9/11: Re-examining the 3 WTC high-rise 'collapses'
AIA Logo

  aeHome  ·  Announcements  ·  Speaking Engagements  ·  Join Us  ·  Help Us!  ·  Discussion Forum  ·  WTC 7  ·  Twin Towers  ·  Blueprints  ·  Online Store
    Press  ·  Web Resources  ·  Contact Us  ·  About Us  ·  Tributes  ·  Members  ·  What Can I Do?  ·  Downloads

New DVD!

The AE911Truth PowerPoint multimedia slide presentation!

    • Proceed at your own pace!
9/11: Re-examining the 3 WTC High-rise Building "Collapses"
Richard Gage, AIA

Richard_Gage NEW!
How the towers fell
Richard Gage, AIA

Parts I & II – "WTC Building #7 and Twin Towers – Controlled Demolitions?"
(2 hours)
Part I: "WTC Building #7 – A controlled demolition?" (45 min.)
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
University of Manitoba


9/11 Blueprint: The Architecture of Destruction
September 5, 2007
Interview with Bay Area architect Richard Gage, AIA, about the organization he has formed, "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth". Outreach to architects and engineers; presentations to the public and to professionals; the physical evidence of controlled demolition of the World Trade Center twin towers and building seven.

We The People Radio Network,
Carol Brouillet Interviews
Architect Richard Gage, AIA
June 11, 2007

Truth Revolution Radio
Architect Richard Gage, AIA
May 14, 2007

Video:  WTC 2 Explodes

Video:  WTC Twin Tower Core Column Animation

Video:  Reading Grain House Top Demolition, Feb. 28, 1999

Take an Engineer to Lunch!

Technical Articles

Direct Evidence for Explosions: Flying Projectiles and Widespread Impact Damage
Dr. Crockett Grabbe

Lies about the WTC by NIST and Underwriters Laboratories
Kevin Ryan - U.L. whistleblower - former Site Manager

Physical Chemistry of Thermite, Thermate, Iron-Alum-Rich Microspheres at Demise of WTC 1 & 2
Jerry Lobdill 6/15/2007

The Destruction of WTC 7
Vesa Raiskila

The NIST WTC Investigation -- How Real Was The Simulation?
Eric Douglas, Architect

Revisiting 9/11/2001 -- Applying the Scientific Method
Prof. Steven E. Jones, Ph.D., Physics

by Gordon Ross, ME [1], June 4, 2007*

Open Letter to Purdue President France Córdova
Kevin Ryan, B.S. Chem.

Jones vs. Robertson: A Physicist and a Structural Engineer Debate the Controlled Demolition of the World Trade Center
Gregg Roberts, Associate Editor, 911Research.com

Another Structural Engineer Questions WTC Collapses
William Rice, P.E.

Can Physics Rewrite History?
Chuck Thurston

Jim Hoffman

NIST's World Trade Center FAQ: A Reply to the National Institute for Standards and Technology's Answers to Frequently Asked Questions
Jim Hoffman

Building a Better Mirage NIST's 3-Year $20,000,000 Cover-Up of the Crime of the Century
Jim Hoffman

The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True
David Ray Griffin

Another reason the 9/11 fire-mediated collapse theory is wrong
Joseph Smith

Popular Mechanics' Assault on 9/11 Truth
Jim Hoffman

Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?
Dr. Steven E. Jones

Proof That The Thermal and Gravitational Energy Available Were Insufficient to Melt Steel in the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade Center on 9/11/01
Terry Morrone

Report on Weidlinger Simulation
Leaked WTC Blueprints contain 3D simulations from the Weidlinger report that contradict the NIST repoort of the Twin Tower's destruction

Engineering News Record: The World Trade Center

Bad Science: Keith Seffen And The WTC 'Collapse'
Winter Patriot blog 9/14/07

UK Engineer: WTC 'Collapses' Were 'A Very Ordinary Thing'
Winter Patriot blog 9/11/07

My Response to Ryan Mackey and the Self-Crushing Building Theory, "On Debunking 9/11 Debunking"
by Chuck Thurston

More Technical Articles...

Web Resources

9-11 Research
Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice
The Journal of 9/11 Studies
9/11 Blogger
Patriots Question 9/11 –
    The Architects & Engineers

9-11 Commission Report
Kevin Ryan - U.L. Whistleblower
More Links...



Info Item

Jun 4, 2007  
Charles Pegelow, BS CE – Civil Engineer with more than 25 years experience in structural design questions the official account of the events of 9/11

Charles Pegelow, BS CE – Civil Engineer with more than 25 years experience in structural design and analysis and project management of construction of major projects, including large steel structures.
Essay 9/25/06: "The FEMA / Kean Commission Report was a flawed investigation. ...

In addition to the firemen calling the Commission a cover up, there are the victim's family organizations that are saying the same thing.

Comments on Some of NIST's FAQs
by Charles Pegelow

As an introduction: The FEMA / Kean Commission Report was a flawed investigation. The most important tool of any criminal investigators is the eyewitness and first responder accounts; if for no other reason, they were there at the scene. For example, the first thing the police do at an accident scene is to gather all witness accounts and within a week the insurance companies are also telephoning the witnesses to take their testimony. In addition to the NYFD, the NYPD also had reported finding a suspicious device and another report stated than they thought a van in the basement of WTC1 had exploded with a bomb.

In addition to the firemen calling the Commission a cover up, there are the victim's family organizations that are saying the same thing.

To give you some perspective on what a comprehensive, thorough, scientific investigation looks like, please recall the Space Shuttle Columbia accident. Although there may remain minor questions concerning some of the periphery conclusions, the report, on the whole, stands without major dispute within the scientific community. Contrast this with the FEMA 9/11 report and its major inconsistencies.

The commission did gather many experts but did not provide them with the full information they needed. FEMA hampered and distorted the investigation of the professionals they hired. For example,

Mr. Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl stated before the Committee on Science of the U.S. House of Representatives 6 March 2002 Hearing: FEMA did not provide "videotapes and photographs taken on 9/11 and the following days and copies of the engineering drawings. At this time, having the videotapes, photographs and copies of the drawings not only is useful, but also is essential in enabling us to conduct any analysis of the collapse and to formulate conclusions from our effort";

the same story of hampering investigations comes from other scientists and engineers, see Learning from 9/11: Understanding the Collapse of the World Trade Center.

on 26 October 2004 An alliance of 100 prominent Americans and 40 family members of those killed on 9/11 Respected Leaders and Families Launch 9/11 Truth Statement Demanding Deeper Investigation into the Events of 9/11.

In conclusion, FEMA / Kean Commission Report was a flawed investigation and it needs to be reopened.

An open, independent of the Federal Government, public inquiry into the attacks should be set up under an independent judicial body with power to subpoena evidence.

1. If the World Trade Center (WTC) towers were designed to withstand multiple impacts by Boeing 707 aircraft, why did the impact of individual 767s cause so much damage? Here it is instructive to consider the concept of global vs. local damage. From the standpoint of global collapse, that is, evidence that overturns [the official account]is easy to show because it revolves about (a) resistance of the columns to overstressed conditions and (b) the impact shear was less than the designed wind condition. We also have the following statements about the original design:

The Richard Roth Telegram: According to the calculations of engineers, who worked on the Towers' design, all the columns on one side of a Tower could be cut, as well as the two corners and some of the columns on each adjacent side, and the building would still be strong enough to withstand a 100-mile-per-hour wind.

According to Hyman Brown, a University of Colorado civil engineering professor and the World Trade Center's construction manager: "meaning that more than nine-tenths of the columns at the same level would have to fail before the weight of the top could have overcome the support capacity of the remaining columns". See Towers' Design Parameters.

According to Matthys Levy (chairman of Weidlinger Assoc) who did independent computer structural analysis study for Larry Silverman (and also had a set of the drawings); states: (a) the failure of the trusses did not cause the tower collapse, (b) the fires did not lead to floor collapses, (c) fire temperatures were lower than typical office fires, and (d) "to create the vertical collapses that we saw in the Twin Towers all of the 47 very large columns that comprised the core had to fail at the same instant" What failed, when and how?.

At this point we are left with only one question: How could "all 47 core columns fail at the same instance"? Fires could not do that. This was not addressed in FEMA's report.

From the standpoint of local design, we do not have any verifiable information from the 1968 design. However, we note that:

The airplanes initial impact column damage (FEMA WTC Building Performance Study Chapter 2). Perimeter columns 31/36WTC1 & 27/32WTC2 perimeter columns were destroyed, and WTC1 & WTC2 core columns were destroyed).

We, off course could expect substantial local damage under the circumstances, but FEMA is attempting to prove the truss theory, the pancake collapse, the truss bolts theory, and so on along with fires as a reasonable collapse theory for the core columns. This is about as reasonable if I told you that you could cut some branches on a tree and the whole tree would fall down. Sorry, the real world doesn't work that way.

2. Why did NIST not consider a "controlled demolition" hypothesis with matching computer modeling and explanation as it did for the "pancake theory" hypothesis? A key critique of NIST's work lies in the complete lack of analysis supporting a "progressive collapse" after the point of collapse initiation and the lack of consideration given to a controlled demolition hypothesis.

3. How could the WTC towers have collapsed without a controlled demolition since no steel-frame, high-rise buildings have ever before or since been brought down due to fires? Temperatures due to fire don't get hot enough for buildings to collapse.

4. Weren't the puffs of smoke that were seen, as the collapse of each WTC tower starts, evidence of controlled demolition explosions?

5. Why were two distinct spikes--one for each tower--seen in seismic records before the towers collapsed? Isn't this indicative of an explosion occurring in each tower?

6. How could the WTC towers collapse in only 11 seconds (WTC 1) and 9 seconds (WTC 2)--speeds that approximate that of a ball dropped from similar height in a vacuum (with no air resistance)?

7a. How could the steel have melted if the fires in the WTC towers weren't hot enough to do so?


7b. Since the melting point of steel is about 2,700 degrees Fahrenheit, the temperature of jet fuel fires does not exceed 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit and Underwriters Laboratories (UL) certified the steel in the WTC towers to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit for six hours, how could fires have impacted the steel enough to bring down the WTC towers?

The February 13, 1975 WTC1 North Tower Fire. The 1975 fire was more intense than the 9/11 fires is evident from the fact that it caused the 11th floor east side windows to break and flames could be seen pouring from these broken windows. This indicates a temperature greater than 700°C. In the 9/11 fires the windows were not broken by the heat (only by the aircraft impact) indicating a temperature below 700°C. < http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ wtc_1975_fire.html> lists NY Times articles.

8. We know that the sprinkler systems were activated because survivors reported water in the stairwells. If the sprinklers were working, how could there be a 'raging inferno' in the WTC towers?

9. If thick black smoke is characteristic of an oxygen-starved, lower temperature, less intense fire, why was thick black smoke exiting the WTC towers when the fires inside were supposed to be extremely hot?

Smoke impedes radiant heat flux to surrounding surfaces.

10. Why were people seen in the gaps left by the plane impacts if the heat from the fires behind them was so excessive?

Open flames produce direct, radiant, and infrared heat. Both radiant and infrared heat are blocked by smoke and solid objects. A reconstruction of the arrangement of the room (on paper if not in actual fact) is critical to this assessment. This may be done by witness statements, physical remains, burn indicators, or pre-fire photos or even videos. Stoll Curve - A plot of thermal energy and time predicted to cause a pain sensation, or a second degree burn, in human tissue. *As defined by the American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) in Standard F1002

11. Why do some photographs show a yellow stream of molten metal pouring down the side of WTC2 that NIST claims was aluminum from the crashed plane although aluminum burns with a white glow?

12. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? The combination of thermite and sulfur (called thermate) "slices through steel like a hot knife through butter."

13. Why did the NIST investigation not consider reports of molten steel in the wreckage from the WTC towers?

14. Why is the NIST investigation of the collapse of WTC 7 (the 47-story office building that collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001, hours after the towers) taking so long to complete? Is a controlled demolition hypothesis being considered to explain the collapse?

Resume: http://www.911blogger.com/node/2257

Take an Architect or Engineer to Lunch!

North Tower

View North Tower Blueprints
  aeHome  ·  Announcements  ·  Speaking Engagements  ·  Join Us  ·  Help Us!  ·  Discussion Forum  ·  WTC 7  ·  Twin Towers  ·  Blueprints  ·  Online Store
    Press  ·  Web Resources  ·  Contact Us  ·  About Us  ·  Tributes  ·  Members  ·  What Can I Do?  ·  Downloads
  Copyright © 2007 by ae911truth.org — All Rights Reserved    ·   Contact the Webmaster    ·   This page has been accessed 3342 times.