!

* To our knowledge there is no evidence whatsoever to support this assertion. Analysis of video and photographs of both towers clearly shows that the initial structural failure occurred at or near the points where the planes impacted the buildings. Furthermore, there is no visible or audible indication that explosives or any other supplemental catalyst was used in the attack.

Submitted on Saturday, Apr 4, 2020 at 4:30:45 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment