Scientists simulate jet colliding with WTC (CNN)

So...? Did you like it?

I think we should rebuild the towers as originally designed and crash new airplanes into them.

Maybe people'd shut up, then.





























































Probably not.

I was waiting for orders from head office on what to say. (kidding)

I had 2295:Comments to read. Its good but as you've probably already guessed, building number 7 always distracts us from agreeing with the official conspiracy.

If they can produce a similar simulation re: WTC 7... who knows?

I don't know. Sure, a simulation of the collapse of Building 7 would be interesting, but bringing WTC 7 up whenever any part of the events on 9/11 are being discussed makes it sound like a deflection...

So, apart from Building 7 and everything else - what did you think about it?

New Study Props Up Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory
Does not refute a single issue the 9/11 truth movement has raised
Steve Watson
Prison Planet
Wednesday, June 20, 2007


A new study into the collapse of the World Trade Center towers has been released that correlates with the findings of the 2005 National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) report and supports the theory that intense fires weakened the structure and initiated "global collapse". Much like the NIST report however, it is fatally flawed.

The AP reports:

A computer simulation of the 2001 World Trade Center attacks supports a federal agency's findings that the initial impact from the hijacked airplanes stripped away crucial fireproofing material and that the weakened towers collapsed under their own weight.

In reality the new study by structural engineers at Purdue University does not provide any scientific evidence to explain the collapses, it merely confirms the NIST fireproofing claim in its animation and then jumps to the same conclusions as NIST, conclusions that fly in the face of the laws of physics.

watch the animation

"The aircraft moved through the building as if it were a hot and fast lava flow," Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering and a lead investigator says. "Consequently, much of the fireproofing insulation was ripped off the structure. Even if all of the columns and girders had survived the impact - an unlikely event - the structure would fail as the result of a buckling of the columns. The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."

There are a number of problems with these claims. Lets take them one by one:

1. Even if the fireproofing had been removed the idea that a regular office fire could weaken steel and cause buckling requires a leap of faith to say the least.

Statements made by Kevin Ryan of Underwriters Laboratories, the company that certified the steel components used in the construction of the World Trade Center towers confirm that the claim is ridiculous. In a 2004 letter to NIST Ryan wrote:

We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F.

Now I'm no physicist but given that Jet fuel doesn't even burn to those temperatures (No fuel, not even jet fuel, which is really just refined kerosene, will burn hotter than 1500 degrees Fahrenheit) the idea that "ordinary office fires" would is patently farcical.

2. Intense fires lasted only minutes
more

...and I refuse to listen to people who are....

In fact, it discounts some of the points that these guys have continually raised. For example, it discounts the "The Twin Towers Were Hit By Missiles And The Government Used A 17 Second Gap To Impose The Shape Of An Airplane On All The Footage Available" theory....

Here's the thread where Zippo provided links to that particular theory...


... and here's a comparison between the data from the simulation and an actual photo of the North Tower:





So I guess we can scratch the "There Were No Planes" theory from the list (not that it had any merit to begin with)...

Zippo, How did the damn NYTimes miss these facts? All the news that's fit to print my ass. It's way past time for the NYTimes to learn there are other much more conscientious journalists out there than they and these hard working people have the means to get the story out with the WWW. The Times has obviously taken sides in an issue that crys for further investigation. There certainly is reasonable doubt to the government's theories and the kind of biased "study" the Purdue report represents and the shoddy biased reporting of the Times only piles on the government story. Why the continued cover-up when these guys are under such intense scrutiny? They're headed off at the pass every pass. They went thatta way. "New 9/11 Study Has Direct Links To Government, Pentagon Black Ops"
"Independent" study financed by Feds
Steve Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, June 22, 2007


A newly released Purdue University animation showing how fire caused the collapse of the World Trade Center towers on 9/11 claims to be independent but in reality has been federally funded and was conducted by individuals with direct links to the Pentagon and the White House.

Earlier this week we covered the news that the new study roughly correlates with the findings of the 2005 National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) report and supports the official line that the airplanes stripped away crucial fireproofing material and that the weakened towers collapsed under their own weight.

While the New York Times today lauds the study as "a counterpoint to the conspiracy theories promulgated by such outspoken figures as Rosie O'Donnell", Prisonplanet.com has actually done some research into the origins of the study.

In addition to the inerrant flaws and conflicts we pointed out in our previous article, it has now come to light that the so called "independent" structural engineers behind the study are anything but.

The Study was funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), a federal agency created by Congress in 1950 "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense…".


As writers at www.truthorlies.org have pointed out, the board of the NSF was appointed by George W. Bush and confirmed by the United States Senate. Its director, Dr. Arden L. Bement Jr, has worked for the Department of defense, where he was under secretary for research and engineering, and DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), which is responsible for the development of new technology for use by the military and famed for its black op projects and offshoot offices.

Last year the Bush Administration doubled the NSF's budget to $6.02 billion.

At the time Arden L. Bement, Jr. stated:

"This is a great day for NSF, and that means it's a great day for the nation, there has been a lot of rhetoric about doubling the NSF budget, but now the Administration is behind it. The FY 2007 Budget Request is the first installment. We are grateful to the Administration for its recognition and leadership,"

It has also been brought to our attention that structural engineer Mete Sozen, the lead investigator in the Purdue study, was also on the American Society of Civil Engineers research team that confirmed the government's story about the OKC bombing in 1995, despite the huge amounts of inconsistencies and conflicting testimony.

Coincidence?

From the ASCE web site

Mete A. Sozen, Ph.D., S.E.
Kettlehut Distinguished Professor of Structural Engineering, Purdue University
Specialty: Behavior of reinforced-concrete structures

Dr. Sozen is currently the Kettlehut Distinguished Professor of Structural Engineering at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Ind. Prior to joining Purdue in 1994, Dr. Sozen was a professor of civil engineering at the University of Illinois for over 35 years. Dr. Sozen also served on the ASCE team that studied the Murrah Federal Office Building collapse.

So while it claims to be independent the study was in fact funded by the government and carried out by long time government hired hands. The study clearly set out not to attempt to discover anything new but to prove the preconceived official fire theory.

Again this underscores the fact that a truly independent investigation into 9/11 is the only way the mountains of evidence pointing towards a controlled demolition will even be considered.