What ..huh? Thats not molten metal, its water from the firefighters in that picture, also, the main beam is not twisted or bent and did not come crashing down, your pic plainly shows the road laying over the top of it. The large pillar is made of concrete and when concrete gets heated it tends to start to flake off and then disintegrate. the beams used in that bridge are about 1/10 the size of the beams in the towers. Using a bridge as your basis of argument is again like comparing apples and screwdrivers, find a steel skyscraper that burnt and fell down, you can't because its only happened 3 times EVER, and coincidentally all on the same day and at the same place. I can show you lots of pics of burnt skyscrapers that DON"T fall and have already. Oh and having a pilots license I can very much tell you that in airspace that is as congested as New York you definitely have to follow a flight plan and can barely go off that plan before the tower will call you on it and demand you get back into your designated path, You don't get to just fly anywhere, YOU MUST follow your flight plan and the towers instructions, there is no other way or they call the authorities. You have to ask for permission to do anything not on your plan.

bryant228. You are certainly NOT an engineer of any caliber or perhaps your just not a structural engineer but an electrical or service engineer, Custodial perhaps?. If the weight was a factor then the towers should have collapsed before they were even finished being built, Because the weight of the plane was certainly well within the structural limits. it sounds to me like your saying that the towers somehow miraculously by god became some 1000 million tons heavier, cuz any real engineer could tell you that they way overbuild skyscrapers so they dont just come falling down when the wind blows. And these buildings were DESIGNED to be hit MULTIPLE times by Large passenger Airplanes. Sorry weight certainly had nothing at all to do with this. As an engineer you would also know that burning jet fuel cannot soften or melt steel, its just not hot enough. And for those of you who think jet fuel is volatile and explosive, your WRONG, I can throw lit cigarettes into a pool of jet A and have a VERY good chance that nothing would happen , the cig would be put out by the fuel without ever lighting its just not a very volatile fuel like gasoline or alcohol. Takes a lot of compression and heat to get it to ignite, like diesel fuel but even less refined. Real life isn't Hollywood Make Believe. In Die Hard 2 he lit the trail of jet fuel and make the plane blow up in mid air, An impossibility if there ever was one. I see on CSI all the time where they take some crappy ATM picture and blow it up and their special picture computer extapolates the data and is able to magnify a pixel of information to provide them with the proof of a license plate reflected in the window of the store across the street, HA HA HA HA there is no such computer that is able to do that, its impossible . ATM cameras are digital and 1 pixel of info is 1 pixel of info, not 100, 000 more when magnified. Or how about when a car goes off the cliff and explodes on impact, another HOLLYWOOD moment and still people believe those things happen. Drive 1000 cars off a cliff and my money is on none of them blowing up. Yet people actually believe their car will blow up if it went off, people are easy to pull the wool over their eyes and get them to believe ANYTHING if done correctly. You can even get people to believe that Steel ( not steel reinforced ) Skyscrapers burn so hot they disintegrate in midair and collapse in fairly nice heaps of steel and concrete.

The towers were closed for 2 weeks prior to this happening, only maintenance personnel were allowed inside. this was all under the guise of computer and electrical updates, you can look that fact up, so plenty of time to install the things needed for this to happen.

__________________
It is far easier to ignorantly control others than it is to wisely control yourself.

Oh... so you are a pilot. Why didn't you correct your friend when he made so many erroneous statements about FAA and NORAD procedures? I guess truth only matters when it serves you.

You aren't even REQUIRED to file a flight plan unless you are IFR or flying in air defense zones. They do NOT call in jets if you are off your flight plan. No. They exhaust every effort to contact you, and unless something else is wrong, you get a pilot deviation report when you land. That's it.

You guys smoke too much dope. I have pictures of both beams with people next to them for scale. Actually look at the pictures. Also... for the 3rd time, my point does not concern the WTC. My argument concerns the "fire wont melt steel" argument. I really don't require you guys to know where I am going before I get there. It is a yes or no question. Not concerning WTC... concerning physics... metallurgy.

This is also not folded concrete or water... it is a series of 6 bent i-beams at LEAST the size of the WTC beams. WTC beams were 22" x 54". See attachment below other images.

Attached Images

fold.jpg (143.2 KB, 4 views)

Guys, anything is possible. They teach you that in school. Thats what engineers do, do the impossible. I've done this before, and swore I wouldn't get sucked into these kind of debates. Your just talking about things you found on the internet, lol, and comparing things to CSI. You have no professional back ground on these matters. I assure you, metal can heat up. When that happens, it weakens the integrity of the steel. That, combined with the added weight of the upper floors crashing down, it's a wonder the buildings stood so long. Do you have any sort of building background? When constructed uniformly, yes, it's not going to come down. A plane slamming into the side of it and taking out almost half of the structural columns. That changes things.

Ok, let me just ask this final question and I'll leave it at that. Why is it so impossible to believe that 9 radical Islamic men could do this? Why is that so hard to believe?

This is getting too heated. Seriously, good luck with your theories. This is a pot forum after all. I mean no ill will to anyone. Like you, I am passionate in what I believe in. Maybe too passionate. Thats why I have tried to stay away from these arguments.

Your right, I'm not an engineer exactly. I'm an architect. Structural engineering is my primary job at my firm (if I still have a job in few months with the sucky economy). These are the things that i see. Aparently you see them differently.

__________________
http://www.rollitup.org/grow-room-de...struction.html

Once again you prove my point ... in the picture you took from this thread you can clearly see the cut metal and the molten iron ... and there are way more steel beams in those buildings than the section of bridge that collapsed ... so you just shot yourself in the foot and as far as the other picture looks to me it from an idiot that doesn't know what he's talking about.


And what part of ... this thread is about 911 don't you understand? I still answered your question in my last post. You seem to want to harp on the same points that prove nothing.

Rebar is a hell of a lot smaller that the fireproofed steel in the WTC ... or any skyscaper ... what part of that don't you get? ... and the point is the whole bridge didn't collapse upon itself like those towers ... the bridge only buckled where the fire was unlike the WTC were the fires were on the upper floors ... yet the buildings fell starting from the bottom. So your bridge theory is bullshit.

]
Yeah ... and the whole massive structure didn't collapse now did it ... so again you are doing nothing more than blowing it out.

__________________
Our Beautiful Ladies ...
Keep Them Safe Keep Them SECRET!
911 ... inside job!

After making a statement like this I have serious doubts about you being an engineer ... it would also explain why you didn't address the 7 min video ...

Strong enough to do what it is design to do ...

If that were true ... other skyscrapers would have come crashing down yet none have ... why is that?

They had opportunity to do that through the guise of "construction" ... no one in the building would be the wiser ... since construction goes on all the time in the big cities ...

We already establish they didn't do this on the fly ...

Real hard with 3 skyscrapers design to withstand fire and plane impact can come crashing down in matter of seconds in it's own footprint only after burning for less than two hours ... no way is all that fire proof steel going to come crashing down on itself ... there is no why you can convince me of that. With all the lies the high members of government have told and all the crimes they have committed ... hell yeah it's real hard to believe the official bullshit. Especially since they refuse to have a real investigation ... now that is a dead give a way.

the RIU poll was one of many that have been done and all of them shows that the majority of the people don't buy the bullshit government story ... there are plenty of other polls in this thread showing we are the majority ...

Work in construction for 20 years now ... and yes I've worked on skyscappers ... that's how I know that steel is sprayed with fireproofing material.

What makes you think I haven't done anything about it besides sit in front of my computer? Nuff said ...

Folks I'm getting pretty tired of these blow hards ignoring the facts ... so what I'm going to do is put up the transcript for Gage and Goyette ... to further slam them with the facts. Look for my next post.

__________________
Our Beautiful Ladies ...
Keep Them Safe Keep Them SECRET!
911 ... inside job!

Grow Rebel FOR THE WIN.......
.....................SWOOSH !

__________________
"The Cruelest Trick Came From The Talibans, Who Allowed Plenty Of Drugs And Then Banned Music."
"Rarely is the question asked: is our children learning"- G.W.B.

Gage does ... you know that guy you won't address.

No way are you an engineer ... no way ... not with this statement.

Look for my post on Gage and Goyette folks ...

__________________
Our Beautiful Ladies ...
Keep Them Safe Keep Them SECRET!
911 ... inside job!

Kopi Sotiropulos: Well first of all give us a little bit more about your background.
Gage: I’m an architect of twenty years, a member of the American Institute of Architects, and have been studying steel frame fire proof buildings for about that long.
Kim Stephens: We ask that for clarification because as we get into this we want people to make sure that you’re not just somebody with a wacky idea, you come with some science to you. What is the official reason for the collapse of the World Trade Center towers?
Gage: Well we’re told that the planes hit the buildings, and there was an explosion and a fire, and about a hour and a half later, in the case of the north tower, the buildings collapsed due to structural weakening, due to the fires. The problem is that we don’t have large gradual deformations associated with collapses. And fires in high rises have never brought down a steel frame high rise building at all, ever. And what we have, unfortunately, is the evidence in the twin towers and the third skyscraper to collapse that day, which most people don’t know anything about it. We have the evidence of the ten key features of controlled demolition. In the case of building seven, it collapses straight down into its own footprint, at free fall speed, in the first hundred feet. It’s dropping, as you can see symmetrically, smoothly, at free fall speed, in the first hundred feet. Two and a half seconds. This is uncanny, there’s forty thousand tons of structural steel designed to resist this collapse.
Kim Stephens: So, what, a forty-seven story building?
Gage: Yeah, it’s called Building Seven, a football field away from the Twin Towers.
Kim Stephens: Okay, so what we’re showing is left, what happened in fact, and right is controlled, where you are using or the people who made this happen, used demolition, explosive devices.
Gage: Indeed, this a direct comparison. You can see that indeed, almost freefall speed, freefall acceleration, through forty thousand tons of structural steel. That is uncanny. So we have 700 architects and engineers demanding a new investigation as a result of this evidence and the evidence in the World Trade Center that is very explosive. Almost every architect and engineer we’ve showed this information to, agrees with us that these are controlled demolitions. If we can get them to look at the information, because obviously the implications of a controlled demolition are…dark for our country. Because that means somebody besides Al Qaeda was involved. Because these have to be easily, three of the most highly secure buildings, outside of the Pentagon.
Kopi Sotiropulos: Now if that was a controlled demolition, would there not be any evidence at the ground level of explosives within the debris that’s left?
Gage: Indeed. And what we find down there is pools of molten iron. Several tons.
Kopi Sotiropulos: What is that doing there?
Gage: Exactly, what is it doing there? The first responders see it, the structural engineers see it, it’s documented by FEMA. The melting of steel. Normal office fires is what’s supposed to have brought these buildings down. Along with jet plane impacts. Jet fuel and office fires don’t produce molten iron or molten steel. It doesn’t begin to melt until three thousand degrees. But what we have is, the fires only produce maybe fourteen, sixteen hundred degrees. So what produced all that molten iron? Well, it has in it the chemical evidence of a special incendiary, which is thermite, a high tech incendiary used to cut through steel like a hot knife through butter.
Kim Stephens: You found that?
Gage: Indeed, in all the dust throughout lower Manhattan, we have a four to six inch thick layer of this dust, and throughout it we have evidence of tiny spheres, billions of them, several tons of previously molten iron. Well how does that happen? If you have molten iron…the by-product of thermite is molten iron and it’s dispersed through out all this dust.
Kopi Sotiropulos: You were allowed to go in and get samples and examine it?
Gage: Oh, there’s plenty of dust. A lot of people have this dust, and four of these samples have been sent to physicist Steven Jones, formerly of Brigham Young University. And they find in it, not only these spheres, which others have found too, USGS, RJ Lee, doing toxicology studies. These spheres have iron, aluminum, fluorine, manganese, very unusual elements associated only with thermite. And there are small chips of unignited thermite as well. This is very high-tech thermite, nano-thermite, it’s not found in a cave in Afghanistan, it’s produced in very sophisticated defense department contracting laboratories.
Kim Stephens: Okay, well, we have an enemy here, we...the finger has been pointed to, this was the work of Al Qaeda, this was the work of Osama bin Laden, at least to get the planes all going into the buildings and into the field in Pennsylvania and into the Pentagon. Is there no way that they then could still be the enemy that placed those in the buildings first, and then did the incendiary device via a plane second?
Gage: Right. Well, what you have to ask is who had access to the buildings? Did Al Qaeda have access to these highly secure buildings? Probably not. Did they have access to sophisticated nano-thermite, where the particles are one thousand times smaller than a human hair? Probably not. Somebody else has to be investigated. That’s why we have 700 architects and engineers demanding a real investigation. We don’t have the whole theory as to how this happened, who did it, why. We just lay out the facts, like we did last night in the Veterans Memorial Auditorium, and we demand a real investigation, and they’ll find out who, why, how, et cetera.
Kopi Sotiropulos: Now let me ask you, I’m person X, I want to place something in one of those buildings. Where would I carry it, how big would it be? Is it that visible that I would be spotted by security? Or could I place it in one of my tooth fillings?
Gage: We’re talking about several tons of nano-thermite and ordinary thermite. One would have to have access through security. So the security company involved for the World Trade Center should be thoroughly investigated. And it turns out to be Securi-com, Stratesec, somebody should look to see who’s on the board of those companies. Some very interesting individuals turn out to be. In addition, one would have to have the cover, of say, an elevator modernization, which was in fact going on nine months prior to 9/11, so that there were workers throughout the World Trade Center, that had access to the hoistway which is immediately adjacent to the core columns and beams in the building.
Kim Stephens: You’re not trying to freak out the country, but you can’t help but feel a little freaked out by this.
Gage: Yeah, you’re getting it.
Kim Stephens: Yeah. And of course this is something we want to talk with you about a whole lot more, and we’re out of time. But we do have a great deal of information on our website, kmph.com. Thank you very much for your time today.



So here you are folks ... Gage's interview with a local SF station ... but the way the station was overwhelmed with people thanking them for air that interview ... so much so they had to ask the people to stop emailing because it was preventing them from checking their email for other stories ...

So tell us where Gage is lying? Bet you can't. Tell us that he doesn't know what he's talking about and why ... bet you can't.


Okay ... I will check out Goyette's interview with the shill from PM.

__________________
Our Beautiful Ladies ...
Keep Them Safe Keep Them SECRET!
911 ... inside job!

Topic: 9/11 Facts and Myths

CG: Is there information that has not been given to the public?
PM: Very little…there is very little that has been held back as far as the basic facts of what happened that morning in terms of the material we looked into.
CG: I was under the impression that there were a lot of facts that were withheld. I mean, the surveillance videos, for example, around the Pentagon we were told about: a hotel video, a convenience store video, we haven’t seen those. Apparently they were swooped up very quickly or so the report goes.
PM: That is the case, those have been taken for larger criminal investigations those are now being disclosed to the public, you know with the Judicial Watch material…
CG: I’ve talked with the guys at Judicial Watch, and they’re not very happy about it, they released like four frames that don’t really show much of anything.
PM: They don’t show very much considering that the frame rate was one frame per second and the plane Flight 77 was moving about 780 feet per second, from that distance it’s not surprising that there was not a whole lot caught on that video.
CG: Are you telling me that’s the only video?
PM: No, I suspect there are other videos, I suspect they’re still being used for various investigations.
CG: What the hell is there to investigate? They told us who the guys were, they held onto some of that stuff for the Moussaoui trial for the love of God, like it was really relevant to his trial (sarcastic), it’s five years later, when are the American people entitled to the evidence?
PM: I think there’s plenty of evidence out there…
CG: It’s not the evidence we’ve seen that we’re concerned about, it’s the evidence we haven’t seen. Does that make any sense?
PM: Oh sure it makes sense…. The evidence is abundant…
CG: It’s the dog that didn’t bark... We know the evidence we’ve seen, that doesn’t cause any suspicion so much as the evidence that we don’t see. It’s not helpful in this country with a very secretive government when a big, powerful magazine like you guys, who owns Popular Mechanics?
PM: “Hearst.”
CG: Ok, with Hearst Corporation, with all of your might, instead of joining the people in their natural curiosity to see all the evidence, you try to say, “Oh shut up, you peons don’t know what you’re talking about, everything’s fine, keep on moving, there’s nothing to see here.” Hearst should be using their influence to get all the evidence released and that will end all the conspiracy talk! Wouldn’t it?
PM: (does answer this question)
CG: …I want to come back to the unseen evidence – the dog that didn’t bark. Hearst has a lot of muscle – where are you in lobbying for the release of all the evidence to put an end to all this madness, speculation and distrust?..
PM: It’s not up to us…
CG: I said use your influence.. Look, is there something we don’t know about this that they have to hide from us? No, or so I presume. We’re told who did it, we’ve invaded two countries in response to it, we’ve spent billions of dollars, I mean, what could be possibly secretive right now?
PM: How can I answer the question?
CG: Because you don’t know, we just want to see the evidence. If the plane flew into the building, show us the damn pictures. What could that possibly hurt?
PM: (Cannot answer question)
CG: …Building 7 is the first piece of evidence that I turn to. Popular Mechanics…say that a third of the face, approximately 25% of the depth of the building that was scooped out beforehand.
PM: When the North Tower collapsed… there was damage to Building 7…. What we found out was…about 25% of the building’s south face had been carved away from it… Each column that you remove that was destroyed by the wreckage from the North Tower…
CG: That would be very persuasive to me if it were true. And it may or may not be true… I go, oh that’s interesting…if that’s true that would go a long way towards explaining what happened to Building 7. So I turn to the pictures in your book about Building 7 you’ve got a picture of Building 7, but it doesn’t show that. So I’m going, OK, instead of just somebody asserting that a third of the building was scooped away, show me the picture. But you don’t show me the picture.
PM: …We have seen pictures that are property of the NY Police Department and various other governmental agencies that we were not given permission to disseminate….
CG: Popular Mechanics got to see them, but the average American citizen can’t see them.
PM: Correct.
CG: Well, that’s a fine kettle of fish, isn’t it? ….What did you see there that I can’t see?
PM: Just what was described.
CG: Well it must be something that’s dangerous for me as an American citizen or a voter to see. You’re publishers, if anybody is concerned about evidence in a criminal case or something, they’ve done the worst possible thing, they’ve shown it to a damn magazine publisher!
PM: That was done for the purposes of our background research.
CG: What about my background research? Do you see the source of my frustration here? I didn’t know we had different classes of citizens. You can’t tell me it’s because it’s a criminal case because they’ve shown it to a damn magazine publisher.
PM: ….I can’t answer that question.
CG: I know you can’t.
PM: (is speechless)….
…Caller (Mike): What about the 7 to 9 hijackers that were reported in the British press who came forward and said, “We’re alive, what are we doing on the FBI list of so-called hijackers? We’re alive and well.” How do you explain that one?
PM: It was one BBC report – I am saying that is false.
Caller: How did you verify that the British story was false?
PM: The remains of the hijackers who have been widely understood to have been on those planes…
Caller: What remains?
PM: There was DNA evidence collected all over the place.
Caller: The building was incinerated; the concrete was turned into powder, there were molten pools of steel in the bottom of the building that were still hot weeks after, and they were able do autopsies on bodies? Are you insane? Where are the autopsy reports you were referring to, on the hijackers, where are those reports? I haven’t heard anything about autopsy reports.
CG: I want to know, even if we presume you’re correct that they recovered the DNA of the 19 hijackers from the rubble, where did they get their original DNA with which to match it? Where did they get the original DNA of a bunch of middle-eastern Islamic madmen? Where did they get the DNA? Had they submitted DNA before they, uh…I mean, where the hell did they get it? You’re not even talking sensibly with me.
PM: Off the top of my head, I don’t know the answer to that.
CG: Of course you don’t.
PM: I’ll get back to you with it.
CG: Is that a promise?
PM: I will do my best.
CG: People all across the state of Arizona now are hearing Davin Coburn say on the show that he’s gonna find out how they got that DNA checked against those Islamic terrorists who had…hijacked those planes. Good, I’d like to hear it. Now do you understand why people scratch their head when these kinds of representations are made?
PM: No, actually I don’t…
CG: You don’t understand why when you tell us that they found the hijackers’ DNA remains amongst the molten steel, and I ask you where did they get the original DNA from the hijackers to match it against – Do you think that’s bizarre to ask a question like that, do you think it’s conspiratorial just to want to know?...You told me that they have DNA evidence that matches the hijackers…
PM: I think the entire question is baseless. I think that it is not even a question that’s worth answering….
CG: …You’ve told me that they checked their DNA, where did they get their original DNA to check it against? You’re the one with the answers, I’m not. I just ask questions.
PM: …A seven year old can ask why, over and over and over….
CG: No, this is the worst attack on America in the history of this country, we’ve invaded two countries, maybe a third because of it, we’re gonna spend trillions of dollars. It’s not a seven year old asking why, I want to know where they got the evidence that they matched it against. What’s so hard about that?
PM: The way that you’re framing it is intentionally…
CG: Of course it is, ‘cause it’s five years later and we haven’t heard the answer. And you haven’t given it to us in Popular Mechanics. I swear to God, that’s it. You see, it’s the way I’m framing it makes it an illegitimate question? Well tell me how to reframe it, tell me how to ask it differently.
PM: I would start entirely over with the question that that gentleman asked.
CG: I want the question I asked. All right, that’s it. Hey Daven, thanks…the Charles Goyette Show.

See how Coburn back tracked? He was blowing out like so many that push the government's bullshit story. Of course he never got back to him ... I wonder why?

__________________
Our Beautiful Ladies ...
Keep Them Safe Keep Them SECRET!
911 ... inside job!

So Popular Mechanics were in on it to lol

__________________