jakee 1,489 #376 December 31, 2006 Quotethats funny then how did wtc7 collapse? Newsflash dude, WTC-7 was not one of the twin towers. As such it was , get this, built completely differently!! Get a grip....Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,990 #377 January 2, 2007 > No off course or negligent air craft came close. They were always > intercepted and told to change their course or they would be blown out of > the sky. This is nonsense. I've flown within 1/4 mile of the towers during sightseeing flights around Manhattan. No problems at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skinnyflyer 0 #378 January 2, 2007 QuoteThis is nonsense. I've flown within 1/4 mile of the towers during sightseeing flights around Manhattan. No problems at all. and how exactly does an on course sightseeing flight qualify as 'off couse or negligent air craft' are you somehow trying to suggest that off course or negligent air craft will not be intercepted even though that is and was the official norad procedure?"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #379 January 2, 2007 www.debunking911.com/firsttime.htm Quote just checked out that website, it was really interestingHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skinnyflyer 0 #380 January 2, 2007 Quotejust checked out that website, it was really interesting this site is beyond ridiculous, i have read everything there before but just glancind at it now i noticed; " This is yet another example of pancaking" the pancaking theory was abandoned by the nist investigation because it couldn't explain what happened. so does this website disagree with the official story? they simpy nit pick at certain inconclusive evidence and site straw man arguments."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sundevil777 102 #381 January 2, 2007 QuoteQuotejust checked out that website, it was really interesting this site is beyond ridiculous, i have read everything there before but just glancind at it now i noticed; " This is yet another example of pancaking" the pancaking theory was abandoned by the nist investigation because it couldn't explain what happened. so does this website disagree with the official story? they simpy nit pick at certain inconclusive evidence and site straw man arguments. Ya, ya, and the WTC wasn't built in the manner described in the official report, it is all there to see in their pictures...but I couldn't see what they were seeing, and couldn't understand the explanation of the stuff they were able to see. I have an engineering background, and have very little patience when I read nonsensical crap on conspiracy websites written by non-engineer types. Come on, look for something new in one of the pictures. If you magnify pics of WTC7, maybe you'll be able to see explosives being set through the windows. Showing you how stuff is bullshit and you saying no it doesn't is getting old now. We need new material.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cumplidor 0 #382 January 2, 2007 QuoteI have an engineering background, and have very little patience when I read nonsensical crap on conspiracy websites written by non-engineer types. Since I am definately one of these non-engineer types you describe, I thought of a question you could answer for me. Has there been any changes to the structural requirements for the large skyscrapers since 9-11 that you are aware of? It sounds kinda like the structures 'failed' in some way or another, and if that is the case, then building codes should change as a result right? Thicker steel maybe? Thicker concrete floors? Please understand this is a serious question. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sundevil777 102 #383 January 2, 2007 QuoteQuoteI have an engineering background, and have very little patience when I read nonsensical crap on conspiracy websites written by non-engineer types. Since I am definately one of these non-engineer types you describe, I thought of a question you could answer for me. Has there been any changes to the structural requirements for the large skyscrapers since 9-11 that you are aware of? It sounds kinda like the structures 'failed' in some way or another, and if that is the case, then building codes should change as a result right? Thicker steel maybe? Thicker concrete floors? Please understand this is a serious question. I don't think it has happened yet, but I think some are pushing for/developing firproofing that sticks better, and wider stairwells with tougher walls. I'm not a civil engineer.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skinnyflyer 0 #384 January 2, 2007 QuoteYa, ya, and the WTC wasn't built in the manner described in the official report i certainly never said it wasn't. but if you watch the nova docu on the collapse they clearly misrepresent the construction by showing concrete slabs in the center instead of 47 steel beams, they change all the proportions to make it look flimsy and ready to pancake. and this is the docu that most people got their collapase explanation from. Quoteand couldn't understand the explanation yes you seem to have trouble understanding a lot of things but keep trying."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pirana 0 #385 January 2, 2007 QuoteLike I said, look at actual reports - not what paranoid lunatic theorists are telling you is in the reports. To certain kinds of people and ways of thinking, paranoid lunatic theorists are so much more interesting; and to these people, interesting means the same as credible. For example, paranoid lunatic theroists are one of the kinds of people who find what paraniod lunatic theorists have to say very interesting; and therefore credible. Wait a minute, I think I'm onto something. There was a really funny show on one of the psuedo-science channels a while back. Don't even remember the topic; it was UFO's or Planet X or Nostrodamus or some other such silliness. Anyway, the narrator segues to a segment with an "expert." Here's this guy in a very dark shadowy room, with pyramids and crystals all over his desk, what looks like blacklight posters on the walls, he's wearing a cape and what appears to be Star Trek officer pips on his collar. Hilarious." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sundevil777 102 #386 January 2, 2007 QuoteThere was a really funny show on one of the psuedo-science channels a while back. Don't even remember the topic; it was UFO's or Planet X or Nostrodamus or some other such silliness. Anyway, the narrator segues to a segment with an "expert." Here's this guy in a very dark shadowy room, with pyramids and crystals all over his desk, what looks like blacklight posters on the walls, he's wearing a cape and what appears to be Star Trek officer pips on his collar. Hilarious. He was an officer, and should be given his due respect. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skinnyflyer 0 #387 January 2, 2007 QuoteThere was a really funny show on one of the psuedo-science channels a while back. Don't even remember the topic; it was UFO's or Planet X or Nostrodamus or some other such silliness. Anyway, the narrator segues to a segment with an "expert." Here's this guy in a very dark shadowy room, with pyramids and crystals all over his desk, what looks like blacklight posters on the walls, he's wearing a cape and what appears to be Star Trek officer pips on his collar. Hilarious. Quote... paranoid lunatic theroists are one of the kinds of people who find what paraniod lunatic theorists have to say very interesting well by your own definition this makes you a paranoid lunatic theorist. QuoteWait a minute, I think I'm onto something sorry i don't think anyone cares what a self proclaimed paranoid lunatic is onto."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #388 January 2, 2007 Quotesorry i don't think anyone cares what a self proclaimed paranoid lunatic is onto. Which is why this thread is getting exactly the attention it deserves...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skinnyflyer 0 #389 January 2, 2007 QuoteWhich is why this thread is getting exactly the attention it deserves... yes 5000 views and 387 replies. thankyou."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #390 January 2, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhich is why this thread is getting exactly the attention it deserves... yes 5000 views and 387 replies. thankyou. Sort of like watching a train wreck... can't look away because you don't want to miss the next crackpot theory... thanks for the comic relief!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skinnyflyer 0 #391 January 2, 2007 Quotecan't look away because you don't want to miss the next crackpot theory maybe you should go watch the ufo tv shows with pirana"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #392 January 2, 2007 QuoteQuotecan't look away because you don't want to miss the next crackpot theory maybe you should go watch the ufo tv shows with pirana Why? This is just as good, if not better! Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sundevil777 102 #393 January 2, 2007 Do you accept all the claims of the conspiracy theorists? Are there any assertions that you don't believe?People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites no7rosman 0 #394 January 2, 2007 The Trade Towers are a good thing to argue about because nobody will ever be able to prove anything. They are gone and coincedently the remains were scooped up immediately and hauled away. And tracked via GPS while being hauled away to make sure nobody could prove anything. I would rather talk about the Pentagon where we can see picutures of the damage. And we can ask...If an airplane hit the building where did the wings hit? If the wings desinigrated...What did they hit to cause them to disinegrate? Where is the damage? Where did the engines enter the building? Why is the orginal hole almost a perfect 16 foot diameter with an unbroken window 3 feet from the damage? Of 3 survailence cameras...why did we only see 8 frames of 1 video that proves nothing..(you can see these 8 frames on the web) No airplane is visible. These questions are still unanswered. You can't look at these pictures and not ask questions. If you have facts to prove any of this wrong please post them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites champu 1 #395 January 2, 2007 Quotecommon sense, intuition... ...would all suggest that... Your feelings betray you, young Skywalker... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #396 January 2, 2007 Immediately scooped up? In *what* alternate universe? As for the Pentagon... Here ya goMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SpeedRacer 1 #397 January 2, 2007 all this bs has been debunked before. do a search. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites no7rosman 0 #398 January 2, 2007 I have been through a lot of those links. They don't prove any of the questions I have asked. For example...I have seen interviews with people who saw and heard an airplane, and seen interviews with groups of people who saw and heard something else. Until someone can tell me how an airplane hit that building, made an almost perfectly round hole...(I have seen that damage in picutures) then completely disenigrate...(Including Wings and Tail section, and engines)I don't believe their story. The only people who show how that could have happened use computer drawings, and computer animations...not real pictures. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #399 January 2, 2007 QuoteI have been through a lot of those links. They don't prove any of the questions I have asked. For example...I have seen interviews with people who saw and heard an airplane, and seen interviews with groups of people who saw and heard something else. Until someone can tell me how an airplane hit that building, made an almost perfectly round hole...(I have seen that damage in picutures) then completely disenigrate...(Including Wings and Tail section, and engines)I don't believe their story. The only people who show how that could have happened use computer drawings, and computer animations...not real pictures. Then you've obviously NOT looked at those links, as they show pics of engine parts and more. For people that talk so much about having "open minds", yall conspiracy theorists manage to NOT think about physical evidence, don't ya?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites no7rosman 0 #400 January 2, 2007 Here is the universe. The surviving fragments of steel from the Twin Towers, most of them between 10 and 30 feet in length, and the larger remaining steel sections from Building 7, were essential to any serious investigation of the collapses. These catastrophic failures were at least as deserving of careful study as other rare events that are studied intensively, such as the aviation disasters investigated by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Normally, great care is taken in preserving the evidence from structural failures and crime scenes. No such effort was made to preserve the evidence of the unprecedented and unexplained collapses of skyscrapers WTC 1, WTC 2, and Building 7 in lower Manhattan -- easily the three largest and least understood structural failures in World history. Indeed the evidence was destroyed with remarkable speed and efficiency. ------------------------------------------------------------ Steel was the structural material of the buildings. As such it was the most important evidence to preserve in order to puzzle out how the structures held up to the impacts and fires, but then disintegrated into rubble. Since no steel frame buildings had ever collapsed due to fires, the steel should have been subjected to detailed analysis. So what did the authorities do with this key evidence of the vast crime and unprecedented engineering failure? They recycled it! Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from Ground Zero. Most of the steel has been recycled as per the city's decision to swiftly send the wreckage to salvage yards in New Jersey. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage. 1 Â The bulk of the steel was apparently shipped to China and India. The Chinese firm Baosteel purchased 50,000 tons at a rate of $120 per ton, compared to an average price of $160 paid by local mills in the previous year. 2 Â http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/steel.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next Page 16 of 21 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
skinnyflyer 0 #380 January 2, 2007 Quotejust checked out that website, it was really interesting this site is beyond ridiculous, i have read everything there before but just glancind at it now i noticed; " This is yet another example of pancaking" the pancaking theory was abandoned by the nist investigation because it couldn't explain what happened. so does this website disagree with the official story? they simpy nit pick at certain inconclusive evidence and site straw man arguments."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #381 January 2, 2007 QuoteQuotejust checked out that website, it was really interesting this site is beyond ridiculous, i have read everything there before but just glancind at it now i noticed; " This is yet another example of pancaking" the pancaking theory was abandoned by the nist investigation because it couldn't explain what happened. so does this website disagree with the official story? they simpy nit pick at certain inconclusive evidence and site straw man arguments. Ya, ya, and the WTC wasn't built in the manner described in the official report, it is all there to see in their pictures...but I couldn't see what they were seeing, and couldn't understand the explanation of the stuff they were able to see. I have an engineering background, and have very little patience when I read nonsensical crap on conspiracy websites written by non-engineer types. Come on, look for something new in one of the pictures. If you magnify pics of WTC7, maybe you'll be able to see explosives being set through the windows. Showing you how stuff is bullshit and you saying no it doesn't is getting old now. We need new material.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cumplidor 0 #382 January 2, 2007 QuoteI have an engineering background, and have very little patience when I read nonsensical crap on conspiracy websites written by non-engineer types. Since I am definately one of these non-engineer types you describe, I thought of a question you could answer for me. Has there been any changes to the structural requirements for the large skyscrapers since 9-11 that you are aware of? It sounds kinda like the structures 'failed' in some way or another, and if that is the case, then building codes should change as a result right? Thicker steel maybe? Thicker concrete floors? Please understand this is a serious question. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #383 January 2, 2007 QuoteQuoteI have an engineering background, and have very little patience when I read nonsensical crap on conspiracy websites written by non-engineer types. Since I am definately one of these non-engineer types you describe, I thought of a question you could answer for me. Has there been any changes to the structural requirements for the large skyscrapers since 9-11 that you are aware of? It sounds kinda like the structures 'failed' in some way or another, and if that is the case, then building codes should change as a result right? Thicker steel maybe? Thicker concrete floors? Please understand this is a serious question. I don't think it has happened yet, but I think some are pushing for/developing firproofing that sticks better, and wider stairwells with tougher walls. I'm not a civil engineer.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skinnyflyer 0 #384 January 2, 2007 QuoteYa, ya, and the WTC wasn't built in the manner described in the official report i certainly never said it wasn't. but if you watch the nova docu on the collapse they clearly misrepresent the construction by showing concrete slabs in the center instead of 47 steel beams, they change all the proportions to make it look flimsy and ready to pancake. and this is the docu that most people got their collapase explanation from. Quoteand couldn't understand the explanation yes you seem to have trouble understanding a lot of things but keep trying."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #385 January 2, 2007 QuoteLike I said, look at actual reports - not what paranoid lunatic theorists are telling you is in the reports. To certain kinds of people and ways of thinking, paranoid lunatic theorists are so much more interesting; and to these people, interesting means the same as credible. For example, paranoid lunatic theroists are one of the kinds of people who find what paraniod lunatic theorists have to say very interesting; and therefore credible. Wait a minute, I think I'm onto something. There was a really funny show on one of the psuedo-science channels a while back. Don't even remember the topic; it was UFO's or Planet X or Nostrodamus or some other such silliness. Anyway, the narrator segues to a segment with an "expert." Here's this guy in a very dark shadowy room, with pyramids and crystals all over his desk, what looks like blacklight posters on the walls, he's wearing a cape and what appears to be Star Trek officer pips on his collar. Hilarious." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #386 January 2, 2007 QuoteThere was a really funny show on one of the psuedo-science channels a while back. Don't even remember the topic; it was UFO's or Planet X or Nostrodamus or some other such silliness. Anyway, the narrator segues to a segment with an "expert." Here's this guy in a very dark shadowy room, with pyramids and crystals all over his desk, what looks like blacklight posters on the walls, he's wearing a cape and what appears to be Star Trek officer pips on his collar. Hilarious. He was an officer, and should be given his due respect. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skinnyflyer 0 #387 January 2, 2007 QuoteThere was a really funny show on one of the psuedo-science channels a while back. Don't even remember the topic; it was UFO's or Planet X or Nostrodamus or some other such silliness. Anyway, the narrator segues to a segment with an "expert." Here's this guy in a very dark shadowy room, with pyramids and crystals all over his desk, what looks like blacklight posters on the walls, he's wearing a cape and what appears to be Star Trek officer pips on his collar. Hilarious. Quote... paranoid lunatic theroists are one of the kinds of people who find what paraniod lunatic theorists have to say very interesting well by your own definition this makes you a paranoid lunatic theorist. QuoteWait a minute, I think I'm onto something sorry i don't think anyone cares what a self proclaimed paranoid lunatic is onto."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #388 January 2, 2007 Quotesorry i don't think anyone cares what a self proclaimed paranoid lunatic is onto. Which is why this thread is getting exactly the attention it deserves...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skinnyflyer 0 #389 January 2, 2007 QuoteWhich is why this thread is getting exactly the attention it deserves... yes 5000 views and 387 replies. thankyou."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #390 January 2, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhich is why this thread is getting exactly the attention it deserves... yes 5000 views and 387 replies. thankyou. Sort of like watching a train wreck... can't look away because you don't want to miss the next crackpot theory... thanks for the comic relief!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skinnyflyer 0 #391 January 2, 2007 Quotecan't look away because you don't want to miss the next crackpot theory maybe you should go watch the ufo tv shows with pirana"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #392 January 2, 2007 QuoteQuotecan't look away because you don't want to miss the next crackpot theory maybe you should go watch the ufo tv shows with pirana Why? This is just as good, if not better! Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #393 January 2, 2007 Do you accept all the claims of the conspiracy theorists? Are there any assertions that you don't believe?People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
no7rosman 0 #394 January 2, 2007 The Trade Towers are a good thing to argue about because nobody will ever be able to prove anything. They are gone and coincedently the remains were scooped up immediately and hauled away. And tracked via GPS while being hauled away to make sure nobody could prove anything. I would rather talk about the Pentagon where we can see picutures of the damage. And we can ask...If an airplane hit the building where did the wings hit? If the wings desinigrated...What did they hit to cause them to disinegrate? Where is the damage? Where did the engines enter the building? Why is the orginal hole almost a perfect 16 foot diameter with an unbroken window 3 feet from the damage? Of 3 survailence cameras...why did we only see 8 frames of 1 video that proves nothing..(you can see these 8 frames on the web) No airplane is visible. These questions are still unanswered. You can't look at these pictures and not ask questions. If you have facts to prove any of this wrong please post them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #395 January 2, 2007 Quotecommon sense, intuition... ...would all suggest that... Your feelings betray you, young Skywalker... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #396 January 2, 2007 Immediately scooped up? In *what* alternate universe? As for the Pentagon... Here ya goMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #397 January 2, 2007 all this bs has been debunked before. do a search. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
no7rosman 0 #398 January 2, 2007 I have been through a lot of those links. They don't prove any of the questions I have asked. For example...I have seen interviews with people who saw and heard an airplane, and seen interviews with groups of people who saw and heard something else. Until someone can tell me how an airplane hit that building, made an almost perfectly round hole...(I have seen that damage in picutures) then completely disenigrate...(Including Wings and Tail section, and engines)I don't believe their story. The only people who show how that could have happened use computer drawings, and computer animations...not real pictures. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #399 January 2, 2007 QuoteI have been through a lot of those links. They don't prove any of the questions I have asked. For example...I have seen interviews with people who saw and heard an airplane, and seen interviews with groups of people who saw and heard something else. Until someone can tell me how an airplane hit that building, made an almost perfectly round hole...(I have seen that damage in picutures) then completely disenigrate...(Including Wings and Tail section, and engines)I don't believe their story. The only people who show how that could have happened use computer drawings, and computer animations...not real pictures. Then you've obviously NOT looked at those links, as they show pics of engine parts and more. For people that talk so much about having "open minds", yall conspiracy theorists manage to NOT think about physical evidence, don't ya?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
no7rosman 0 #400 January 2, 2007 Here is the universe. The surviving fragments of steel from the Twin Towers, most of them between 10 and 30 feet in length, and the larger remaining steel sections from Building 7, were essential to any serious investigation of the collapses. These catastrophic failures were at least as deserving of careful study as other rare events that are studied intensively, such as the aviation disasters investigated by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Normally, great care is taken in preserving the evidence from structural failures and crime scenes. No such effort was made to preserve the evidence of the unprecedented and unexplained collapses of skyscrapers WTC 1, WTC 2, and Building 7 in lower Manhattan -- easily the three largest and least understood structural failures in World history. Indeed the evidence was destroyed with remarkable speed and efficiency. ------------------------------------------------------------ Steel was the structural material of the buildings. As such it was the most important evidence to preserve in order to puzzle out how the structures held up to the impacts and fires, but then disintegrated into rubble. Since no steel frame buildings had ever collapsed due to fires, the steel should have been subjected to detailed analysis. So what did the authorities do with this key evidence of the vast crime and unprecedented engineering failure? They recycled it! Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from Ground Zero. Most of the steel has been recycled as per the city's decision to swiftly send the wreckage to salvage yards in New Jersey. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage. 1 Â The bulk of the steel was apparently shipped to China and India. The Chinese firm Baosteel purchased 50,000 tons at a rate of $120 per ton, compared to an average price of $160 paid by local mills in the previous year. 2 Â http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/steel.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
