Doubtful conclusion

Henry Hansteen lives in Enfield. He is a technician in Cornell's Laboratory of Elementary Particle Physics.
Ming
_________________


http://www.theithacajournal.com/article/20091003/VIEWPOINTS02/910030313/1129/Doubtful+conclusion


October 3, 2009

Doubtful conclusion

By Henry Hansteen

For many, perhaps even most of us, early September is a harsh reminder of the devastating terror attacks of 2001. And although one probably wouldn't know it through the popular news media, there are many glaring contradictions between the government's 9/11 conspiracy theory and what the actual evidence and expert research demonstrate.

Let's examine the unprecedented free-fall and symmetric drop of World Trade Center 7, which occurred about seven hours after the twin towers exploded and disintegrated, spewing tons of toxic dust for miles - toxic dust that the government insisted was safe, knowing that it was anything but safe.

WTC7 was a 47-story, steel-framed, hurricane- and earthquake-resistant high-rise. At 5:20 p.m. that day, all four walls and everything within accelerated toward the ground at free-fall speed with near-perfect symmetry as if nothing but air was resisting its drop. This is not mere opinion. It's a matter of easily verified fact. The video evidence proves it, and even the National Institute of Standards and Technology has finally acknowledged it.

At www.ae911truth.org., almost 900 architects and engineers and 5,000 other supporters prove convincingly why the government's theory is physically impossible. Also worth noting is the fact that although many steel-framed high-rises have suffered infernos of far greater size, intensity and duration than WTC7, there are no examples elsewhere of such buildings suffering a complete collapse. In fact, I am unable to find an example where even one major support column buckled.

There is, at minimum, one fundamental problem with NIST's explanation for WTC7's unprecedented drop: NIST attributes the instant, total and symmetric failure of WTC7's massive, resilient steel frame to gradual, partial and asymmetric weakening of the frame. However, not only is it physically impossible to cause a steel-framed high-rise to drop at anywhere near free-fall speed, even with a raging inferno that engulfs the entire structure, weakening every support column at the same rate, but video evidence shows that much of WTC7's steel frame was never even exposed to any fire.

Originally, government-hired researchers claimed that WTC7, although it wasn't struck by a plane, suffered significant structural damage in one corner due to tower debris impacts. NIST also speculated that fuel oil tanks in the building may have ruptured, causing a much hotter and larger than normal fire. With no evidence to support either claim, NIST abandoned them and now theorizes that structural damage played no significant role - that, instead, nothing but ordinary office fires caused WTC7's free-fall drop for the first and only time in history.

This is physically impossible. When steel is heated gradually, it loses its strength gradually. Furthermore, when steel does become hot enough that the forces exerted cause it to bend, it becomes stronger through a process known as "work hardening."

NIST's theory does not hold up. Please join heroic first responders, victims, family members, scientists and others in demanding a new investigation into the 9/11 attacks. Visit www.nyccan.org and www.911research.com for more information.