Defending the Truth

what can I say, I'm amazing. It just shocks me that people come up with this stuff.

You have to ignore a great deal of evidence to not see something just isnt right. Especialy when you have fire fighters striaght saying they heard several explosions just before they went down. Plus, how the hell can a plane drop a building falling within its self, as good as a demolition crew could have done? Let alone twice. Each building dropped in 7 seconds flat, that is near free fall. In other words as well constructed as the buildings were made (and made to take plane crash, fully fueled) no part gave ANY resistance on the way down. Listening to the enginer's that is simply impossible.

The explosions could have been the fuel. The Tower were constructed on metal frames, which would have melted under high heat. The supports were ment to distribite such a shock in a vertical fashion and if those give out the tower falls vertically. The supports were also lightweight, so if to many supports are damaged the building can no longer hold itself up. This was done to prevent the tower from falling ata an angle and crushing buildings and people below

The explosion could not have been the fuel, It was over a hour later, and they were heard as low as the first floor.

“The short cut taken by NIST in relying upon this theoretical work, allowed them to avoid a continuation of their examination to include the physical evidence available from the collapse. Such a continuation would have shown many points of evidence which cannot be readily explained by a collapse whose initiation and progression was caused as a result of aircraft impact and subsequent fires.”
Gordon Ross, BSc ME, M.Eng – Mechanical Engineer

"The NIST investigation of the WTC building failures was extensive, but NIST did not substantiate its conclusions experimentally. On the contrary, many of NIST’s tests contradicted its conclusions. Furthermore, there are several examples in which NIST chose to manipulate input data, and then certify its findings based upon the inevitable conclusions that derive from the manipulated input. One finds little acknowledgement on the part of NIST that uncertainties in its simulations translate into uncertainties in its findings.”
Eric Douglas – Registered Architect

“Upon reviewing the work of Prof. Jones, Jim Hoffman, and others, as well as NIST reports: my opinion is that these "collapses" could not have happened without the use of some sort of explosive, barring repeal of laws of physics!”
John Mizzi, B EE, PE – Licensed Professional Engineer

“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations of specificity to cause, by not fully invoking all of their authority to seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.”
James Quintiere - Professor of Fire Protection Engineering

“I have carefully studied the Jones 2006 paper, "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?" and concluded that it is a rational step-by-step study that meets the accepted standards for scientific building research. His critical reviews of the FEMA, NIST, and 9/11 Commission reports are correct.”
J. Marx Ayres, BS ME, MS ME, PE – Mechanical Engineer

“The aircraft impact and fire severity effects were magnified in the NIST reports.”
“We will find that the government investigations into building collapse [at the World Trade Center] must consider controlled demolition as far more probable since fire effects collapse could never be duplicated. ...”
Edward S. Munyak, BS ME, MS Eng. Mgmt., PE – Licensed Professional Mechanical Engineer and Fire Protection Engineer

“In addition the NIST report in relation to collapse initiation is faulty and opposes the known material properties of structural grade steel and the associated heat transfer processes.”
Christopher Backus, BS ME – Senior Product Design Engineer

“When you’re ready to accept the fact that we still have a vital need for the truth, a good way of examining the many important facts NIST ignored, and considering what could have really happened in New York City, is to read Steven Jones’ historic paper.”
Kevin Ryan, BS Chem – Certified Quality Engineer
*Mr. Ryan was fired by Underwriters Laboratories 5 days after sending a letter to a NIST scientist pointing out inconsistencies in the NIST report on the causes of the building collapses at the World Trade Center and asking for clarification.

“And, in contrast to the Report's voluminous detail about the plane crashes, fires, and loss of life, it makes no attempt to characterize or explain the demolition-like features of the collapses -- such as their explosiveness, pulverization, verticality and nearly free-fall rapidity -- except for two sentences in a half-page section added to the Final Report to address criticisms of the Draft. NIST simply avoids these troublesome issues by placing them outside the scope of its investigation, claiming that "global collapse" was "inevitable" after the "initiation of collapse."”
Jim Hoffman, MFA – Software Engineer and Research Scientist

“The NIST and FEMA reports do not explain the collapse of WTC 7.”
Jon Jensen, BSc Physics – R&D Engineer, Aerospace Test Engineer, Manufacturing Engineer and Engineering Technician

Grace, how about looking at the evidence for yourself instead of quoting those so-called professionals?

The Twin Towers did not collapse, they were turned to dust.

So called professionals? Yea

Fuel doesn't have to explode instantly

I take it, that Grace's 'authorities' didn't mention that the fuel pipes had been damaged (ruptured) during the plane collision? And that the fuel from the 3 different locations fuel generators were located was sparked by the water sprayers kicking on when the smaller fires had started?

In otherwords...Smaller fires setting of sprinkler system, that water hitting exposed/damaged wiring from the planes, then the sparks hitting the fuel that was running out of the damaged fuel lines going to the fuel run backup electric generators...

The heat then generated further weakend the supports that were holding up each floor...And the weight of each floor caved into the next floor, creating more weight, which just kept increasing expendentially...As they say. LOL!

"It was over designed to with stand almost anything

Including hurricans, high winds, bombings and a airplane hitting it"

Hyman Brown- WTC construction manager


"We know that the steel componants were certified to the ASTM E1 19. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures of 2000 degrees F for several hours"
Additionaly, I think we can all agree that even unfire proofed steel will not melt until reaching red hot temperatures of nearly 3000 degree's F. Why Dr Brown would imply that 2000 degree F would melt the high grade steel used in those buildings makes no sence at all

This story just does not add up. If steel from those buildings did soften or melt, we can all agree that this was certainly not due to jet fuel fires of any kind, let alone the briefly burning fires in those towers."

Kevin Ryan- Underwritter Laboratories