How Did They Fall? How Did They Not Fall?

1. How Did They Fall?How Did They Not Fall?

2. Introduction WTC 7 also “collapsed” due to “fire” and “gravity” on that day: It was not struck by aircraft

3. Introduction American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) study; Federal Emergency Management Agency Building Performance Assessment (FEMA BPA); 9/11 Commission and it’s Report; National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) WTC 1 and 2 study and report NIST WTC 7 study and report

4. Introduction Budget of 17.5 million dollars, Staff of hundreds 3 year study 10000 page final report NIST admits they do not know what caused global collapse of the Twin Towers.

5. Introduction N and S Towers • Historical Background • NIST vs Physical Evidence • Not addressed by NIST • Independent research (Steve Jones et al) • NIST vs the Engineering Community • Appendices

6. Some Historical Background Worthington, Skilling, Helle and Jackson structural engineering firm of record for the WTC tower construction 1966 - 1970 John Skilling and Leslie Robertson Principle engineers

7. Some Historical Background Steel framed reinforced high rise structures have never before or since 9/11 collapsed due to fire Hotel Mandarin  Madrid Spain Beijing

8. Some Historical Background Civilians, and over 100 FDNY firefighters reported explosions in the towers

9. Some Historical Background:Demolition Experts 2001: Bent Lund, Jens Claus Hansen, NATO General Keld Hillingsoe Hugo Bachmann Van Romero, Mark Taylor Van Romero later publicly recanted 2007: Danny Joewenko Confirms WTC7 CD

10. Some Historical Background

11. Some Historical Background$elling out the Investigation Bill Manning 2002 • Half baked farce • Destruction of evidence illegal (City of NY rapidly recycled 300,000 tons of steel from WTC)

12. NIST Analysis Based on “Descending block” scenario: Analysis only done up to image 4 Image 5 shows beginning of “global collapse”

13. NIST argument For global collapse There was no analysis only the NIST mantra: “The change in potential energy due to downward movement of building mass above the buckled columns exceeded the strain energy that could have been absorbed by the structure. Global collapse then ensued.”

14. NIST argument NIST mantra says fewer lighter floors above aircraft impact out-crushed the more numerous and more massive floors below I-Beams above 85th floor Square beams on lower floors

15. The biggest problem it turns out… There was no “upper block” Upper 34 floors of S. Tower begin to rotate Angular momentum would carry block away

16. South Tower Reality:Angular rotation stopsUpper block disintegrates in mid air

17. North Tower Reality:There was no “upper block” Floors above aircraft impact disintegrate while falling on the lower tower. Note the top of the “upper block” has fallen considerably, While the top of the “lower block” has moved very little

18. Kevin Ryan blows the whistle UL: Floor trusses: ASTM E 119 Subjected to 1000 deg. C for two hours With specified loading 35 ft trusses passed test NIST: No significant steel temperatures over 625 deg. C [steel conducts heat from source] NIST: floor trusses and columns weakened and collapsed on impact floors

19. N. Tower: Fuel burns up in 8 minutesS. Tower: More fuel burns outside Impact at 9:03

20. S. Tower reality: About 9:41 No hot fire

21. 911 Commision Report notes: “Lost Tape”radio transmissions: Battalion Chief Orio Palmer reached the impact floors in the South tower, seconds before it fell, His men only saw a few small pockets of fire, and thought they had the situation under control S. Tower Reality: Internal fires not severe

22. Perimeter 47 Core NIST: loads on perimeter columns ENR: loads on perimeter columns

23. Structural damage Abdolhasan Astaneh Asl, NSF Grant "The impact did nothing to this building."

24. NIST simulation of aircraft damage to S Tower

25. Not addressed by NIST WTC1, 2 , and 7 fell at close to free fall speed Implies lower floors offered little resistance Removal of core columns could cause this

26. Not addressed by NIST • N Tower antenna seems to move downward • No façade motion • Noted by FEMA and NYT • Suggests core columns severed • NIST calls motion “lateral” with no analysis

27. Not addressed by NIST Squibs (detonator or dud charges) which the “collapse” overtakes: This was not dust blowing out of collapsing floors

28. Not addressed by NIST Massive material thrown laterally up to 500 ft; Penetrates into surrounding structures Beam assemblies weighed tons

29. Not addressed by NIST complete pulverization of virtually all concrete into a pyroclastic cloud.

30. Not addressed by NIST Afterglow recorded in multiple videos of the tower collapses.

31. Not addressed by NIST Pools of molten metal in WTC1,2, and 7 basements, 6 weeks after 9/11

32. Not addressed by NIST Steel melted and vaporized to razor sharp thinness by a eutectic mixture of sulfur. [images from Appendix C of FEMA Report]

33. Steven Jones asks an important question: How can a Gravitational “collapse”: Occur at free fall speed Pulverize concrete to a pyroclastic flow; Cause melted metal in basements; Vaporize steel columns in mid-air; Throw massive steel structures 500 ft laterally Burn or melt thousands of cars and trucks

34. Research: Steven Jones South Tower Molten metal flowing well below aircraft impact (attributed by NIST to aircraft aluminum)

35. Research: Steven Jones Iron rich slag Ash emissions Jones thought all of these observations were consistent with the use of thermite

36. Research: Steven Jones Thermite: iron oxide + aluminum powder Produces: aluminum oxide + heat + iron Hot enough to evaporate iron & steel Thermite + sulfur produces thermate Accelerates thermite reaction Remember Appendix C of FEMA report: Sulfur found which produced a eutechtic reaction

37. Steven Jones et alWTC Dust 6%: Metallic microspheres: once molten iron rich droplets Were once vaporized iron Highly energetic (reactive) Red and grey bi-layered chips: Red layer: high tech nano-particles Produces metallic microspheres Carbon: gas/explosive effect Nano thermite: Livermore Labs

38. NIST vs The engineering community The British construction industry magazine New Civil EngineerInternational (NCEI) Has posted articles critical of the NIST study Raising such issues as: • NIST continually changing it’s story • NIST “refusing to show computer visualizations (ie simulations) of the [global] collapse”

39. NIST vs The Engineering Community Jon Magnusson, CEO of Magnusson Klemencic Associates, based in Seattle WA Seattle Seattle vs NIST

40. NIST vs The engineering community

41. NIST vs The engineering community James Quintiere, PhD, • One of the world’s leading fire science researchers • Former Chief of the Fire Science Division of NIST • Objected to certain aspects of the NIST investigation • Has called for an independent review.

42. NIST vs The fire engineering community Erik Lawer, Seattle area firefighter, foundedFirefighters for 9-11 Truth The website states: "...NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) 921, which is the National Standard for Fire and Explosion Investigations, very clearly indicates … thatthe possibility of explosives should have been thoroughly investigated. [But was not]

43. How all three buildings fell Shared features in fall of WTC 1, 2, 7: Perfectly symmetric at or near free fall speed Pyro cloud Eroded/vaporized steel Molten metal in basement Squibs Red and Grey chips/microspheres

44. To be Released Sept 1 2011

45. Appendix 1: NIST: Failed in their assigned mission of finding the cause of global collapse Drew conclusions inconsistent with photographic evidence, statements from eyewitnesses, the 911 Commission report, and even their own evidence Provided no momentum transfer analysis of their alleged upper and lower blocks

46. Appendix 1: NIST: Omitted or distorted many important aspects: Building free fall Movement of the WTC1 antenna before the adjacent façade, Disintegration of “upper blocks” Squibs, Pyroclastic dust clouds, Pools of molten metal in the WTC basements Eye witness reports

47. Appendix 1: NIST: Failed to provide follow up study of the “eutechtic reaction” referenced in FEMA Appendix C Failed to test for explosives residue.

48. Appendix 2: Structural details of the towers Each tower was 1375 ft. tall, with 110 floors of 12.5 ft. height Each consisted of a perimeter of 244 structural steel columns forming a square plan, with horizontal bracing (spandrels) and extremely rigid chamfered corners. The building cores, of dimensions 79X139 ft., was a veritable forest of 47 columns, horizontal and diagonal cross braced. The 47 core columns varied in thickness with floor height. Individual core columns in the lower core measured 52 x 22 in. (in plan), and were formed of 5 and 3 inch plate into almost solid steel shafts that weighed up to 56 tons. This construction changed to relatively light I-beam cross section above the 85th floor.

49. Appendix 3Other problems with descending block scenario Small number of upper floors vs lower floors Lower floors constructed with more massive beams to support more weight No momentum transfer anaysis

50. Appendix 3Other problems with descending block scenario • FEMA, notes the average core box column cross section construction changed to relatively light I-beam cross section above the 85th floor • S tower impact at 78-85th floor • N tower impact at 94-98th floor