portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary global

9.11 investigation

THE WORLD TRADE CENTER JET FUEL HOAX

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) report into collapse of the WTC towers, estimates that about 3,500 gallons of jet fuel burnt within each of the towers. Imagine that this entire quantity of jet fuel was injected into just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor, that no heat escaped this floor by conduction and that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat. With these ideal assumptions we calculate the maximum temperature that this one floor could have reached.

THE JET FUEL; HOW HOT DID IT HEAT
THE WORLD TRADE CENTER?

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) report into collapse of the WTC towers, estimates that about 3,500 gallons of jet fuel burnt within each of the towers. Imagine that this entire quantity of jet fuel was injected into just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor, that no heat escaped this floor by conduction and that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat. With these ideal assumptions we calculate the maximum temperature that this one floor could have reached.

"The Boeing 767 is capable of carrying up to 23,980 gallons of fuel and it is estimated that, at the time of impact, each aircraft had approximately 10,000 gallons of unused fuel on board (compiled from Government sources)."

Quote from the FEMA report into the collapse of WTC's One and Two (Chapter Two).

Since the aircraft were only flying from Boston to Los Angeles, they would have been nowhere near fully fueled on takeoff (the aircraft have a maximum range of 7,600 miles). They would have carried just enough fuel for the trip together with some safety factor. Remember, that carrying excess fuel means higher fuel bills and less paying passengers. The aircraft would have also burnt some fuel between Boston and New York.

"If one assumes that approximately 3,000 gallons of fuel were consumed in the initial fireballs, then the remainder either escaped the impact floors in the manners described above or was consumed by the fire on the impact floors. If half flowed away, then 3,500 gallons remained on the impact floors to be consumed in the fires that followed."

Quote from the FEMA report into the collapse of WTC's One and Two (Chapter Two).

What we propose to do, is pretend that the entire 3,500 gallons of jet fuel was confined to just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with the perfect quantity of oxygen, that no hot gases left this floor and that no heat escaped this floor by conduction. With these ideal assumptions (none of which were meet in reality) we will calculate the maximum temperature that this one floor could have reached. Of course, on that day, the real temperature rise of any floor due to the burning jet fuel, would have been considerably lower than the rise that we calculate, but this estimate will enable us to demonstrate that the "official" explanation is a lie.

Note that a gallon of jet fuel weighs about 3.1 kilograms, hence 3,500 gallons weighs 3,500 x 3.1 = 10,850 kgs.

Jet fuel is a colorless, combustible, straight run petroleum distillate liquid. Its principal uses are as an ingredient in lamp oils, charcoal starter fluids, jet engine fuels and insecticides.

It is also know as, fuel oil #1, kerosene, range oil, coal oil and aviation fuel.

It is comprised of hydrocarbons with a carbon range of C9 - C17. The hydrocarbons are mainly alkanes CnH2n+2, with n ranging from 9 to 17.

It has a flash point within the range 42? C - 72? C (110? F - 162? F).

And an ignition temperature of 210? C (410? F).

Depending on the supply of oxygen, jet fuel burns by one of three chemical reactions:

(1) CnH2n+2 + (3n+1)/2 O2 => n CO2 + (n + 1) H2O

(2) CnH2n+2 + (2n+1)/2 O2 => n CO + (n + 1) H2O

(3) CnH2n+2 + (n+1)/2 O2 => n C + (n + 1) H2O

Reaction (1) occurs when jet fuel is well mixed with air before being burnt, as for example, in jet engines.

Reactions (2) and (3) occur when a pool of jet fuel burns. When reaction (3) occurs the carbon formed shows up as soot in the flame. This makes the smoke very dark.

In the aircraft crashes at the World Trade Center, the impact (with the aircraft going from 500 or 600 mph to zero) would have throughly mixed the fuel that entered the building with the limited amount of air available within. In fact, it is likely that all the fuel was turned into a flammable mist. However, for sake of argument we will assume that 3,500 gallons of the jet fuel did in fact form a pool fire. This means that it burnt according to reactions (2) and (3). Also note that the flammable mist would have burnt according to reactions (2) and (3), as the quantity of oxygen within the building was quite limited.

Since we do not know the exact quantities of oxygen available to the fire, we will assume that the combustion was perfectly efficient, that is, that the entire quantity of jet fuel burnt via reaction (1), even though we know that this was not so. This generous assumption will give a temperature that we know will be higher than the actual temperature of the fire attributable to the jet fuel.

We need to know that the (net) calorific value of jet fuel when burnt via reaction (1) is 42-44 MJ/kg. The calorific value of a fuel is the amount of energy released when the fuel is burnt. We will use the higher value of 44 MJ/kg as this will lead to a higher maximum temperature than the lower value of 42 (and we wish to continue being outrageously generous in our assumptions).

For a cleaner presentation and simpler calculations we will also assume that our hydrocarbons are of the form CnH2n. The dropping of the 2 hydrogen atoms does not make much difference to the final result and the interested reader can easily recalculate the figures for a slightly more accurate result. So we are now assuming the equation:

(4) CnH2n + 3n/2 O2 => n CO2 + n H2O

However, this model, does not take into account that the reaction is proceeding in air, which is only partly oxygen.

Dry air is 79% nitrogen and 21% oxygen (by volume). Normal air has a moisture content from 0 to 4%. We will include the water vapor and the other minor atmospheric gases with the nitrogen.

So the ratio of the main atmospheric gases, oxygen and nitrogen, is 1 : 3.76. In molar terms:

Air = O2 + 3.76 N2.

Because oxygen comes mixed with nitrogen, we have to include it in the equations. Even though it does not react, it is "along for the ride" and will absorb heat, affecting the overall heat balance. Thus we need to use the equation:

(5) CnH2n + 3n/2(O2 + 3.76 N2) => n CO2 + n H2O + 5.64n N2

From this equation we see that the molar ratio of CnH2n to that of the products is:

CnH2n : CO2 : H2O : N2= 1 : n : n : 5.64n moles
= 14n : 44n : 18n : 28 x 5.64n kgs
= 1 : 3.14286 : 1.28571 : 11.28 kgs
= 31,000 : 97,429 : 39,857 : 349,680 kgs

In the conversion of moles to kilograms we have assumed the atomic weights of hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen are 1, 12, 14 and 16 respectively.

Now each of the towers contained 96,000 (short) tons of steel. That is an average of 96,000/117 = 820 tons per floor. Lets suppose that the bottom floors contained roughly twice the amount of steel of the upper floors (since the lower floors had to carry more weight). So we estimate that the lower floors contained about 1,100 tons of steel and the upper floors about 550 tons = 550 x 907.2 ? 500,000 kgs. We will assume that the floors hit by the aircraft contained the lower estimate of 500,000 kgs of steel. This generously underestimates the quantity of steel in these floors, and once again leads to a higher estimate of the maximum temperature.

Each story had a floor slab and a ceiling slab. These slabs were 207 feet wide, 207 feet deep and 4 (in parts 5) inches thick and were constructed from lightweight concrete. So each slab contained 207 x 207 x 1/3 = 14,283 cubic feet of concrete. Now a cubic foot of lightweight concrete weighs about 50kg, hence each slab weighed 714,150 ? 700,000 kgs. Together, the floor and ceiling slabs weighed some 1,400,000 kgs.

So, now we take all the ingredients and estimate a maximum temperature to which they could have been heated by 3,500 gallons of jet fuel. We will call this maximum temperature T. Since the calorific value of jet fuel is 44 MJ/kg. We know that 3,500 gallons = 31,000 kgs of jet fuel

will release 10,850 x 44,000,000 = 477,400,000,000 Joules of energy.

This is the total quantity of energy available to heat the ingredients to the temperature T. But what is the temperature T? To find out, we first have to calculate the amount of energy absorbed by each of the ingredients.

That is, we need to calculate the energy needed to raise:

39,857kilograms of water vapor to the temperature T? C,
97,429kilograms of carbon dioxide to the temperature T? C,
349,680kilograms of nitrogen to the temperature T? C,
500,000kilograms of steel to the temperature T? C,
1,400,000kilograms of concrete to the temperature T? C.

To calculate the energy needed to heat the above quantities, we need their specific heats. The specific heat of a substance is the amount of energy needed to raise one kilogram of the substance by one degree centigrade.

SubstanceSpecificHeat[J/kg*C]
Nitrogen1,038
Water Vapor1,690
Carbon Dioxide845
LightweightConcrete800
Steel450

Substituting these values into the above, we obtain:

39,857 x1,690 x (T - 25)Joules are needed to heat the water vapor from 25? to T? C,
97,429 x845 x (T - 25)Joules are needed to heat the carbon dioxide from 25? to T? C,
349,680 x1,038 x (T - 25)Joules are needed to heat the nitrogen from 25? to T? C,
500,000 x450 x (T - 25)Joules are needed to heat the steel from 25? to T? C,
1,400,000 x800 x (T - 25)Joules are needed to heat the concrete from 25? to T? C.

The assumption that the specific heats are constant over the temperature range 25? - T? C, is a good approximation if T turns out to be relatively small (as it does). For larger values of T this assumption once again leads to a higher maximum temperature (as the specific heat for these substances increases with temperature). We have assumed the initial temperature of the surroundings to be 25? C. The quantity, (T - 25)? C, is the temperature rise.

So the amount of energy needed to raise one floor to the temperature T? C is

= (39,857 x 1,690 + 97,429 x 845 + 349,680 x 1,038 + 500,000 x 450 + 1,400,000 x 800) x (T - 25)
= (67,358,330 + 82,327,505 + 362,967,840 + 225,000,000 + 1,120,000,000) x (T - 25) Joules
= 1,857,653,675 x (T - 25) Joules.

Since the amount of energy available to heat this floor is 477,400,000,000 Joules, we have that

1,857,653,675 x (T - 25) = 477,400,000,000
1,857,653,675 x T - 46,441,341,875 = 477,400,000,000

Therefore T = (477,400,000,000 + 46,441,341,875)/1,857,653,675 = 282? C (540? F).

So, the jet fuel could (at the very most) have only added T - 25 = 282 - 25 = 257? C (495? F) to the temperature of the typical office fire that developed.

Remember, this figure is a huge over-estimate, as (among other things) it assumes that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb the heat, whereas in reality, the jet fuel fire was all over in one or two minutes, and the energy not absorbed by the concrete and steel within this brief period (that is, almost all of it) would have been vented to the outside world.

"The time to consume the jet fuel can be reasonably computed. At the upper bound, if one assumes that all 10,000 gallons of fuel were evenly spread across a single building floor, it would form a pool that would be consumed by fire in less than 5 minutes"

Quote from the FEMA report into the collapse of WTC's One and Two (Chapter Two).

Here are statements from three eye-witnesses that provide evidence that the heating due to the jet fuel was indeed minimal.

Donovan Cowan was in an open elevator at the 78th floor sky-lobby (one of the impact floors of the South Tower) when the first aircraft hit. He has been quoted as saying: "We went into the elevator. As soon as I hit the button, that's when there was a big boom. We both got knocked down. I remember feeling this intense heat. The doors were still open. The heat lasted for maybe 15 to 20 seconds I guess. Then it stopped."

Stanley Praimnath was on the 81st floor of the South Tower: "The plane impacts. I try to get up and then I realize that I'm covered up to my shoulder in debris. And when I'm digging through under all this rubble, I can see the bottom wing starting to burn, and that wing is wedged 20 feet in my office doorway."

Ling Young was in her 78th floor office: "Only in my area were people alive, and the people alive were from my office. I figured that out later because I sat around in there for 10 or 15 minutes. That's how I got so burned."

Neither Stanley Praimnath nor Donovan Cowan nor Ling Young were cooked by the jet fuel fire. All three survived.

Summarizing:

We have assumed that the entire 3,500 gallons of jet fuel was confined to just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor, that no heat escaped this floor by conduction and that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat.

Then it is impossible that the jet fuel, by itself, raised the temperature of this floor more than 257? C (495? F).

Now this temperature is nowhere near high enough to even begin explaining the World Trade Center Tower collapse.

It is not even close to the first critical temperature of 600? C (1,100? F) where steel loses about half its strength and it is nowhere near the quotes of 1500? C that we constantly read about in our lying media.

"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 frame 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."

Quote from the FEMA report (Appendix A).

Recalling that the North Tower suffered no major structural damage from the intense office fire of February 23, 1975, we can conclude that the ensuing office fires of September 11, 2001, also did little extra damage to the towers.

Conclusion:

The jet fuel fires played almost no role in the collapse of the World Trade Center.

So, once again, you have been lied to by the media, are you surprised?


conservation of energy 28.Dec.2003 22:09

ajdhlahn i

So far a cursury glance seems reasonable but for the following:

1. Noting Aluminum and magnesium (ie airplanes) are flammable what contribution to
temperature results here.

2. Further what heat is generated on impact.

Of course jet fuel at the WTC was a hoax: were there any jets at the WTC? 29.Dec.2003 01:49

hellsbells

Those who are following closely the growing debate about all aspects of *911* will be interested in a most important information upgrade.

Gerard Holmgren recently discovered that the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics maintains a searchable website whereby one can check the actual & scheduled departure/arrival times of domestic airline flights, by airport, airline and day.

What really happened to AA Flights 11 and 77 on Sept 11, 2001
posted at
 http://sydney.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=36354&group=webcast
and reposted at
 http://new.globalfreepress.com/article.pl?sid=03/11/13/0455236

When one searches the database for September 11, 2001 one discovers that the two American Airlines flights, AA11 and AA77, did not depart - repeat, did not depart - their respective airports. Amazing, really.

Recall that Flight 11 was supposed to hit the WTC North Tower. The fuzzy Naudet 'firemen's video' showed something flying into the North Tower. Whether the something was big enough to be a Boeing 767 has been debated at length. Since it wasn't Flight 11, one may question whether any jet fuel was injected into the North Tower.

Then there are serious questions whether the videos purporting to be Flight 175 flying into the South Tower are authentic. These were 'official amateur' videos which were taken seemingly by accident, since the people behind the cameras couldn't possibly have expected an airliner to suddenly fly into view (could they?). Were some of them forgeries? Were they all forgeries?

For example, Scott Loughrey's website:
 http://www.911hoax.com/

These revelations that one if not both Boeing 767's at the WTC were hoaxes are fascinating. It makes one wonder whether all the ballyhoo over Christmas at Los Angeles and New York Airports were beat-ups to reinforce the false meme that planes were used to hit large buildings on September 11, 2001.

An Orwellian world indeed.

...

False Memes 29.Dec.2003 08:14

tom

hellsbells may well be correct.

Were passenger manifests ever released? What happened to the passengers who supposedly died on the airplanes? Did they exist? Were their grief-stricken families made up?

Guess we can't go back and look. The most rapid scavanging job ever in the history of the world took all the building material away.

And the French press reported that there was no airliner at the Pentagon, either.

hellsbells - attempting to disrupt on this thread 29.Dec.2003 15:03

reader

If Hellsbells were actually interested in reading the article, they would see that a number of witnesses saw the plane hit, wings on fire and all. Trying to claim there was no plane involved here is like the CIA in their Iran coup where they had pro-communists coming out to rally as ways to discredit the democratically elected leader.

Go away Hellsbells. No one needs your gov't supported strawmen here.

this is stunning piece of work...it's correct too! 29.Dec.2003 17:30

Merlin

This article involves some very technical details, pretty complex concepts, and essentially basic science
and chemistry to support it's conclusions. Being, myself, a retired engineer with solid background in
mathematics, sciences, and chemistry, I spend a lot of time reading, studying, and number-crunching
my own researched formulas...and, frankly, I find nothing to challenge what the author has done, nor do
I in anyway dispute his conclusions. This is a real stunning piece of work. I hope all of you appreciate
what has gone into putting such together, and offer your gratitude to those who did it; for they've put the
TRUTH before you, and I only hope you realize it! This speaks volumns about our government; and I
am sure history will recognize it's implications, even if the majority of the sheepeople of today don't!

The article in question 29.Dec.2003 20:21

was copied from here

LIST OF ARTICLES from
http://members.fortunecity.com/911/.

September the Eleventh 2001.

The World Trade Center.

In a Perfect World.
Evidence of Explosives in the World Trade Center Towers collapse (0.7 MB).
Why did the World Trade Center Towers Fall? A Review of Thomas Eagar's (of MIT) Article (0.7 MB).
Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers. A Review of Charles Clifton's Article (0.7 MB).
The Jet Fuel; How hot did it heat the World Trade Center?
Proof the Twin Towers were Deliberately Demolished.
The FEMA Report into the World Trade Center 7 Collapse is a Total Joke.
Multi-Storey Buildings in Steel: The World Trade Center (0.4 MB).
Some Articles from Engineering News Record (0.8 MB).
Comments on the World Trade Center Demolition (0.4 MB).
Microsoft Software used to simulate the crash of a Boeing 747 into the World Trade Center.
University of California, Berkeley Professor, Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl Testifies.
The World Trade Center 7 Explosion Myth.
The World Trade Center Towers collapse as an Enormous Insurance Scam.
What went wrong with the investigation? By Eric Hufschmid (with comment).
Sixty State Street and the World Trade Center towers: A Comparison (0.7 MB).
Was Thermite used to Melt Sections of the World Trade Center Core Columns.
Calculations Say at Least 14 Tons of High Explosive Needed to Bring Down Each Tower.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Reports on the World Trade Center disaster.

Table Of Contents for the FEMA World Trade Center Report.
Chapter 1 of the FEMA WTC Report: Introduction (with comment) (0.9 MB).
Chapter 2 of the FEMA WTC Report: The Twin Towers (with comment) (2.2 MB).
Chapter 3 of the FEMA WTC Report: WTC 3 (0.4 MB).
Chapter 4 of the FEMA WTC Report: WTC 4, 5, and 6 (1.2 MB).
Chapter 5 of the FEMA WTC Report: World Trade Center Seven (with comment) (1.3 MB).
Chapter 6 of the FEMA WTC Report: Bankers Trust Building (0.6 MB).
Chapter 7 of the FEMA WTC Report: Peripheral Buildings (0.8 MB).
Appendix A of the FEMA WTC Report: Overview of Fire Protection in Buildings (0.5 MB).
Appendix B of the FEMA WTC Report: Structural Steel and Steel Connections (0.6 MB).
Appendix D of the FEMA WTC Report: WTC Steel Data Collection (0.8 MB).
The FEMA World Trade Center Collection in PDF-document format.

The Fires.

Research Results from the Cardington Test Fires (text only).
A New Approach to Multi-Storey Steel Framed Buildings Fire and Steel Construction (0.8 MB).
The Behaviour of Multi-storey Composite Steel Framed Structures in Response to Compartment Fires (1.0 MB).
The Cardington Tests and the Broadgate Fire.
Tapes Tell of Firefighters Courage at WTC.
The Cardington Reports in PDF-document format.

The Pentagon.

A Detailed Analysis of whether or not a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon (1.5 MB).
Photos of Flight 77 crashing into the Pentagon are a Complete and Utter Fabrication (0.5 MB).
The Pentagon Problem in a Nutshell.
The Bijlmer Crash - Joe Vialls - Caught in a Lie (0.5 MB).
Carol A. Valentine Article Completely Wrong.
The Strange Case of the Sports Utility Vehicle at the Pentagon.
How the Size of the Plane in the "Explosion" Photo was Calculated.
The Essence of the Problem.
Article on the Pentagon Retrofit.

The Response, Or Rather, Lack Of It.

District of Columbia Air National Guard Mission And Vision Statement.
New Jersey Air National Guard Mission Statement.
An example of Air National Guard efficency.
Where was NORAD on September Eleven?

Other.

Evidence that the Arabs are Not to blame for the WTC attack.
Many 9-11 "Hijackers" are Still Alive and Well.
Collection of Eric Hufschmid's early articles.
Israelis arrested on suspicion of 9-11 involvement.
Sept 11th - Unanswered Questions By MalcontentX (0.3 MB).
Seismic Waves Generated by Aircraft Impacts and Building Collapses at the WTC (0.3 MB).
Seismic Observations During the September 11, 2001, Terrorist Attack (0.5 MB).
Investigation shows Cellphone Calls from 9-11 "Hijacked" Planes are next to Impossible
Benjamin Freedman Predicted the Present Push for WWW III in 1961, prescient eh?
Stranger Than Fiction (from www.whatreallyhappened.com).

Palestine (Now Known As Israel).

Some Facts About Palestine.
Listing and Map of Land Ownership in Palestine in 1947.
Listing and Map of Towns and Villages Ethnically Cleansed/Destroyed by the Jews.
More on the Towns and Villages Ethnically Cleansed/Destroyed by the Jews (0.5 MB).
Time line of the Israeli aggression against the Palestinians in the 1948 war.
Jewish/Israeli massacres of Palestinians and Jewish Terrorism in general.
Brief articles on the 1948, 1956 and 1967 wars started by Israel.
Brief article on the Israeli attempt to ignite a civil war in Lebanon.
Arafat calls for democratic elections in the United States.
The Amazing Cost of Israel to the United States
America should fight minorities and aliens the way Israel does!
The Day Israel Deliberately Killed 34 American Sailors.
Brief article on Israeli apartheid.
Israel wins Huge Victory.
Is Israel a Democracy?
Some Israeli War Criminals.
Some articles on the War Criminal Sharon.
The War Criminal Sharon. The Long Version.
The Chinese claim California as a Confucian Homeland.
Time to Bomb Israel for its Development and Deployment of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
God gave the Jews New York.
The Genocidal God of the Jews.
Some Zionist Fairy Tales.
Israel mugs the Palestinians.
Muslims base their claim to Palestine on History.
Jewish Terrorism.
Jewish Terrorism targeting the British.
Online Books about Palestine and the Jews.
What you can do if you care.
Jews Attack Christianity.


Here are some websites which mirror the old nerdcities.com/guardian site (from about January 2003).

http://misternet.org/nerdcities/index_guardian.html
http://www.wtc7.net/911research/mirrors/guardian which is part of http://www.wtc7.net
http://guardian.911review.org which is a part of the http://911review.org site.

Here are three websites that mirror some or all of the most recent edition of the nerdcities.com/guardian site (from September 2003).

http://911review.org/Wget/members.fortunecity.com/911 (full mirror)
http://guardian.150m.com
http://guardian.250free.com

Here is some useful information from the second.


Download 45 Megabytes of Information Concerning 9-11.

If you like the articles presented on guardian.150m.com then you can download them, and many more like them, by clicking on the following link.
Click here to download the September 11 2003 update of the nerdcities.com/guardian site (45 MB)
Save the archive file guardian11Sep03.tar to a directory on your hard-drive.
We will assume that you have chosen C:\ but any directory will do.
Extract the archive using WinZip, Stuffit or tar -xf to the directory C:\
This will automatically place the contents of the archive into the directory C:\guardian (and sub-directories).

Microsoft users will use WinZip to extract the files.
Linux/Unix users will use the command tar -xf guardian11Sep03.tar and
Apple users will use Stuffit.

Now point your web browser at C:\guardian\index.html.
That is, type C:\guardian\index.html in the address/location bar (where you usually enter a web-sites URL) of Internet Explorer.
This will bring up the main index page (don't forget to bookmark it for easy return). Now just follow the links.

If you wish you can also download a collection of full-sized photos from the MIT report - Sixty State Street - A Case Study.
Click here to download the collection of photos from the MIT report (15 MB)
Thumbnail versions of these photos are already available in the archive guardian11Sep03.tar
Save the archive file sixty-state-street.tar to the same directory that you saved guardian11Sep03.tar
Similarly, extract the archive using WinZip, Stuffit or tar -xf to the directory C:\
This will automatically place the contents of the archive into the directory C:\guardian\sixty-state-street

how many millions are suspicious of those events as reported in the media? 30.Dec.2003 01:29

soda jerk

Okay, so it's pretty well established that planes crashed into the WTC buildings... many people who lived in the northeast states at the time probably heard of a personal connection to somebody on one of the planes which went off course that day, as I did... (the pennsylvania "field" plane, don't recall the flight number, btw...)

What's really odd and unexplained is the nature of the damage to the buildings - which, as documented copiously by photographs and video shot on scene before, during and after the impacts, really looks much more like controlled demolition than "natural" results of plane impacts alone.

The whole thing stinks to high heaven no matter which way you look at it... I can only hope the rumors of a 9/11 redux are misfounded... not sure I want "the jump" just yet...

Conspiracy-obsessed 30.Dec.2003 19:23

Psychologist

"how many millions are suspicious of those events as reported in the media?"

I doubt there are millions. Tens of thousands, probably. Your ilk range from the clinically deluded to the conspiracy-obsessed (the latter representing the bulk of my research and my practice -- hence, my regular readings of these conspiracy forums).

The conspiracy-obsessed are people who mean well, but whose strong fear of random/unrelated events beyond their control forces them to connect random dots and make believe that all of these events are related and even controlled by a single source. This makes the world a less scary place for them (you).

The good news for you folks is that many people grow out of this fear. I wish you all the best of luck.

PS: relating to the article that heads this thread, you must ask why the author left out the source of the heat -- the thousands of tons of burning wood, plastic, carpet, drywall, etc. The kerosene simply helped ignite and initially fuel the fires.


reply to PSYCHOLOGIST's little rant 30.Dec.2003 20:45

Merlin

as you said, you're a mere "psychologist", and as such, it's most doubtful that you have the expertise
to fully understand, appreciate, or fathom the technical nature of the initial posting. It is very thorough,
very comprehensive, and it is very very sound science. As for your canade about the temperature in
the tower's being affected by the wood, plastics, and other materials present at time of impact, all of
that is relatively easy---technically speaking---to account for and arrived at sound estimate of just how
much contribution such had towards the burn that took place. I have seen other websites, elsewhere,
that have taken the known material take-off of all material's used in construction (this is easily had, by
the way), then applied the standard estimates for office furniture, office supplies, and such that would
be combustionable....in the calculations, or numbers-crunching if you like, the realization was had...
based on what is clearly well known and documentable...that these material's did not likely impact
the ignition and fueling of the jet avi fuel's burn enough to increase the achieved temperature, and to
sustain it for the time-frame required, to bring about massive structural failure that arose.

Sorry about that! Accurate science seems to trump mere bullshit once again! It would be meaning-
ful if you're going to critize in such caustic manner, as you have, that you do so from a more solid foot-
ing than that which you've indicated you stand upon!

As for the old swipe about "conspiracy theories"...who do you think you're kidding? Conspiracies are
as common as dirt...thought such may not always be called the exact same name...it's all in how the
act in labeled is what I got out of my study of psychology, that determines the slant on meanings! So,
to label those who appreciate this thread and it's initial posting as "conspriacy theorists" is to betray
your deficiencies as a "psychologist", for a competent would never do so to his/her patient that they
seek to be instrumental in assisting towards healing. It's outright "name-calling" and all the basic
psychology I studied (yes, even we engineer's know more than mere numbers and lines on drwgs)
clearly states how totally useless an exercise in futility it is.

So, my dear "psychologist", perhaps you are need of remedial courses in your self-described occu-
pation...that is, assuming it really is! I do trust this has set you to rights on this matter?

Merlin the Engineer 31.Dec.2003 10:30

Sophomore Engineering Student

Merlin,
It's great to see a retired engineer on this board. Will you help out a fellow progressive? I am practicing ODEs this vacation and one in particular is driving me nuts. If I post it, will you solve it for me and show me how you did it?

Let me know. Thanks!

Already been done 31.Dec.2003 12:19

Newton

"...temperature in the tower's being affected by the wood, plastics, and other materials present at time of impact, all of that is relatively easy---technically speaking---to account for and arrived at sound estimate of just how
much contribution such had towards the burn that took place."

Very true. In fact, the ASCE already performed that analysis. As an engineer, I assume you've read it.


emperature in the tower's being affected by the wood, plastics, 31.Dec.2003 20:38

is totally irrelevant

temperature in the tower's being affected by the wood, plastics, and other materials present at time of impact, all of that is relatively easy

and it is totally irrelevant since the (very intense) North Tower fire proved the World Trade Center could easily handle a serious office fire.

THE 1975 WORLD TRADE CENTER TOWER FIRE.

This 110-story steel-framed office building suffered a fire on the 11th floor on February 23, 1975. The loss was estimated at over $2,000,000. The building is one of a pair of towers, 412 m in height. The fire started at approximately 11:45 P.M. in a furnished office on the 11th floor and spread through the corridors toward the main open office area. A porter saw flames under the door and sounded the alarm. It was later that the smoke detector in the air-conditioning plenum on the 11th floor was activated. The delay was probably because the air-conditioning system was turned off at night. The building engineers placed the ventilation system in the purge mode, to blow fresh air into the core area and to draw air from all the offices on the 11th floor so as to prevent further smoke spread. The fire department on arrival found a very intense fire. It was not immediately known that the fire was spreading vertically from floor to floor through openings in the floor slab. These 300-mm x 450-mm (12-in. x 18-in.) openings in the slab provided access for telephone cables. Subsidiary fires on the 9th to the 19th floors were discovered and readily extinguished. The only occupants of the building at the time of fire were cleaning and service personnel. They were evacuated without any fatalities. However, there were 125 firemen involved in fighting this fire and 28 sustained injuries from the intense heat and smoke. The cause of the fire is unknown.

WAS THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION COMPLICIT IN 9/11? 01.Jan.2004 04:54

book review: THE NEW PEARL HARBOR

WE REPOST, YOU DECIDE

-Caveat Lector-

----- Original Message -----
From: chris.osborne
To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 1:19 AM
Subject: Fw: Was the Bush Administration Complicit in 9/11?



To:
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 5:09 AM
Subject: Fw: Was the Bush Administration Complicit in 9/11?


Book Review: The New Pearl Harbor

Was the Bush Administration Complicit in 9/11?
by Dr. Rosemary Radford Ruether


Until recently I dismissed the suggestions that the
Bush administration might have been complicit in
allowing 9/11 to happen as groundless "conspiracy
theory." I regarded the federal investigative
bureaucracies as suffering from a "lock the barn door
after the horse has escaped" syndrome. American
government agencies seemed to me to be full of
repressive energy and exaggerated overreach after some
atrocity had occurred, but remarkably incompetent when
it came to preventing something in advance. There is no
question that the Bush administration has profited
greatly from the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center
and the Pentagon, but I did not imagine that they could
have actually known they were being planned and
deliberately allowed them to happen.

Thus it was with some skepticism that I agreed to read
the new book written by David Ray Griffin, a process
theologian from the Claremont School of Theology
(Claremont, California), that argues the case for just
such complicity. This book, The New Pearl Harbor:
Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and
9/11, is due for release in January, 2004. Griffin
admits that he too was skeptical toward such
suggestions until he began to actually read the
evidence that has been accumulated by a number of researchers,
both in the United States and Europe. As he became
increasingly convinced that there was a case for
complicity, he planned to write an article, but this
quickly grew into a book.

The first startling piece of evidence that Griffin puts
forward is establishing the motive among leaders in the
Bush administration for allowing such an attack.
Already in 2000 the right-wing authors of the "Project
for the New American Century: Rebuilding America's
Defenses," opined that the military expansion they
desired would be difficult unless a "new Pearl Harbor"
occurred. They had outlined plans for a major imperial
expansion of American power that included a greatly
increased military budget and invasions of Afghanistan
and Iraq, primarily to secure oil supplies, but also to
control the region generally. But they believed that
the American people would not have the will for such
actions without some devastating attack from outside
that would galvanize them through fear and anger to
support it. In short, they had already envisioned
facilitating a major attack on the United States in
order to gain the public support for their policy
goals.

Griffin then shows the considerable evidence that the
Bush administration knew in advance that such an attack
was being planned, despite claims by the administration
that such an attack was completely unanticipated. As
early as 1995 the Philippine police conveyed to the
U.S. information found on an Al-Queda computer that
detailed "Project Bojinka" that envisioned hyjacking
planes and flying them into targets, such as the World
Trade Center, the White House and the Pentagon. By July
of 2001 the CIA and the FBI had intercepted
considerable information that such an attack was
planned for the Fall. Leaders of several different
countries, including the Taliban in Afghanistan, as
well as leaders of Russia, Britain, Jordan, Egypt and
Israel, conveyed information to the United States that
such an attack was being planned. It appears not only
that all these warnings were disregarded, but that
investigations into them were obstructed.

The actual events of September 11 leave many puzzling
questions. Standard procedures for intervention when a
plane goes off course were not followed in the case of
all four airplanes. Within ten minutes of evidence that
a plane has been hyjacked standard procedures call for
fighter jets to intervene and demand that the plane
follow it to an airport. If the plane fails to obey, it
should be shot down. There was time for this to happen
before the plane was over New York City in the case of
the first jet and more than ample time in the case of
the second. Moreover when the order was finally given
to intervene, it was not to McGuire Air Force Base in
New Jersey, seventy miles from New York City, but from
Otis Air National Guard in Cape Cod.

Griffin also examines unexplained issues about the
other two planes. Eye witnesses and on-site evidence
suggests that a missile or guided fighter aircraft, not
a large commercial plane, crashed into the Pentagon.
Moreover the part of the Pentagon that was hit was not
where high ranking generals were working, but an area
under repair with few military officials. Flight #93
was the only plane shot down, although only after it
appeared passengers were on the verge of taking
control. Griffin also examines the conduct of President
Bush on that day, giving considerable evidence that he
knew of the first crash immediately after it happened,
but delayed his response for some half a hour,
nonchalantly continuing with a photo op with elementary
school children.

These are only a few details of the myriad data that
Griffin assembles to show that, not only did the Bush
administration have detailed information that such
attacks were going to occur on September 11 and failed
to carry through protective responses in advance, but
that they also obstructed the standard procedures to
intervene in these events on the actual day it
happened.

Griffin concludes the book with some considerable
evidence of the way the Bush Administration has
obstructed any independent investigation of 9/11 since
it occurred, both withholding key documents and
insisting that the official investigation, when it was
set up, limit itself to recommendations about how to
avoid such an event in the future, and not focus on how
it actually was able to happen. Griffin writes in a
precise and careful fashion, avoiding inflammatory
rhetoric. He argues for a high probability for the Bush
Administration's complicity in allowing and
facilitating the attacks, based not on any one
conclusive piece of evidence, but the sheer
accumulation of all of the data. He concludes by
calling for a genuinely independent investigative
effort that would examine all this evidence. He himself
plans to send the book to the Kean Commission presently
charged with that task, even though he has doubts about
its real independence.

I personally found Griffin's book both convincing and
chilling. If the complicity of the Bush Administration
to which he points is true, then Americans have a far
greater problem on their hands than even the more
ardent anti-war critics have imagined. If the
administration would do this, what else would they do
to maintain and expand their power?

==========================================

(Dr. Rosemary Radford Ruether has been a pioneer
Christian feminist theologian for over three decades
and is among the most widely read theologians in the
world. Her book, Sexism and God-Talk, a classic in the
field of theology, remains the only systematic feminist
treatment of the Christian symbols to date. With
wide-ranging scholarship, Dr. Ruether has written and
edited over thirty books and hundreds of articles and
reviews.)

911 MISSING PIECES...WHAT DON'T WE KNOW, AND... 01.Jan.2004 05:26

WHY DON'T WE KNOW IT?

WE REPOST, YOU DECIDE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Art: Scott Lizama

Nine hundred and Eleven Missing Pieces
What don't we know, and why don't we know it?

The Southern Solstice has passed, and with it the deadline for 9/11 families to file their claims with the "Feinberg Fund," as it has come to be known. Of an official death toll of 2976, claims have been filed by for 2,851. The claim involves signing off on any future litigation against the government, the airlines, the airports or any security firms.

One hundred and twenty-five claims remain outstanding, but little has been written about any of these families. Where is the coverage of those insisting on finding out what really happened on that day before they sign away their "claims?"

First to stand up were five widows: Kristen Breitweiser, Patty Casazza, Mindy Kleinberg and Lorie van Auken. Breitweiser's husband was killed in his office at Fiduciary Trust on the 94th floor of the South Tower, while Casazza, Kleinberg and van Auken are Cantor-Fitzgerald widows. They began lobbying for answers early in 2002, navigating the labyrinth of American bureaucracy and hammering the bureaucrats for direct answers to direct questions. In September 2002, Breitweiser testified at the first televised public hearing before the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry (JICI) in DC.

Like many others, she wanted to know why, on May 16, 2002, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice stated that she didn't "think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center... That they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile."

Breitweiser knows the historical facts say otherwise. She noted the following points in her statement. In her words:

• In 1993, a $150,000 study was commissioned by the Pentagon to investigate the possibility of an airplane being used to bomb national landmarks. A draft document of this was circulated throughout the Pentagon, the Justice Department and to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

• In 1994, a disgruntled Fed Ex employee invaded the cockpit of a DC-10 with plans to crash it into a company building in Memphis. That same year, a lone pilot crashed a small plane into a tree on the White House grounds, and an Air France flight was hijacked by members of the Armed Islamic Group with the intent to crash the plane into the Eiffel Tower.

• In January 1995, Philippine authorities investigating Abdul Murad, an Islamic terrorist, unearthed a plot to blow up 11 airliners over the Pacific, and in the alternative, several planes were to be hijacked and flown into civilian targets in the U.S. Among the targets mentioned were CIA headquarters, the World Trade Center, the Sears Tower and the White House.

• In September 1999, a report, "The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism," was prepared for U.S. intelligence by the Federal Research Division, an arm of the Library of Congress. It stated, "Suicide bombers belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and Semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the CIA, or the White House."

Like many others, Breitweiser believes that American intelligence had long speculated that terrorist organizations could and would utilize airplanes as weapons.

She also included a March 11, 2002 statement by the director of the CIA, George Tenet: "[The United States] never had the texture-meaning enough information-to stop what happened." She offered a similar statement by the director of the FBI, Robert Mueller, from May 8, 2002: "[T]here was nothing the agency could have done to anticipate and prevent the attacks."

Once again Breitweiser argued that the facts indicated otherwise. As she said:

• Throughout the spring and early summer of 2001, intelligence agencies flooded the government with warnings of possible terrorist attacks against American targets, including commercial aircraft, by al Qaeda and other groups. The warnings were vague but sufficiently alarming to prompt the FAA to issue four information circulars, or ICs, to the commercial airline industry between June 22 and July 31, warning of possible terrorism.

• On June 22, the military's Central and European Commands imposed "Force Protection Condition Delta," the highest anti-terrorist alert.

• On June 28, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice said, "It is highly likely that a significant al Qaeda attack is in the near future, within several weeks."

• As of July 31, the FAA urged U.S. airlines to maintain a "high degree of alertness."

• One FAA circular from late July noted, according to Condoleezza Rice, that there was "no specific target, no credible info of attack to U.S. civil aviation interests, but terror groups are known to be planning and training for hijackings, and we ask you therefore to use caution." Two counter-terrorism officials described the alerts of the early and mid-summer 2001 as "the most urgent in decades."

Breitweiser is resolute in her assertions. Airport security officials, she believes, could have done much more to prevent the hijackings. Beyond that, however, she wonders what September 11 would have been like had the government made the public aware of the threats. How many people, she asks, would have chosen to board planes that morning? And how many of those in World Trade Center 2 would have remained in their offices, watching the inferno of Tower 1, had they known of the possibility of an air attack?

One of the more compelling passages in Breitweiser's statement concerns a July 5, 2001 White House gathering of the FAA, the Coast Guard, the FBI, Secret Service and INS wherein a top counter-terrorism official, Richard Clarke, stated that "[s]omething really spectacular is going to happen here, and it's going to happen soon." Despite being put on heightened alert, intelligence agencies ignored-or at least dismissed-what is now widely known as the "Phoenix Memo."

On July 10, an FBI field agent in Phoenix, AZ, named Kenneth Williams reported suspicions of a hijacking plot. He recommended that the FBI investigate the possibility that al Qaeda operatives were training at U.S. flight schools, suggesting that Osama bin Laden's followers may have been securing jobs as security guards, pilots and other personnel.

Too many questions remain, and Breitweiser is very thorough in outlining the possible failures of not only our government's communication prior to the attack, but its response. She wonders why, for instance, the NY/NJ Port Authority didn't evacuate the World Trade Center when they knew that a second plane was heading in? And why weren't the F-16s and Stealth bombers that tracked on radar screens at approximately 8:05 a.m. used to prevent tragedy?

Concerning the attack on the Pentagon, Breitweiser notes that Washington Air Traffic Control Center was aware of the first plane before it hit the World Trade Center. And yet, the third plane-American Airlines Flight 77, soon to plunge into the Pentagon-made a few "loop de loops" over DC one hour and 45 minutes after Washington Center was made aware of the hijackings. Why, she asks, was our Air Force so late in its response?

In late 2002, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States-now known popularly as the "9/11 Commission"-was reluctantly created, in large part due to the efforts of the widow Breitweiser. The commission's object is not so much to get the facts straight, but to assign blame for "shortcomings" and "failures" in the bureaucracy. It's what is known in intelligence circles as a "limited hang-out."

On September 12, 2003, the widow Ellen Mariani filed a civil RICO suit in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania naming George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, Norman Mineta, Peter G. Peterson, Condoleezza Rice, George H.W. Bush and Kenneth Feinberg, in addition to "Other unnamed past, present, officials, representatives, agents, and private consultants of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" as defendants. She is demanding a jury trial.

She also fired off an open letter to President Bush in which she claims that he "intentionally allowed 9/11 to happen to gather public support for a 'war on terrorism.'" She accuses him of being "fully aware of the unfolding events" yet "[choosing] to continue on to the Emma E. Booker Elementary School to proceed with a scheduled event and 'photo op.'" With America under attack, she writes, our president "did not appear to blink an eye or shed a tear [but] continued on as if everything was 'business as usual.'"

Speaking for the families of the victims, she poses the following questions to President Bush:

Why were 29 pages of the 9/11 committee report personally censored at your request?

Where are the "black boxes" from Flight 11 and Flight 175?

Where are the "voice recorders" from Flight 11 and Flight 175?

Why can't we gain access to the complete air traffic control records for Flight 11 and Flight 175?

Where are the airport surveillance tapes that show the passengers boarding the doomed flights?

When will complete passenger lists for all of the flights be released?

Why did your brother, Jeb Bush, the governor of Florida, personally go to the offices of the Hoffman Aviation School and order that flight records and files be removed? These files were then put on a C130 government cargo plane and flown out of the country. Where were they taken and who ordered it done?

Her letter ends ominously: "I will prove this in a court of law!"

So many, many questions. Why did World Trade Center 7 collapse? No airplane hit that building, and before September 11, no steel skyscraper had ever collapsed because of a fire. Yet three fell-very neatly and virtually into their own footprints.

(Even if one allows the engineers their claims that WTC1 and WTC2 were designed to collapse in on themselves, what of the perfect collapse of WTC7?)

The firefighters who were in the two towers were not in the least concerned about a collapse, as demonstrated in the fire department's transcript of their radio traffic. In fact, they stated that the fires were dying out and could be extinguished with just a couple of lines of hose. Jet fuel burns like kerosene or charcoal fluid-quickly and completely-yet Ground Zero burned for 100 days.

The idea of rigging the buildings for a controlled demolition was dismissed as unrealistic by even the most suspicious types. How to gain access? Well, President Bush's other brother, Marvin, had a security company covering the World Trade Center, Dulles International Airport and United Airlines.

In The American Reporter (Jan. 20, 2003), Margie Burns raises the question of Marvin Bush's role in September 11. She notes that two of the planes involved that day were United, and another took off from Dulles airport. The firm that handled security, formerly named Securacom, "listed [Marvin] Bush on its board of directors and as a significant shareholder. The firm, now named Stratesec, Inc., is located in Sterling, Va., a suburb of Washington, D.C., and emphasizes federal clients."

The company, Burns writes, was never investigated. Rather, it has benefited from increased security measures instituted in the wake of the attacks.

Some doubt altogether that a plane hit the Pentagon. On Sept. 12, Arlington County Fire Chief Ed Plaugher made some revealing statements. When asked about aircraft wreckage, he responded that "there are some small pieces of aircraft visible from the interior during this fire-fighting operation... but not large sections. In other words, there's no fuselage sections and that sort of thing." When asked about jet fuel, he referred to a "puddle."

Look at pictures, however, and it's hard to believe that a Boeing 757 flew into the Pentagon. The damage is not in proportion to the claim, especially when one considers that two Boeing 757s are said to have taken down three skyscrapers. The Pentagon was dented, the plane evaporated.

Nothing that has been reported as truth escapes examination. Even the 19 men at the controls, now infamously known as the 9/11 hijackers, cannot be tied with real evidence to the event itself. This, according to FBI Director Robert Mueller. "Mohammed Atta" appears to have been a stolen identity, as per the real Atta's father and his passport, which went missing in 1999, and on Sept. 23, 2001, the BBC reported that at least four other of the 19 men identified as the hijackers were alive and well-and considerably unsettled.

Why would seismographs in the NYC area register two tiny quakes at Ground Zero at the commencement of the collapse of each tower?

Why were the planes up in the air for so long? And why did they fly over so many military bases? Was America's defense team on a crack break, or was it a National Reconnaissance Office exercise, a wargame that involved hijacked aircraft being splashed into buildings in New York and DC? The two that took the towers flew within spitting distance of the Indian Point nuclear reactor facility.

Condoleezza Rice's preposterous May 16, 2002, statement that no one could have foreseen this scenario was particularly ironic given that Pacifica Radio identified her that day as the source of San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown's "airport security" call warning him not to fly on Black Tuesday.

The internet is boiling with analyses of the 9/11 event. In Europe, a fair number of people believe the American government was complicit in the attacks. According to recent polls, one-third of young Germans believe this. Print and broadcast media here ignore the questions, but it can't be kept from public view forever. It's all out there. It's been two years, and we still have nothing but questions and Grassy Knoll theories. The answers lay scattered in shreds and pieces, waiting to be assembled.

Now come the widows, asking the right questions. Mariani's lawyer, Phil Berg, makes a point to remind people that he is not in the least bit suicidal, or given to playing with loaded guns. They may not be able to reassemble or reanimate their loved ones in a literal sense, but these families who are choosing the hard road, the Narrow Way, will get to the truth

MANY 9-11 "HIJACKERS" ARE STILL ALIVE. 01.Jan.2004 12:44

William

> MANY 9-11 "HIJACKERS" ARE STILL ALIVE.

This is huge news, indeed. If an interview were conducted with at least one of the live "hijackers", it would rival any other event for the story of the year.

A modest proposal for IMC investigators:
If you go to the Middle East and videograph and photograph an interview with one of these live hijackers*, I guarantee that I can sell the story for at least $6 million. My firm has all the connections we'd need to sell the video and the still photos/transcript to all of the top media outlets around the world. I wouldn't be surprised if I could get $10 million for the material (this would be more likely if you could interview more than one of them). With such a high sales price, I will lower my fee and take only 10%. The remainder can be used to fund IMC into the next decade.

What do you say?

* use the list published from the government report of Summer 2003.

reply to SOPHOMORE ENGINEERING STUDENT 04.Jan.2004 12:13

Merlin

a friend just told me to come back to this page, as it'd dropped off front page a day or so ago, and I've
not followed it anymore till he tell me that an Engineering Student had request of me. I don't know if
now is still timely for your question...but, shall give it a try nonetheless. I would, of course, be happy
to assist any fellow engineer with any problem had...brain-storming, etc. towards seeking solution;
but at this point, I would need to qualify any "technical" assistance by devulging my situation insofar
as my "status" within the engineering community...professional, that is...is concerned.

Up till 12 years ago, I'd enjoyed a successful career, and at age 44 on my birthday, I suffered from a
cerebral hemmorhage and nearly died. Due to my relative youth, being in very top-shape physical
condition, and otherwise good health, I managed to survive it, and after 9 months recuperations, to
once again return to practice. Unfortunately, after a year's work, it began apparent I'd suffered lot of
memory loss, and other psychological impairments arising from the brain stroke suffered.

All of this was driven home to me in most powerful manner, as for that year I'd largely been in state
of personal "denial" as to what had really happened, and it wasn't till I did a horrible botched job of
estimating a construction project for young minority contractor--who won the bid (how could he NOT?)
and had the governing agency to have him "reconfirm" it as even they suspected it far too low to do
the work. Well, he brought it back to me, of course, and I went over it time and time again...still NOT
catching my original errors (it so simple...as they always are...that I'm still yet too ashamed to admit
what it was!), and so, I reassured him it was RIGHT! He trusted me so completely that he went back
and reconfirmed it, was then awarded the bid, and soon during course of construction, came to the
sad realization that I had been seriously WRONG! Well, he was facing financial ruin as result, his
bonding agent was having heart attacks, and his insurer was seeking means to undercut him--rather
than underwrite him...but, his attorney was jumping up and down with delight...as, his tasks became
like taking candy from a baby... with "Transfer of Wealth for "Dummies"" being his reference book!

Naturally, as I well knew I'd made the costly mistake, and owned up to it, and much grieved over the
fact this fine young man/his family faced financial ruin because of me, I was most inclined to seek an
equitable settlement before facing a slam-dunk civil court. All parties were agreeable, and since it
was sanctioned, one of the stipulations was that I "retire" all professional licenses (which at time, I
had a good many..PE, RLS, LLS, ChE, etc. etc.) to "inactive" level, and never again resume practice,
and to withdraw active memberships in professional organizations I then belonged to. I had no real
problem with all this, as frankly, I'd reached point where I'd seen it all/done it all insofar as career was
concerned...was looking for a change anyway...I was BURNED-OUT with being consulting engineer &
government technocrat. I even donated all my textbooks/references accumulated over 25 years, and
lost a fortune in settlement, but retained enough to go on relatively comfortable to seek new lifestyle.

So, now I have no textbooks, no references, no professional contact with colleagues/peers...except
those I retain personal friendships with, and of course, e-mailing and internet sources. I been a full-
time student for past 10 years, working on sociology, humanities, demography & film studies degrees
to keep my brain interested in new knowledge and functioning, so as to manage better my failing body,
which is afflicted with numerous ailments as I approach my late-50's.

I tell you this, so you'll realize I am not really in position to render the degree of assistance you may in-
deed require with your problem (though I would certainly try nonetheless), and so you'll realize I'm not
giving you the buzz-off and ignoring your plea to fellow engineer, for I wouldn't want a young engineer to
ever get notion that we professionals are like that...we aren't...we take our responsiblities seriously,
quest for knowledge, and always offer the hand back to our younger brethen/sisters as respect to all
those older ones/long gone, who gave us their hand when we were your age.

So...my young Sophomore Engineering Student...whoever you are/wherever you may be...be proud of
the course you've set for your life, and realize you are amongst wonderful people in the profession who
will always take your career development seriously. Why?...take's how the world progresses on the
technical/material level. While doing so...don't forget the "spiritual level" either, for that's where you'll
find inspiration to withstand the "tests", "trials", "failures", and yes, "successes"! Hope this helps?

Someone's missing the bigger picture! 10.Aug.2005 12:52

DataSurge

Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation
 http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

I did not notice if this article had been posted on this discussion, but I would implore some of you to take an unbiased look at what was written by two individuals from MIT regarding the WTC collapses. Despite the fact that the formulas in this discussion may be true and correct, they are not taking the entire situation into account and are only taking basically about the melting point of steel. Many factors have to be taken into account when trying to investigate the cause of any accident. I believe that looking at only a minor scope of information can easily lead to overall miscalculations and misjudgements.