Defending the Truth

I'll catch up with you guys later, I gotta run. Dont bash me to hard while Im gone.

A storm isn't fire Grace...I said they didn't design it to withstand head-on high side damage. Period. Boeings didn't exsist when the towers

I clearly stated it was designed to withstand the stress of highwinds...Not fire. What you think a storm is? Just water and lightening? Or has suddenly lightening in your mind become meaning 'the building was made to withstand fire'? ROTFLMAOL!

Again...A plane hitting either building, is alot more force then the 270 mph high wind stresses the buildings were designed to withstand. The buildings would have withstood a one and a half multiplied Hurrican Katrina type of hurrican with hardly a scratch and perhaps a few broken windows...But the impact created by the force of a plane flying several hundred miles an hour was 30 times harder then that type of wind force.

The steel was bendable enough for a catagory 5 hurrican style wind...But pay careful attention Grace...It was not designed to withstand a large object flying several hundreds of miles per hour impacting it's upper floors practically head-on.

In fact, the ONLY features that were added to withstand fire damage in the building was renovations done to put fire-proofing materials AROUND the outer frame supporters in the 70's, then again in the 80's when inspectors learned about asbestos poisoning. And that wasn't fool proof because if it's degraded, broken, damaged, or soaked enough, it will fall apart and away from the supports themselves...Which is what happened in this instance.

Again Grace, slowly so you can understand...The steel used was bendable steel...Not high heat, HARD steel. So it's 'melting' points are much lower then the type of steel you THOUGHT it was made with. Hard steel couldn't be used in the upper floors that would be affected by the wind stresses, because it snaps in high winds over buildings over 20 stories unless there's surrounding buildings at the same height nearby, to break the wind's stress paths. So pliable steel is used in the floors above the 20 story mark...

That's why the pictures of the portions left of the buildings? Show bent steel still standing at the centerpoints of the buildings...Those lower portions were hard steel...But not strong enough to support the whole of the building when it collasped...Hence bent to near unrecognition. Fire didn't melt them or bring those portions down...But all the material attached to them did come off because the weight of the top falling in sheared them off of the hard steel as well as bend that steel inwards towards the collasp and fall hole.

As the films and pictures showed that day, the planes literally cut through the buildings like hot knives through butter. And that's what that building was that day, because it wasn't designed to be sliced through by large, highspeed near solid objects.

"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"


This is a fact, so to keep arguing that the fire could have weakened the steel is fruitless. Knowing that, if it was the force of the planes cutting through the steel that dropped them, it wouldnt have taken over a hour for them to fall. The steel was designed like a screen, when those planes hit, it was like pushing a thick pencile through a screen, the rest of the steel was intact.

ROTFLMAOL!!! Grace, you're describing the lower floor steel...The UPPER steel framing was 18 inch WIDE H-Frame flexible steel. A much lighter and less fire-resistant steel.

And it wasn't like 'a pencil pushed through a screen'...In fact, before the towers fell, everyone could clearly see the huge RIPS into the buildings the planes had made...In fact, the plane had practically cut completely through one complete side of the one building, where only 3 corners weren't torn from the impact and the other building had 2 corners greatly damaged, leaving only 2 support corners intact. That doesn't include all the complete destruction of the frames inbetween those corner struts and halfway into the other side of the one building...

The weight of 30+ floors above that tear were already weakening the framing...Despite the fact that they used a lighter steel because of the concrete and glass weight added into it...Then the fires that were started below and above those tear points adding to it's destruction.

Extreme damage to the 18 inch standard H-frame (by standard, that means it's approximately only 4 inches thick along the H-frame shape) steel framing.

No where near the 'thick, fire-resistant heavy steel' frame work you cling to, that was used on the ground levels only and were the only thing that survived the towers falling, except for being bent inwards and missing their siding....Which incidentally was built IN and above the level of the fall hole, of which the towers themselves were set several IN feet and UP with the more wind resistant, lighter flexible steel.

And that darling, is where your conspiracy people get you to fall for their 'story'...They tell you the building material used on the lower floors giving you the impression that it was used throughout the building, not informing you about the other materials used to build ABOVE that level...They HAD to use a lighter steel that would allow to build that high as well as ensure the structure itself could withstand high wind speeds.

Like I said Grace...You're talking about something you really don't know a thing about, except for what the conspiracy creators have led you to believe about it.

"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."


Looks more than obvious that he isnt talking about the lower level steel. He is striaght saying where the fire was, the steel couldnt have weakened or melted the structure. That it in fact had been tested in 2000 degree temps for several hours. The exact steel that supossedly melted from a lesser degree fire.

And now I find out that the Goverment refuses to release any blue prints on the WTC's. Cant even get them through freedom of information act. Go figure.

I suppose you do realize that Kevin Ryan's former job at Underwriters Laboratories had nothing to do with testing steel, right?

He was involved with testing water for Underwriters Laboratories.

And, here is a statement made be Underwriters Laboratories concerning Kevin Ryan:

"On Nov. 11, 2004, a letter from Kevin Ryan, a former employee of Underwriters Laboratories Inc., addressed to the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST), was posted on a Web site called the 9-11 Visibility Project (www.septembereleventh.org: 9-11 Visibility Project). In the letter, Mr. Ryan speculated on the causes of the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.

Mr. Ryan wrote the letter without UL's knowledge or authorization. Mr. Ryan was neither qualified nor authorized to speak on UL's behalf regarding this issue. The opinions he expressed in the letter are his own and do not reflect those of Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

UL's Fire Protection Division has assisted NIST in its investigations regarding the collapse of the WTC towers. However, Mr. Ryan was not involved in that work and was not associated in any way with UL's Fire Protection Division, which conducted testing at NIST's request. Rather, Mr. Ryan was employed in UL's water testing business, Environmental Health Laboratory, in South Bend, Indiana.

Underwriters Laboratories Inc. fully supports NIST's ongoing efforts to investigate the WTC tragedy. We regret any confusion that Mr. Ryan's letter has caused 9/11 survivors, victims' families and their friends."

911truth.org ::::: UL's Letter Disowning Ryan and 911Truth's Response


And, here is a critique of Kevin Ryan's statements:

Loose Change 2nd Edition Viewer Guide

(You will have to scroll down a bit to get to the section concerning Kevin Ryan.)

Actually, steel components are not, technically speaking, "certified" in the US.

Rather, steel assemblies are tested by procedures, such as ASTM E 119, that determine the fire ratings for such assemblies.

And the assemblies that are tested in these types of tests include fire protective coatings that are meant to prolong the amount of time such assemblies can withstand a certain temperature fire before they reach a minimum set of performance characteristics (i.e. - internal stresses, deflections, etc.) that are laid out by various building, fire, and civil engineering-related codes.

And, in my professional opinion, being that I am an engineer with a mechanical and civil engineering background, anyone who claims that the strength of structural steel is not a function of temperature is rather, well, ignorant.

Also, people, the towers were built in the 1970's long before Al Qaeda was formed, and before Bin Laden became the world's number one bad boy. I do not know how tough steel is now compared to when it was used in the 1970's. But I suspect it is all the same.

Where I work on my second job: look at all the steel used to construct the ballpark that the San Diego Padres play.

Imagine being inside a volcano in Kilauea, Hawaii and not places like Mt. St. Helens. The lava oozes from the volcano and goes into the ocean not far away, making new land. That lava is hot enough to melt the steel anywhere.

Had any of you gone inside a steel mill? It is probably the world's hottest and dirtiest job, but someone's got to do it.

Bethlehem Steel, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 2001

Bethlehem Steel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

PA RUST BELT

The Steel Mill


My company did business with Bethlehem Steel back in the 1980's and 1990's. We sold them units for whatever applications they were used for.

When the terrorists flew the planes into the towers, the fuel tanks of the jetliners were close to full, and they were like bombs themselves. The buildings never stood a chance. And I doubt that even if the WTC towers were built today, it still would not withstand another terrorist fly-in.

And Ali is right: the steel used were built to withstand the winds. Who would have ever thought that the terrorists would fly into them?

It is sad that if anybody was among the crowd leaving the parking garages at Logan and JFK airports, they would see the terrorists walking together, and join up with the others inside the terminal. I only wish that any passengers could have thought that something was going to happen just by looking at the terrorists' faces.

AP: Part of the reason I disbelieve your statement that these people don't believe what they're saying is because of your misinformation regarding specifics like this. You seem to be saying that if people visit these sites, the owners of the site gets paid money from their "host" (ISP, I assume). Because these ISP's are paying these sites, other people's internet costs go up. This makes absolutely no sense. ISP's don't pay sites for getting visitors to go to the site. There's no incentive to do so. The only paying method that I've seen, and I haven't seen everything, is where you get paid based on clicking ads.
If this is the kind of information you gleaned from the show, I'm doubting the show's basis in fact or your particular interpretation of what you saw.