9/11 Controlled Demolation--More Proof

Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - 06:51 AM,

"I work at the American society of civil engineer, an office which contributed massively at the NIST report. I work at the public relation department, so if I seem angry when I post, its because my *** is on the line; they want to shut down our department because of people like you who oppose the official version. Politicians don't want another scandal."
by Piper

I was reading a thread about the free-fall speed of the WTC towers' collapse called "Basic Physics, Correct Analysis of WTC Towers Collapse" on the phys.org forum, a mainstream physics board.

The initial post includes a very good .swf file showing how the time of the collapses indicate that they had to have been caused by explosives, and the poster wanted to know the community's opinion on this, asking them to point out any error in his physics.

As usual, a 9/11 apologist/shill (nick a_ht) starts defending the official story, and this goes on for a few pages until a very well informed post throws an accusation at him.

farang on physorg.com wrote:
It is heartening to see that the horrific crime of 911, for which NO ONE has been apprehended in my country, is still a burning issue for those that see a real problem in officialdom's explanation (or in the case of WTC 7, simply ignoring the issue entirely, which is cause of suspicion in and of itself for any reasonable person) of that day's events.

I wish those finding fault in Mr. Johnson's conclusions would state specifically what those are, not keep referring to something not in the reply. Damn sure would like to see ANY logical rebuttal.

In other words, I see no rebuttal to his statement that physics rules out a kerosene fire melting and collapsing three steel buildings in this manner.

That's fairly straightforward, and should be simple to refute, yet I see nothing but anger, resentment, insults and false statements about the structural strength (or lack thereof) of the two towers (the core should have stayed upright, with plane parts stuck to it). Not to mention how one poster claimed modeling a 22 second free fall, then stated a 13 second free fall, without explaining his conflicting statements.

Look, I am not a scientist, nor a physicist, nor structural engineer.

I am a Boilermaker, Shipbuilder, Blacksmith Forger and helper. Union. Now a contractor on military facilities. I build steel storage tanks for jet fuel. A few years ago, a typhoon blew through, and I got to watch a Mobil AST, with @ 1,000,000 gallons of diesel in it, get hit with lightning, the grounding failed, and the million gallons BLEW!!

Well, for a diesel fire that is. it simply caught fire, burned itself out after 4 days, blackened the steel. Catch that? One million gallons of diesel fuel, burned for 4 days, didn't melt squat. Tank, 1/4" steel, never melted.

Yet HUGE core I-beams, supporting the elevator and utility shafts, were VAPORISED at the WTC towers? Stop, I'll wet my britches laughing.

I've melted, welded, forged, bent, twisted, repaired sheared, punched, formed, plated, blasted and coated just about every metal you see used commonly in industry and construction, for over 32 years. I 've welded many a steel I-beam: purlin clips, joining plates, you name it.

I ask you plainly: you know the explosion you see after the second plane hits the tower?

a_ht, what caused that?

Tell me you believe, like me, it was the JP-8 (yes, I work with jet fuel daily, too) contained in the jet's tanks, correct?

Huge explosion, you say you were there that day? Your father? He see this huge fireball?

What was it?

Because, if it was the kerosene (JP-8, acts just like diesel, you can put it right in your diesel tank, works great, low flash point of 140 deg) that did explode that way, that you state so assuredly melted steel,

explain how it reconstituted itself after exploding, and put itself back inside the building, and THEN what?

Ran down 90 floors to melt the "uninsulated I-beams"? What? "Shook" it off by jet impact? Are you kiddin' me? When the jet hit, it did not even knock folks down in the building below!!! What nonsense, a_ht!!

Because I KNOW the dimensions of a 14,000 gallon fuel tank. About the size on one of the many offices on the floor hit. That's all, a_ht. The size of one office.

Yet, you would have me believe NOT my own eyes, that see an explosion of huge proportions caused by the impact of the jet plane, but rather a tale that says exploded fuel turned back into liquid form, and only <14,000 gallons, a ridiculously small amount of fuel, ran 90 stories down the stairways (the stairwells the firefighters used to come up to see "small fires") and caused the beams to melt because the impact "knocked of the insulation".

One reply to that: WTC 7. Not hit, there goes THAT THEORY.

Melted steel bends. NEVER turns to dust. Never. No, not ever.

Say, how about this for argument: From now on, CDI never needs to use sophisticated computer analysis on where to place the explosives, amounts, sequences, no, no no. We can simply use a_ht's rational analysis, pour @ 10,000 gallons of diesel fuel in the basement, stand back, and watch a PERFECTLY SIMULATED controlled demolition, right? Right, a_ht? or, are you incorrect here?

a_ht, Mr. Jackson's British, I believe. Very polite, considerate.

I am not, I am just a blunt American: I believe you to be an Israeli disinformation agent.

Yes, obviously, the buildings were pre-rigged for controlled demolitions.

I never thought I would see the day my country chased the rabbit down the hole...and I would wake up in a land where black is white, up is down, liars are heroes, and criminals in charge of our government, and 19 "Arab Terrorists" could make physics stand down while they attacked.

Yet.....

Physics don't "stand down" for anyone. Therefore, I believe 19 Arab hijackers flying planes into the towers did not bring down the buildings on 911.

Obviously.
And here is the reply:
a_ht on physorg.com wrote:

I am not an Israely information agent, and I take offense.

I work at the American society of civil engineer, an office which contributed massively at the NIST report. I work at the public relation department, so if I seem angry when I post, its because my *** is on the line; they want to shut down our department because of people like you who oppose the official version. Politicians don't want another scandal.
So THAT'S what the 'public relations' department does!
Man, they must be sending newbie shills to the non-conspiracy boards... http://valis.cjb.cc/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=77