CONTROLLED DEMOLITION AND THE DEMISE OF WTC ON 9/11

No building exhibiting all the characteristics of controlled demolition has ever not been a controlled demolition.”~David Ray Griffin

ABSTRACT

There are ‘Signature Effects’ to physical phenomena, and forensic science is put to analyzing the signature of specific characteristics to determine the cause and effects of events.

Explosive demolitions of structures have a known set of specific characteristics, and a set of these were in full display in the destruction of the World Trade Towers. It is pure pretense and conjecture to propose any other mechanism would duplicate and mimic these very specific signature characteristics.

10 Signature Characteristics of a Controlled Demolition:

1. Each collapse occurred at virtually free fall speed;

2. Each building collapsed straight down, for the most part onto its own footprint;

3. Virtually all the concrete was turned into particulates and dust;

4. In the case of the Twin Towers, heavy material was blown out horizontally for 200 feet or more;

5. The collapses were total, leaving no steel columns sticking up hundreds of feet into the air;

6. Videos of the collapses reveal “demolition waves”, meaning “confluent rows of small explosions”;

7. Most of the steel beams and columns came down in sections that were no more than 30 feet long;

8. According to many witnesses, explosions occurred within the buildings;

9. Each collapse was associated with detectable seismic vibrations (suggestive of underground explosions);

10. Each collapse produced molten steel (which would be produced by explosives), resulting in “hot spots” that remained for months.

[+] The combined points of evidence and deductive analysis thereof is then adduced as “Ultimate Fact”.

Ultimate Fact

[=] The combined evidence of the destruction of the towers is shown conclusively and beyond a reasonable doubt to be the result of a chemical-explosive controlled demolition .

> NOTE: Any alternative theory as to the mechanisms of the destruction of WTC, will have to successfully dispute each and every one of these 10 points. Particularly troublesome for such theories are points 6 – 10.

Aftermath

A forensic study of the physical evidence, as much or little as there is known of in the public realm, as well as analysis of what the ‘government’ has revealed as can be determined in the text and subtext.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Full Definition of ULTIMATE FACT: “a basic fact essential to maintain a cause of action or to establish a defense thereto as distinguished from the subsidiary individual facts that are offered in evidence as tending to prove a basic fact”

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ultimate%20fact

The Semantics of the Twin Towers’ Destruction

“The transformations of the Twin Towers from intact buildings to widely scattered rubble and dust were, inescapably, explosions. Whatever the cause of these vast eruptions of dust and shattered steel, their sudden onset, rapidly expanding frontiers, and omnidirectional character fit virtually every sense of the word “explosion”.

The expunging of this word from reportage of these events — a shift that can be seen on major TV networks within the space of an hour — is a testament to the degree to which powerful socialization tools can be used to rewrite history at times when a deep collective shock renders the populace ever so susceptible to messages emanating from authority figures, where the words used to frame that message exert a profound and mostly unconscious effect on the listener’s understanding of the events.

On 9/11/2001, the very words used to describe the Towers’ destruction were a key aspect of inculcating the public with pretext for the War on Terror. With the substitution of the word collapse for explosion, and the supplying of the narrative “plane hits tower, tower burns, tower collapses” the official explanation was cemented and rational examination of events short-circuited.”~Kevin Ryan – 2008

How the Towers were Planted and Wired with Explosives:

NYC Dept. of Buildings: No Records for Pre-9/11 WTC Elevator Rebuild, One of the “Largest, Most Sophisticated” Ever

Aidan Monaghan thu, 06/16/2011 – 7:22am

The New York City Department of Buildings (DoB) has reported within a June 6, 2011 Freedom of Information (FOI) response, that no records could be located regarding the following request for information pertaining to the massive elevator modernization project underway at World Trade Center buildings 1 and 2 until the very morning of September 11, 2001, one of the largest ever [1]. The DoB governs elevator construction and use within New York City.

An April 15, 2011 FOI appeal request sought:

“Permits or certifications provided by the NYC Department of Buildings regarding elevator modernization/renovation work performed at the former World Trade Center buildings 1 and 2 during the 1990s and 2000s.”

The DoB’s June 6, 2011 FOI answer reads as follows:

“BIS shows no elevator records for the time period in question.”

The DoB’s Building Information System (BIS) “is the Department of Buildings’ main database. The database was put into production in 1984 and supports Department functions with respect to: … Application Processing (application submission …)” [2]

The DoB’s description of its role regarding elevator installation and use within New York City: “The Department of Buildings’ Elevator Division oversees the use and operation of New York City’s elevators”. [3] Such duties include the receipt and issuance of construction applications and permits: “Applications and Permits; New Installations or Major Upgrades; File an Elevator Application (EA) to install a new device or perform a substantial upgrade, alteration, replacement or modernization to an existing device.” [4]

The New York City building code regarding elevator construction reads as follows: “SUBCHAPTER 18 ELEVATORS AND CONVEYORS; § [C26-1803.1] 27-1001 Permit required. – No construction, alteration or removal shall be commenced until a written work permit therefor shall have been issued by the commissioner” [5]

A harmonic filter was installed for the
purpose of dissipating and reducing harmonics thereby preventing electrical contamination of building power that is often
caused by SCR drive systems. In addition,
installation of line starters and circuitry
were also utilized, preventing the in-rush
of 480v to the primary side of multiple
isolation transformers. If and when the
building went to an emergency power
condition, line starters could provide the
sequential re-energizing of the fleet.
The CEC-built controller originally utilized
a tape reader for position; however, high
rise and speed warranted modifications to
a tapeless system. Special proximity limits
were designed for reliability and reduced
maintenance. High capacity and rise along
with rope stretch necessitated the development of special circuitry to facilitate proper relevelling during the
loading and unloading process.
As with any high-rise steel building, high winds can raise havoc
with high-rise elevators. During windy days when the sway of the
building is greater than 1 mG, the speed of all the shuttle elevators are
automatically reduced to 1,000 feet per minute, with a degraded speed
curve. Also due to the building design, two express elevators share a
common hoistway enclosure, therefore special software was designed
to insure that the two shuttle cars sharing the same hoistway enclosure
would never start to run in the same direction at the same time. An
adjustable software delay allows the cars to run in the same direction
after a minimum gap of 20 floors.
The capacities and speed at which the WTC shuttle cars operate,
made the replacement of the motor generator sets with SCR drives
quite a challenge.
March 2001 ◆ Elevator World

Ace Elevator was renovating the elevator systems in the WTC towers, up to the very day that the buildings were demolished.
This cached March 2001 article in the trade magazine Elevator World, gives some of the details.

At a time when new construction is dominating the market, ACE Elevator undertook what was perhaps, one of the largest, most sophisticated elevator modernization programs in the industry’s history. This “towering” achievement took place at New York City’s prestigious World Trade Center (WTC), with the completion of the first six members of the elite “Shuttle Fleet.”

This project was originally intended to operate with the
existing 275kW motor-generator sets that were specifically designed for the WTC project. However, both the
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and ACE Elevator Co. Inc. had the collective vision of utilizing cuttingedge, solid-state-drive technology to replace the existing
motor generator sets.
All the parties involved felt that implementing this innovation would significantly enhance the elevators’ operation and eliminate countless problems associated with the
motor generator rotating elements. Although similar technology is used every day throughout the elevator industry,
no equipment available at the time met the power requirements demanded by this type of installation.
New technology had to be developed to achieve what
was in mind. The WTC shuttle fleet represents, arguably
the largest, fastest and most menacing equipment in the
industry. The dynamics of the shuttle cars, together with
unique logistical obstacles from within the complex,
posed challenging engineering and installation scenarios
far exceeding the typical modernization program.

Towers A and B consist of a total of 46 shuttle elevators, capable of moving up to 460,000 pounds, at speeds
of 1,600 feet per minute. Within a 60-second time frame,
as many as 4,000 passengers travel distances exceeding
100,000 vertical feet in a single roundtrip and some 75
miles of large diameter hoist cable are used to lift these
vertical beasts.
Yet, with an installation abundant in highly specialized
componentry, the heart and soul of this operation
remains the highly customized “Motor-Drive System.”
Although having endured a tedious, and at times exasperating, engineering evolution, ACE Elevator prevailed
in implementing and installing new silicon-controlled
rectifier (SCR) drives on the shuttle fleet. This upgrade
made a positive impact on both the fleet’s efficiency and
overall operation.
The contribution this innovation made was instrumental in the WTC’s recognition as Building Owners and Managers Association’s (BOMA) “Building of the Year.”
This honor was bestowed upon the Port Authority at both the regional and national levels.

A harmonic filter was installed for the
purpose of dissipating and reducing harmonics thereby preventing electrical contamination of building power that is often
caused by SCR drive systems. In addition,
installation of line starters and circuitry
were also utilized, preventing the in-rush
of 480v to the primary side of multiple
isolation transformers. If and when the
building went to an emergency power
condition, line starters could provide the
sequential re-energizing of the fleet.
The CEC-built controller originally utilized
a tape reader for position; however, high
rise and speed warranted modifications to
a tapeless system. Special proximity limits
were designed for reliability and reduced
maintenance. High capacity and rise along
with rope stretch necessitated the development of special circuitry to facilitate proper relevelling during the
loading and unloading process.
As with any high-rise steel building, high winds can raise havoc
with high-rise elevators. During windy days when the sway of the
building is greater than 1 mG, the speed of all the shuttle elevators are
automatically reduced to 1,000 feet per minute, with a degraded speed
curve. Also due to the building design, two express elevators share a
common hoistway enclosure, therefore special software was designed
to insure that the two shuttle cars sharing the same hoistway enclosure
would never start to run in the same direction at the same time. An
adjustable software delay allows the cars to run in the same direction
after a minimum gap of 20 floors.
The capacities and speed at which the WTC shuttle cars operate,
made the replacement of the motor generator sets with SCR drives
quite a challenge.
March 2001 ◆ Elevator World http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/arch/wtc_elevator_renovation.pdf

Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports
Below is a series of twenty-five provable points which clearly demonstrate that the reports
produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on the destruction of the World Trade Center (WTC) were unscientific and fraudulent. Therefore NIST itself – including its lead authors, Shyam Sunder and John Gross – should be investigated.

Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports
Below is a series of twenty-five provable points which clearly demonstrate that the reports
produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on the destruction of the
World Trade Center (WTC) were unscientific and fraudulent. Therefore NIST itself – including its
lead authors, Shyam Sunder and John Gross – should be investigated.
Table of Contents
WTC 7 – THE THIRD SKYSCRAPER ………………………………………………………………………………. 2

  1. OMISSION OF GIRDER STIFFENERS SHOWN ON FRANKEL DRAWING #9114 ……………………………………….2
  2. OMISSION OF THREE LATERAL SUPPORT BEAMS ON THE 13TH FLOOR G3005 BEAM ……………………………2
  3. WTC 7 COLLAPSE AT FREE-FALL ACCELERATION IS NOT EXPLAINED…………………………………………………..3
  4. VIDEOS OF THE COLLAPSE OF WTC 7 BETRAY NIST’S COMPUTER MODEL…………………………………………..3
  5. CLAIMS OF INVESTIGATING CONTROLLED DEMOLITION WITHOUT TESTING FOR EXPLOSIVE RESIDUES….4
  6. CHANGES OF STATEMENTS ON COMPOSITE BEAMS AND SHEAR STUD USE BETWEEN DRAFTS …………….5
  7. REFUSING OF FOIA REQUESTS …………………………………………………………………………………………………….6
    ALL THREE BUILDINGS …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 6
  8. NEGLIGENCE IN SALVAGING STEEL ………………………………………………………………………………………………6
  9. IGNORING THE RESULTS OF FEMA 403, APPENDIX C ………………………………………………………………………6
  10. INVOLVEMENT IN NOT SAVING STEEL FOR INVESTIGATION …………………………………………………………….7
  11. FIRE SIMULATIONS AND DURATIONS ARE EXAGGERATED……………………………………………………………….8
  12. NO DISCUSSION OF THE MOLTEN METAL FOUND IN THE RUBBLE OF THE THREE COLLAPSED BUILDINGS. 8
  13. REFUSAL TO TEST FOR EXPLOSIVE RESIDUE…………………………………………………………………………………..9
  14. FAILURE TO FOLLOW STANDARD FIRE INVESTIGATION PROTOCOL ………………………………………………… 10
    THE TWIN TOWERS……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 10
  15. STRIPPING OF THE FIRE PROOFING IS EXAGGERATED…………………………………………………………………… 10
  16. PRE-COLLAPSE STEEL TEMPERATURES ARE EXAGGERATED …………………………………………………………… 11
  17. TESTED FLOOR ASSEMBLIES DID NOT FAIL …………………………………………………………………………………. 11
  18. INITIATION OF COLLAPSE – “INWARD BOWING” WAS INDUCED ARTIFICIALLY…………………………………. 12
  19. COLUMN STRESS DUE TO LOAD REDISTRIBUTION IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO CAUSE FAILURE …………………. 12
  20. NO EXPLANATION GIVEN FOR HORIZONTAL PROPAGATION OF COLLAPSE ……………………………………… 12
  21. WTC 1 TILT OCCURRED AFTER SYMMETRICAL COLLAPSE FOR AT LEAST TWO STORIES………………………. 13
  22. NO JOLT – CONTINUOUS ACCELERATION OF COLLAPSE WAS IGNORED…………………………………………… 14
  23. NO PILE DRIVER IS OBSERVED IN VIDEOS …………………………………………………………………………………… 16
  24. COLUMN LOADS WERE CALCULATED FOR WORST CASE, NOT ACTUAL IN-SERVICE LOADS…………………. 16
  25. MOLTEN METAL OBSERVED POURING OUT OF THE CORNER OF WTC 2 REMAINS UNRESOLVED…………. 1

**22. 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?

NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.

The responses to previous questions demonstrate why NIST concluded that there were no explosives or controlled demolition involved in the collapses of the WTC towers. https://www.nist.gov/disaster-failure-studies/faqs-nist-wtc-towers-investigation

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

WTC 7 – THE THIRD SKYSCRAPER

  1. OMISSION OF GIRDER STIFFENERS SHOWN ON FRANKEL DRAWING #9114
    Technical Statement: NIST maintains that WTC 7 collapsed due to fire acting upon the 13th floor A2001 girder between columns 79 and 44 and the beams framing into it from the east.
    They said that the beams expanded by 5.5” (revised in June 2012 to 6.25”), broke the girder erection bolts, and pushed this girder off its column 79 seat. This girder fell to floor 12, which then precipitated a cascade of floor failures from floor 12 down to floor 5, and column 79 then became unsupported laterally, causing it to buckle. It is then said that column 79’s buckling caused the upper floors to cascade down, which started a chain reaction — a north-to-south then east-to-west horizontal, progressive collapse — with a global exterior collapse that was captured on the videos.
    The first omission concerns flange-to-web stiffeners on the south end of the girder (A2001).
    See drawing 9114. These omitted stiffeners would prevent the girder flange from folding when the girder web moved beyond the seat, requiring twice the possible expansion of the beams framing into the girder from the east to move the girder far enough to the west for it to fall off its seat.
    References:
     Frankel Shop Drawing #9114
  1. https://www.dropbox.com/s/r009pjr3qhduyjg/9114.TIF?dl=0
    o Girder_A2001_Stiffeners_Plan_HL
MaladmiNISTration'
WTC-iskut 11/9 2001: Virheellinen yliopistotutkimus WTC-7:n romahduksesta -  Hämeemmiäs - Vuodatus.net -

  1. https://www.dropbox.com/s/jnt2f9i2vnm0wa3/Girder_A2001_Stiffeners_Plan.jpg?dl=0
    o Girder_A2001_Stiffeners_Elevation_HL
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/uy7cehcn2saorh1/Girder_A2001_%20Stiffeners_Elevation.jpg?dl=0
  2. OMISSION OF THREE LATERAL SUPPORT BEAMS ON THE 13TH FLOOR G3005 BEAM
    Technical Statement: NIST omitted three lateral support beams from the exterior frame to the north-most beam (G3005) framing into the A2001 girder between columns 44 and 79 from the east. The NIST WTC 7 report contains a second possible failure initiation mechanism, where G3005 buckles and causes the other four beams framing into the girder from the east (A3004, B3004, C3004, and K3004) to also buckle, lose their load-carrying capability, collapse downward, and rock (pull) the girder off its seats back to the east. When these lateral support beams are excluded in the NIST analysis, the beam slenderness is increased by 16 times, and this reduces the actual buckling load to 6% of what it would have been in reality. Analysis with the lateral support beams included shows that the beam would not buckle and that it would actually deflect the girder and put the other four beams in tension, eliminating any chance of them buckling, as beams and columns need to be in compression in order to buckle.
    References:
     Frankel Shop Drawing #3005 https://www.dropbox.com/s/qoikgin4l8x0yub/3005.TIF?dl=0
     Frankel Shop Drawing #3007 https://www.dropbox.com/s/f9n62mr3c1mdvqs/3007.TIF?dl=0

Cardington Steel Fire Experiments

“In the mid-1990s British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of six experiments at Cardington to investigate the behavior of steel-framed buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected. Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800-900 C (1,500-1,700 F) in three of the tests (well above the traditionally assumed critical temperature of 600 C (1,100 F), no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments).
In building fires outside of such laboratory experiments, steel beams and columns probably never exceed 500º C. In extensive fire tests of steel frame carparks conducted by Corus Construction in several countries, measured temperatures of the steel columns and beams, including in uninsulated structures, never exceeded 360ºC.[3]”

Click to access MultistoreySteelFramedBuildings.pdf

The following information is from the most comprehensive and thorough tests yet done on the effects of fire on structural steel.
This study was cited in the NIST WTC Structure Report of 2002, in Appendix A, of that report. The same NIST report wherein the Appendix C was cited, that showed evidence of Thermite Arson on WTC7 steel samples.
The Cardington steel tests show why no multi-story steel framed building has EVER collapsed due to fire; not before 9/11, not after 9/11, and certainly not on 9/11.

THE BEHAVIOUR OF MULTI-STORY STEEL FRAMED BUILDINGS IN FIRE
© 1999 British Steel Technology Center

Cardington Steel Tests

9 DISCUSSION
9.1 Observed Behavior

The tests on the Cardington frame enabled the differences between the standard fire test and the actual behavior to be studied. This led to the conclusion that the cooler structure surrounding the heat effected members was extremely beneficial to the heated members. The maximum steel temperatures reached during the six tests at Cartington was in excess of 1100 °C. This occurred with no signs of structural collapse.
Using modern fire codes , which are based on the standard fire tests, failure (or structural collapse) was calculated at 680°C ; it is clear that the current level of safety is quite high.
Further work on quantifying the safety level and developing definitive design guidance, which will incorporate a more logical and economical approach to structural fire design. – pg. 64 text (pg. 73 PDF)

Every collapse theory generated by those who support the official narrative of the destruction of the WTC towers is based on the “accumulation of mass” hypothesis.
This thesis is utter nonsense, as I have pointed out time after time.
There was no accumulating solid mass.
The mass was particulates blown laterally outside of the frame of the buildings. This can be seen clearly in every single image of the towers being demolished.
___________________________________________________________________________________________

The theory that jet fuel poured down the elevator shafts is untenable.
The elevators in the towers were staggered, with just one going from top to bottom. They were also self sealing to prevent the chimney effect. See FEMA Building Performance Study 2002
The amount of jet fuel that poured into the buildings during the crashes was miniscule compared to the size the the structures. Most of that fuel blew up in huge fireballs outside the buildings on impact.
If the towers were made to scale as 6 ft structures, the amount of jet fuel in the plane at that scale would be less than a thimble full.
The towers were essentially three separate buildings atop one another.

Elevator System Design

NOTICE
The article is produced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research

\\][// ®

5 thoughts on “CONTROLLED DEMOLITION AND THE DEMISE OF WTC ON 9/11

  1. ALL THREE BUILDINGS

    8. NEGLIGENCE IN SALVAGING STEEL
    Technical Statement: At one point, NIST admitted that only 0.25% to 0.50 % of the steel
    from the Twin Towers was saved for analysis. Later, NIST claimed that none of the steel
    from WTC 7 was saved for analysis. At another time, NIST mentioned that Dr. John Gross
    was in the salvage yards and was involved in the selection of pieces of steel to save.
    The NIST WTC Tower and WTC 7 reports do not explain why so little steel was saved and,
    incredibly, in the case of the Twin Towers, was dismissive when forced to admit that the
    steel saved from the buildings did not show that it had experienced high temperatures, by
    contending that “the sample size was not sufficient to be representative.” Why didn’t Dr.
    Gross save a sufficient sample size? The space required to store the steel would have been
    insignificant relative to the massive and historic issues to be resolved.
    References:
    • At 5:00 minutes into this video, Dr. John Gross says he was on the WTC site and in the steel
    yards early on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SLIzSCt_cg
    • NCSTAR 1-3, p. 27
    • NCSTAR 1-3, Paragraph 6.6.2, p. 95
    • Pertinent short clip from the documentary film, 9/11: Explosive Evidence—Experts Speak Out

    Click to access twenty-five-points-10-19-14-3.pdf

    Like

Leave a Reply to prophet2020 Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: