Eine Diskussion über 9/11 = Inside Job (once again;)) im Forum Politik & Weltgeschehen. Teil des Off Topic-Bereichs; Zitat von SonGohan Tickerts bei euch noch ganz sauber. Ich stand kurz vor nem Herzstillstand, als ich diesen Theardtitel erneut ...
Ach kommt, früher oder später gräbt den irgendeine arme vewirrte Seele doch sowieso wieder aus
irgendwelche neuigkeiten zum jahrestag? irgendwelche neuen theorien?
AHNUNG VON OWNUNG !!!
... weil heavy metal der einzig wahre weg ist
Nein, da sicherlich niemand so viel Kompetenz besitzt und Songohans These, von der nicht exestierenden druckabhängigen Erhöhung der Wärmeleitfähigkeit von Stahl, widerlegen kann.
Das Flugzeug schlägt ein, der Druck im ganzen Gebäude erhöht sich. Auf einmal haben alle Stahlteile eine erhöhte Wärmeleitfähigkeit, wodurch die Bolzen aus irgendwelchen Gründen nach der Abkühlung dieser brechen.
Und somit das ganze Gebäude in Freifallgeschwindigkeit nach unten, bis in den Keller "ein stürtzt". Nebenbei wird aus irgendwelchen Gründen der gesamte Beton samt Büroinnenleben zerstäubt und über die ganze Stadt verteilt, anstelle Schicht für Schicht einen Pfandkuchen zu bilden.
Songohan wird auch bestimmt in der Lage sein, mit seinem Mathematischem können uns her zu rechnen, wie dieses Gemisch aus Mangan, Barium, Schwefel, Aluminium, und Eisen III-oxid in den WTC Staub gelangt. Wahrscheinlich hatte wohl einer der Bauarbeiter bei den Aufräumarbeiten eine Hand voll dieses Militärischen Sprengstoffgemisches welches sich Thermat nennt zufällig einstecken und verloren.
Geändert von QUAKERxnc (11.09.2010 um 15:07 Uhr)
Niemand widersetzt sich mir.
Meine Meinung dazu ist bekannt, und die Zukunft wird irgendwann zeigen, wer denn nun eigentlich Recht hatte.
Der Gewinner darf wahlweise amerikanische Flaggen oder Korane verbrennen. Mei wird das ein Spaß...
And once again,the NIST-FAQ. Könnt ihr das nicht erst einmal lesen, anstatt immer nur eure Aluhut-Träger-Seiten ohne Quellen zu zitieren? Wie soll man denn mit euch diskutieren? Hier nochmals für die relevanten fragen von Quaker auch wenn er sie vermutlich nicht lesen wird^^
6. How could the WTC towers collapse in only 11 seconds (WTC 1) and 9 seconds (WTC 2)—speeds that approximate that of a ball dropped from similar height in a vacuum (with no air resistance)?
NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2. These elapsed times were based on: (1) precise timing of the initiation of collapse from video evidence, and (2) ground motion (seismic) signals recorded at Palisades, N.Y., that also were precisely time-calibrated for wave transmission times from lower Manhattan (see NCSTAR 1-5A).
As documented in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, these collapse times show that:
“… the structure below the level of collapse initiation offered minimal resistance to the falling building mass at and above the impact zone. The potential energy released by the downward movement of the large building mass far exceeded the capacity of the intact structure below to absorb that energy through energy of deformation.
Since the stories below the level of collapse initiation provided little resistance to the tremendous energy released by the falling building mass, the building section above came down essentially in free fall, as seen in videos. As the stories below sequentially failed, the falling mass increased, further increasing the demand on the floors below, which were unable to arrest the moving mass.”
In other words, the momentum (which equals mass times velocity) of the 12 to 28 stories (WTC 1 and WTC 2, respectively) falling on the supporting structure below (which was designed to support only the static weight of the floors above and not any dynamic effects due to the downward momentum) so greatly exceeded the strength capacity of the structure below that it (the structure below) was unable to stop or even to slow the falling mass. The downward momentum felt by each successive lower floor was even larger due to the increasing mass.
From video evidence, significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse. Neither the duration of the seismic records nor video evidence (due to obstruction of view caused by debris clouds) are reliable indicators of the total time it took for each building to collapse completely.
2. Why did NIST not consider a “controlled demolition” hypothesis with matching computer modeling and explanation as it did for the “pancake theory” hypothesis? A key critique of NIST’s work lies in the complete lack of analysis supporting a “progressive collapse” after the point of collapse initiation and the lack of consideration given to a controlled demolition hypothesis.
NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST’s dedicated Web site, http://wtc.nist.gov. This included consideration of a number of hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.
Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.
Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.
NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor system—that connected the core columns and the perimeter columns—consisted of a grid of steel “trusses” integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram below). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon.
diagram of composit wtc floor system
Diagram of Composite WTC Floor System
NIST’s findings also do not support the “controlled demolition” theory since there is conclusive evidence that:
the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers and nowhere else, and;
the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102 minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact floors.
Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their downward movement upon collapse initiation.
In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view.
12. 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? The combination of thermite and sulfur (called thermate) "slices through steel like a hot knife through butter."
NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.
The responses to questions number 2, 4, 5 and 11 demonstrate why NIST concluded that there were no explosives or controlled demolition involved in the collapses of the WTC towers.
Furthermore, a very large quantity of thermite (a mixture of powdered or granular aluminum metal and powdered iron oxide that burns at extremely high temperatures when ignited) or another incendiary compound would have had to be placed on at least the number of columns damaged by the aircraft impact and weakened by the subsequent fires to bring down a tower. Thermite burns slowly relative to explosive materials and can require several minutes in contact with a massive steel section to heat it to a temperature that would result in substantial weakening. Separate from the WTC towers investigation, NIST researchers estimated that at least 0.13 pounds of thermite would be required to heat each pound of a steel section to approximately 700 degrees Celsius (the temperature at which steel weakens substantially). Therefore, while a thermite reaction can cut through large steel columns, many thousands of pounds of thermite would need to have been placed inconspicuously ahead of time, remotely ignited, and somehow held in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building. This makes it an unlikely substance for achieving a controlled demolition.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC towers, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
7a. How could the steel have melted if the fires in the WTC towers weren’t hot enough to do so?
7b. Since the melting point of steel is about 2,700 degrees Fahrenheit, the temperature of jet fuel fires does not exceed 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit and Underwriters Laboratories (UL) certified the steel in the WTC towers to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit for six hours, how could fires have impacted the steel enough to bring down the WTC towers?
In no instance did NIST report that steel in the WTC towers melted due to the fires. The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36).
However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers.
UL did not certify any steel as suggested. In fact, in U.S. practice, steel is not certified at all; rather structural assemblies are tested for their fire resistance rating in accordance with a standard procedure such as ASTM E 119 (see NCSTAR 1-6B). That the steel was “certified ... to 2000 degrees Fahrenheit for six hours” is simply not true.
Cause I'm a picker
I'm a grinner
I'm a lover
And I'm a sinner
I play my music in the sun
Geduld, die Auswertung des neuen Filmmaterials, welches nun veröffentlicht werden musste, wird noch etwas dauern!
Aber für alle Ungeduldigen:
Der Mann weiss einfach alles besser!
Never run a touching system!!
Ich will doch bitten, schon alleine der Gedanke grenzt an einer Beleidigung.......
Geändert von SonGohan (29.10.2010 um 14:21 Uhr)
Es werden auch in 100 Jahren nicht alle Details geklärt sein zu den Anschlägen. Aber alle Jahre wieder müssen sich alle den Kopf darum zerbrechen
DON'T FORGET THE OHO-EFFECT!!!
Ein Quickie am Morgen, vertreibt Kummer und Sorgen
Staatlich geprüfter Vaginal und Analreiniger. Zu ihren Diensten.
Es gibt vieles zwischen Himmel und Erde von dem Wir nichts wissen.
Dadrüber sind wir uns alle doch sicherlich klar.
Wow, wie sehr man doch aus dem ZUsammenhang reißen kann
"President and the Press" Speech (April 27, 1961)
John Fitzgerald Kennedy
President Kennedy speaks at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City before the American Newspaper Publishers Association. Kennedy asks the press for their cooperation in fighting Communism by applying the same standards for publishing sensitive materials in the current Cold War that they would apply in an officially declared war.
Zu deutsch da gehts um den Kommunismus nicht um Illuminaten, Freimauerer oder Bielefeld...
Cause I'm a picker
I'm a grinner
I'm a lover
And I'm a sinner
I play my music in the sun
Du hast ja keine Ahnung! Natürlich musste er es so aussehen lassen, als ginge es um Kommunismus...
Oh, the devil will find work for idle hands to do...
Heute ist der 12 . Jahrestag....
War es ein Inside Job ?????
Für den Post sollte man dir ordentlich den Popo versohlen. Bitte in freezys Folterkammer melden.
PS: Können wir den Thread vielleicht einfach schließen? Ist ja nicht so als käme hier noch irgendwas sinnvolles bei rum.
keine ahnung, gabs noch nich hier? ich haus ma rein, hf beim gucken ^^
Entweder bist du für uns oder gegen uns... Republikaner oder Demokrat, Rot, Schwarz, Gelb oder Grün, Konservativer oder Liberaler Staat.
Niemand analysiert mehr einen Sachverhalt und versucht den richtigen Standpunkt zu finden, dabei ist unsere Vernunft das was uns zu Menschen macht, aber in letzter Zeit scheinen wir diese Gabe viel zu oft, zu schnell und zu leichtfertig aufzugeben, nur für das gute Gefühl einer Gruppe anzugehören. Hauptsache wir übernehmen den Standpunkt „unseres“ Teams. Ich hab das auch mal versucht… ich hab mich schwer enttäuscht…