Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

The NIST World Trade Center Report: A New Standard for Deception Kevin Ryan 911 Truth Conference: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future Chicago, IL.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "The NIST World Trade Center Report: A New Standard for Deception Kevin Ryan 911 Truth Conference: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future Chicago, IL."— Presentation transcript:

1 The NIST World Trade Center Report: A New Standard for Deception Kevin Ryan 911 Truth Conference: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future Chicago, IL June 4, 2006

2 Introduction I’m a former manager at Underwriters Laboratories (UL), fired for publicly questioning the October 2004 draft NIST WTC report I’m a former manager at Underwriters Laboratories (UL), fired for publicly questioning the October 2004 draft NIST WTC report NIST* is a government agency, reporting to Bush cabinet member Gutierrez (Commerce). The director of NIST is also a Presidential appointee NIST* is a government agency, reporting to Bush cabinet member Gutierrez (Commerce). The director of NIST is also a Presidential appointee NIST’s WTC report is a product of the Bush Administration (i.e. Bush Science) NIST’s WTC report is a product of the Bush Administration (i.e. Bush Science) *National Institute of Standards and Technology

3 “Bush Science” The Bush Administration has been “deliberately and systematically distorting scientific fact in the service of policy goals” The Bush Administration has been “deliberately and systematically distorting scientific fact in the service of policy goals” Open letter from 60 prominent scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates “We found a serious pattern of undermining science by the Bush Administration” “We found a serious pattern of undermining science by the Bush Administration” Union of Concerned Scientists “[We] found numerous instances where the Administration has manipulated the scientific process and distorted or suppressed scientific findings” “[We] found numerous instances where the Administration has manipulated the scientific process and distorted or suppressed scientific findings” House Committee on Government Reform

4 Important WTC collapse considerations No tall buildings have ever collapsed from fire, but on 9/11, we’re told there were threeNo tall buildings have ever collapsed from fire, but on 9/11, we’re told there were three No building exhibiting all the characteristics of demolition has ever NOT been a demolitionNo building exhibiting all the characteristics of demolition has ever NOT been a demolition 99.7% of steel evidence destroyed despite outraged cries from public and fire experts99.7% of steel evidence destroyed despite outraged cries from public and fire experts More than a year passed before full investigation beganMore than a year passed before full investigation began

5 Demo remembers The collapse of the WTC towers looked like a classic controlled demolition, said Mike Taylor of the National Association of Demolition Contractors, “It cascaded down like an implosion” The collapse of the WTC towers looked like a classic controlled demolition, said Mike Taylor of the National Association of Demolition Contractors, “It cascaded down like an implosion” “It appeared to me that charges had been placed in the building” -- Ronald Hamburger, structural engineer and contributor to FEMA and NIST reports “It appeared to me that charges had been placed in the building” -- Ronald Hamburger, structural engineer and contributor to FEMA and NIST reports Official investigations never considered demolition Official investigations never considered demolition

6 Early support for the official story “Experts” said jet fuel fires melted the steel “Experts” said jet fuel fires melted the steel BBC (Chris Wise, etc.)BBC (Chris Wise, etc.) Scientific American (Eduardo Kausel)Scientific American (Eduardo Kausel) NOVA video (Matthys Levy)NOVA video (Matthys Levy) Henry Koffman from USCHenry Koffman from USC Tom Mackin from Univ. of IllinoisTom Mackin from Univ. of Illinois The New ScientistThe New Scientist Temperatures exaggerated Temperatures exaggerated National Geographic Today - 2,900 FNational Geographic Today - 2,900 F A&E /History Channel video – 2500 FA&E /History Channel video – 2500 F

7 Jet fuel fires melted steel? Steel melts at ~2800 FSteel melts at ~2800 F Jet fuel fires burn at maximum of ~1500 F unless in special combustion chamberJet fuel fires burn at maximum of ~1500 F unless in special combustion chamber Gas temps are not steel tempsGas temps are not steel temps Thermodynamic calculations suggest steel temperatures in impact zones could have reached maximum of 600 FThermodynamic calculations suggest steel temperatures in impact zones could have reached maximum of 600 F

8 Where are the real experts? Our nation’s air defenses don’t stand down Our nation’s air defenses don’t stand down Terrorists don’t come back to life after stealing our freedoms Terrorists don’t come back to life after stealing our freedoms Tall buildings do not collapse from fire Tall buildings do not collapse from fire Because these are unique events, there are no experts on these subjects Because these are unique events, there are no experts on these subjects

9 But there is always an official explanation for terrorist events But there is always an official explanation for terrorist events Disturbing questions about the OKC Murrah Building bombing Disturbing questions about the OKC Murrah Building bombing Survivors reported multiple explosionsSurvivors reported multiple explosions Many media reports and witness accounts of un- detonated bombs left in buildingMany media reports and witness accounts of un- detonated bombs left in building FBI confiscated videos and would not release themFBI confiscated videos and would not release them Experts said demolition charges requiredExperts said demolition charges required Official story stuck with one guy, one truck bomb Official story stuck with one guy, one truck bomb Small group of engineers provided reportSmall group of engineers provided report

10 Official “investigations” into the collapse of the WTC buildings ASCE ASCE FEMA BPAT FEMA BPAT Turned ASCE investigation into an “assessment”Turned ASCE investigation into an “assessment” Report released May 2002Report released May 2002 Silverstein/Weidlinger Silverstein/Weidlinger report released October 2002report released October 2002 NIST NIST report released September 2005report released September 2005

11 ASCE Team = Murrah Building Team Initial ASCE team leaders (9/14/01) Gene CorleyGene Corley Charles ThorntonCharles Thornton Paul MlakarPaul Mlakar Mete SozenMete Sozen Other volunteersOther volunteers OKC Murrah building report authors Gene Corley Charles Thornton Paul Mlakar Mete Sozen ASCE says there are 1.5 million US engineers. Why so few when it comes to terrorism?

12 Pre-determined conclusions Gene Corley -- knew once the jets hit the building that the WTC would collapse as it did, “I just didn’t know when it was going to happen”, said CorleyGene Corley -- knew once the jets hit the building that the WTC would collapse as it did, “I just didn’t know when it was going to happen”, said Corley (reported by St. Petersburg Times) Charles Thornton -- "Karl, we all know what caused the collapse."Charles Thornton -- "Karl, we all know what caused the collapse." (From Karl Koch’s book Men of Steel) Shankar Nair -- "Already there is near-consensus as to the sequence of events that led to the collapse of the World Trade Center.”Shankar Nair -- "Already there is near-consensus as to the sequence of events that led to the collapse of the World Trade Center.” (Chicago Tribune September 19, 2001)

13 The first official leaders Gene Corley in charge of ASCE investigation Gene Corley in charge of ASCE investigation NYC put Thornton-Tomasetti in charge of site NYC put Thornton-Tomasetti in charge of site Richard Tomasetti (Thornton’s partner) “cleared” the decision to recycle the steel, later saying had he “known the direction that investigations into the disaster would take, he would have adopted a different stance.” Richard Tomasetti (Thornton’s partner) “cleared” the decision to recycle the steel, later saying had he “known the direction that investigations into the disaster would take, he would have adopted a different stance.” Anyone smell a rat?

14 Restrictions on ASCE investigation No access to blueprints No access to blueprints Not allowed to ask for help from public Not allowed to ask for help from public Team members threatened with dismissal for speaking to press Team members threatened with dismissal for speaking to press No access to steel until first week of October No access to steel until first week of October FEMA obstruction FEMA obstruction

15 FEMA BPAT ASCE expanded and was named FEMA BPAT ASCE expanded and was named FEMA BPAT John Gross, NIST engineer with oil and gas historyJohn Gross, NIST engineer with oil and gas history Therese McAllister, Greenhorne and O’Mara (G&O)Therese McAllister, Greenhorne and O’Mara (G&O) Other government contractors (Arup, Hughes)Other government contractors (Arup, Hughes) When FEMA took over, $1 million was allocated, but only $100,000 was spent by December When FEMA took over, $1 million was allocated, but only $100,000 was spent by December At the same time, Bush was telling us “It costs a lot to fight this war. We have spent more than a billion dollars a month…” At the same time, Bush was telling us “It costs a lot to fight this war. We have spent more than a billion dollars a month…”

16 By January, it was a half-baked farce Bill Manning, editor of Fire Engineering magazine, said the “official investigation…is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure.”Bill Manning, editor of Fire Engineering magazine, said the “official investigation…is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure.” Dick Cheney called Senate leader Tom Daschle and asked him to “limit the scope and overall review of what happened [on 9/11]”, claiming resources would be pulled from the War on Terrorism. President Bush met with Daschle privately and asked him to limit the investigation.Dick Cheney called Senate leader Tom Daschle and asked him to “limit the scope and overall review of what happened [on 9/11]”, claiming resources would be pulled from the War on Terrorism. President Bush met with Daschle privately and asked him to limit the investigation.

17 Meanwhile Astaneh-Asl, a lone scientist working on a National Science Foundation study, got access to the steel before the ASCE/FEMA team Astaneh-Asl, a lone scientist working on a National Science Foundation study, got access to the steel before the ASCE/FEMA team “The impact did nothing to this building” (reported by CNN) “The impact did nothing to this building” (reported by CNN) “So now we know, the column did not fail, it was a failure of the floor in most cases” (reported by Wired) “So now we know, the column did not fail, it was a failure of the floor in most cases” (reported by Wired)

18 Who would design a building for plane crashes but forget the jet fuel fires? Eduardo Kausel – The WTC buildings were designed to withstand Boeing 707 impacts but were “never designed for the massive explosions nor the intense jet fuel fires that came next – a key design omission.”Eduardo Kausel – The WTC buildings were designed to withstand Boeing 707 impacts but were “never designed for the massive explosions nor the intense jet fuel fires that came next – a key design omission.” Loring Knoblauch (CEO of UL) – the jet fuel fires were not “reasonably foreseeable.”Loring Knoblauch (CEO of UL) – the jet fuel fires were not “reasonably foreseeable.” What? How would the planes get to the buildings? Who would really do this?What? How would the planes get to the buildings? Who would really do this?

19 Not the WTC’s design Engineer Towers designed by John SkillingTowers designed by John Skilling Skilling had this to say in 1993 when asked if he considered plane crashes in his design.Skilling had this to say in 1993 when asked if he considered plane crashes in his design. “Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel would dump into the building. [But] the building structure would still be there.” City in the Sky, Glanz and Lipton

20

21 Where’s the fire? Windsor building, Madrid, February 2005 Twin towers shortly after WTC2 hit

22 ASCE / FEMA findings April 2002 NOVA video by commentators Corley and Thornton April 2002 NOVA video by commentators Corley and Thornton Fireproofing easily blown off Fireproofing easily blown off Floors collapsed Floors collapsed Columns buckled outward Columns buckled outward May 2002 final FEMA report May 2002 final FEMA report “a pancake-type of collapse of successive floors”“a pancake-type of collapse of successive floors”

23 June 2002 – NIST drafts plan National Institute of Standards and Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology Director is Presidential appointeeDirector is Presidential appointee Repository for national reference standardsRepository for national reference standards First meeting included “Public” comments by First meeting included “Public” comments by Gene CorleyGene Corley Richard TomasettiRichard Tomasetti Shankar NairShankar Nair Other contributors to official reportsOther contributors to official reports

24 FEMA authors become NIST authors FEMA Chapter 1 authors FEMA Chapter 1 authors Therese McAllister: co-wrote NIST report 1-6 and 1-7Therese McAllister: co-wrote NIST report 1-6 and 1-7 John Gross: co-wrote NIST report 1-6 and 1-7John Gross: co-wrote NIST report 1-6 and 1-7 Ronald Hamburger: NIST contributorRonald Hamburger: NIST contributor FEMA Chapter 2 authors FEMA Chapter 2 authors Ronald Hamburger: see aboveRonald Hamburger: see above William Baker: NIST contributor, Freedom towerWilliam Baker: NIST contributor, Freedom tower Harold Nelson: co-wrote NIST report 1-5 and 1-7Harold Nelson: co-wrote NIST report 1-5 and 1-7 FEMA chapter 5 authors (WTC 7) FEMA chapter 5 authors (WTC 7) Ramon Gilsanz: co-wrote NIST report 1-6FRamon Gilsanz: co-wrote NIST report 1-6F Harold Nelson: see aboveHarold Nelson: see above

25 Oct Silverstein / Weidlinger report Corley and Thornton-Tomasetti involved in study to establish Silverstein insurance claim Corley and Thornton-Tomasetti involved in study to establish Silverstein insurance claim Report results Report results No floor failure of any kindNo floor failure of any kind Column failure onlyColumn failure only Directly contradicts FEMA report, NOVA video and most other experts (e.g. Astaneh-Asl)Directly contradicts FEMA report, NOVA video and most other experts (e.g. Astaneh-Asl) Apparently floor failure would have meant design failure and therefore “one event” Apparently floor failure would have meant design failure and therefore “one event”

26 They knew from the start what happened? ”Experts” Towering Inferno ”Experts” Towering Inferno Steel meltedSteel melted FEMA FEMA Floor failure: “A pancake-type of collapse of successive floors”Floor failure: “A pancake-type of collapse of successive floors” Silverstein/Weidlinger Silverstein/Weidlinger Column failure onlyColumn failure only NIST NIST External column failure from sagging floors and softened core columns,etc…leading to pile driver collapseExternal column failure from sagging floors and softened core columns,etc…leading to pile driver collapse (TNRAT – They’ll Never Read All This theory) TNRAT

27 Demo points out characteristics of demolition Sudden onset Sudden onset Straight down Straight down Nearly free-fall speed Nearly free-fall speed Total collapse Total collapse Sliced steel Sliced steel Pulverization of concrete Pulverization of concrete Dust clouds Dust clouds Horizontal ejections (squibs) Horizontal ejections (squibs) Demolition rings Demolition rings Sounds of explosions Sounds of explosions Pools of molten steel Pools of molten steel All supported by photographic evidence and eyewitness testimonies

28 Sept The NIST WTC Report 42 sub-reports and 42 sub-reports and 10,000 pages Only for Twin Towers Only for Twin Towers Like others, focused only Like others, focused only on political story Same people as FEMA Same people as FEMA TNRAT

29 NFPA 921 used? Standard for fire investigation Sec 6-5: Important to remember that conflict of interest should be avoided Sec 6-5: Important to remember that conflict of interest should be avoided NIST used specialists/contractors who were dependent on government contracts or on the official story itselfNIST used specialists/contractors who were dependent on government contracts or on the official story itself Sec 12-4: Unusual residues …could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials Sec 12-4: Unusual residues …could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials NIST report does not mention FEMA’s puzzling sulfur residueNIST report does not mention FEMA’s puzzling sulfur residue

30 Our focus NIST’s stated goals NIST’s stated goals Goal 1 – Why and How three buildings collapsedGoal 1 – Why and How three buildings collapsed Goal 3 – What design factors should have prevented this?Goal 3 – What design factors should have prevented this? NIST’s approach and final story NIST’s approach and final story 5 methods to investigate5 methods to investigate 7 steps to collapse7 steps to collapse

31 NIST’s investigation methods A. Review of documents B. Interviews with eyewitnesses C. Analysis of steel D. Laboratory tests E. Computer Simulations

32 A. NIST’s review of documents Reports of original design claims? Reports of original design claims? No, many relevant claims not mentionedNo, many relevant claims not mentioned Fire resistance test data (e.g. UL test documents)? Fire resistance test data (e.g. UL test documents)? No, documents came up missingNo, documents came up missing Skilling’s fire resistance analysis? Skilling’s fire resistance analysis? No, documents missingNo, documents missing

33 Original design claims “The World Trade Center towers would have an inherent capacity to resist unforeseen calamities.” “The World Trade Center towers would have an inherent capacity to resist unforeseen calamities.” For the perimeter columns (83% of total columns), “live loads on these columns can be increased more than 2,000% before failure occurs.” For the perimeter columns (83% of total columns), “live loads on these columns can be increased more than 2,000% before failure occurs.” One “could cut away all the first story columns on one side of the building, and partway from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building could still withstand design live loads and a 100 mph wind from any direction.” One “could cut away all the first story columns on one side of the building, and partway from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building could still withstand design live loads and a 100 mph wind from any direction.” All quotes from Engineering News-Record, 1964

34 A. Were the WTC steel components tested for fire resistance? NIST said they found no documents, yet states the buildings were rated as Class 1B (3 hours for columns and 2 hours for floors) NIST said they found no documents, yet states the buildings were rated as Class 1B (3 hours for columns and 2 hours for floors) Underwriters Laboratories’ CEO -- UL tested the steel to NYC code (meaning 40 years ago) Underwriters Laboratories’ CEO -- UL tested the steel to NYC code (meaning 40 years ago) Port Authority -- “there are no test records in our files” Port Authority -- “there are no test records in our files” ASTM E119 is used for testing both steel components and floor assemblies ASTM E119 is used for testing both steel components and floor assemblies

35 ASTM E119 Time-temperature curve

36 A. UL comments on testing the WTC steel September 2001 September 2001 Loring Knoblauch, UL’s CEO, told staff that UL had certified the steel used in the WTCLoring Knoblauch, UL’s CEO, told staff that UL had certified the steel used in the WTC November 2003 November 2003 I asked Knoblauch in writing about UL’s involvement, and he responded in December confirming details.I asked Knoblauch in writing about UL’s involvement, and he responded in December confirming details. “We tested the steel with all the required fireproofing on, and it did beautifully.” “We tested the steel with all the required fireproofing on, and it did beautifully.” “As we do not do follow-up service on this kind of product, we can give an opinion only on the test sample which was indeed properly coated.” “As we do not do follow-up service on this kind of product, we can give an opinion only on the test sample which was indeed properly coated.” “We test to the code requirements, and the steel clearly met [the NYC code] requirements and exceeded them.” “We test to the code requirements, and the steel clearly met [the NYC code] requirements and exceeded them.”

37 A. Our “Public Safety Guardian” (UL) lying? August 2004 August 2004 UL performed tests of WTC floor modelsUL performed tests of WTC floor models Floors barely affected and didn’t collapseFloors barely affected and didn’t collapse Loring Knoblauch resigned suddenlyLoring Knoblauch resigned suddenly October 2004 October 2004 NIST report update showed contradictionsNIST report update showed contradictions November 2004 November 2004 My letter to NIST became publicMy letter to NIST became public UL quickly backtracked, sayingUL quickly backtracked, saying “No evidence” any firm tested the steel “No evidence” any firm tested the steel They played only a “limited” role in investigation They played only a “limited” role in investigation

38 B. NIST’s performance on interviews NIST started planning for eyewitness interviews in April 2003 NIST started planning for eyewitness interviews in April 2003 (7 months after start of investigation, and 19 months after 9/11) By October, still no NIST interviews and no NIST access to NYC interviews By October, still no NIST interviews and no NIST access to NYC interviews NYC finally agreed to allow NIST access to original interviews by December 2003 NYC finally agreed to allow NIST access to original interviews by December 2003 …but only in NYC offices (sound familiar?)

39 B. Eyewitness interviews not used Paramedic Daniel Rivera – “[Did] you ever see professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear ‘Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop?’…I thought it was that.” Witness Timothy Burke – “the building popped, lower than the fire…I was going oh, my God, there is a secondary device because the way the building popped. I thought it was an explosion.” Firefighter Edward Cachia – “It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. We originally thought there was like an internal detonation, explosives…” Assistant Commissioner Stephen Gregory -- “I thought…that I saw low-level flashes…[at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building?”

40 B. Eyewitness interviews not used Firefighter Richard Banaciski – “It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all around like a belt, all these explosions.” Deputy Commissioner Thomas Fitzpatrick – “My initial reaction was that this was exactly the way it looks when they show you those implosions on TV.” Battalion Chief Brian Dixon – “the lowest floor of the fire in the south tower actually looked like someone had planted explosives all around it because…everything blew out on the one floor.” Firefighter Kenneth Rogers – “there was an explosion in the south tower…I kept watching. Floor after floor after floor. [It] looked like a synchronized deliberate kind of thing.”

41 C. Analysis of steel Most of the steel evidence destroyed Most of the steel evidence destroyed Tomasetti decision (Thornton’s partner)Tomasetti decision (Thornton’s partner) 236 samples saved for testing (0.3%)236 samples saved for testing (0.3%) NIST tests NIST tests Paint test indicated low steel temps (480 F ) “despite pre-collapse exposure to fire”Paint test indicated low steel temps (480 F ) “despite pre-collapse exposure to fire” Microstructure test showed no steel reached critical (half-strength) valuesMicrostructure test showed no steel reached critical (half-strength) values

42 NIST comments before and After Before steel temperature analysis Before steel temperature analysis(12/02/03) “Regions of impact and fire damage emphasized in selection of steel pieces.”“Regions of impact and fire damage emphasized in selection of steel pieces.” After steel temperature analysis After steel temperature analysis (final report) “None of the samples were from zones where [high] heating was predicted.”“None of the samples were from zones where [high] heating was predicted.”

43 D. Laboratory tests Tests to prove loss of fireproofing? Tests to prove loss of fireproofing? Fifteen rounds from a shotgunFifteen rounds from a shotgun Workstation burn tests Workstation burn tests Gas temperatures, not steel temperaturesGas temperatures, not steel temperatures Used double the average amount of jet fuelUsed double the average amount of jet fuel Used “Over-ventilation”Used “Over-ventilation” UL floor model tests evaluated Pancake Theory UL floor model tests evaluated Pancake Theory

44 Pancake Theory “I could see it in my mind’s eye: The fire burned until the steel was weakened and the floors above collapsed, starting a chain reaction of gravity, floor falling upon floor upon floor, clunk – clunk – clunk, the load gaining weight and momentum by the nanosecond, unstoppable. Once enough floors collapsed, the exterior walls and the core columns were no longer laterally supported and folded in.” -- Karl Koch“I could see it in my mind’s eye: The fire burned until the steel was weakened and the floors above collapsed, starting a chain reaction of gravity, floor falling upon floor upon floor, clunk – clunk – clunk, the load gaining weight and momentum by the nanosecond, unstoppable. Once enough floors collapsed, the exterior walls and the core columns were no longer laterally supported and folded in.” -- Karl Koch (from Koch’s book Men of Steel)

45 WTC floor model tests by UL (Aug 2004) Used less fireproofing than was known to exist in WTC1, and then reduced fireproofing further Used less fireproofing than was known to exist in WTC1, and then reduced fireproofing further Used “maximum load” (i.e. applied doubled the weight known to have been on floors) Used “maximum load” (i.e. applied doubled the weight known to have been on floors) Heated floors according to ASTM E119 Heated floors according to ASTM E119 Minimal floor sagging Minimal floor sagging No floor collapse No floor collapse “The results established that this type of assembly was capable of sustaining a large gravity load, without collapsing, for a substantial period of time relative to the duration of the fires in any given location on September 11th.” “The results established that this type of assembly was capable of sustaining a large gravity load, without collapsing, for a substantial period of time relative to the duration of the fires in any given location on September 11th.”

46 NIST comments before and after Before UL floor tests Before UL floor tests “[Tests will] determine the fire rating of typical WTC floor systems under both as-built and specified conditions”“[Tests will] determine the fire rating of typical WTC floor systems under both as-built and specified conditions” After UL floor tests After UL floor tests “The Investigation Team was cautious about using these results directly in the formulation of collapse hypotheses”“The Investigation Team was cautious about using these results directly in the formulation of collapse hypotheses”

47 E. Computer Simulations Input parameters could be tweaked Input parameters could be tweaked “Realistic” parameters tossed in favor of “More severe” parameters “Realistic” parameters tossed in favor of “More severe” parameters Animations generated to “compare with observed events” Animations generated to “compare with observed events”

48 E. NIST’s computer simulated “animations” Does your future depend on these cartoons?

49 NIST’s investigative practices were deceptive and unscientific Documents needed just happened to be missing Documents needed just happened to be missing Eyewitnesses to demolition characteristics were ignored Eyewitnesses to demolition characteristics were ignored Physical tests that disproved pre-determined conclusions were downplayed or ignored Physical tests that disproved pre-determined conclusions were downplayed or ignored Entire theory is built on fudged, inaccessible computer simulations Entire theory is built on fudged, inaccessible computer simulations TNRAT

50 NIST’s Final, Computer-Based Story 1. The aircraft severed “a number of columns” 2. Loads were redistributed (from -20% to +25%) 3. Insulation (fireproofing) was widely dislodged 4. High temperatures softened columns and floors 5. Some floors began to sag 6. Sagging floors pulled exterior columns inward causing them to buckle 7. Instability spread around entire building “Global collapse ensued”

51 1. How many columns were severed? NIST now admits only a small percentage of columns were severed NIST now admits only a small percentage of columns were severed 14% in WTC114% in WTC1 15% in WTC215% in WTC2 But since one “could cut away all the first story columns on one side of the building, and partway from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building could still withstand design live loads and a 100 mph wind from any direction”, we know the buildings could withstand > 25% column loss without a problem. But since one “could cut away all the first story columns on one side of the building, and partway from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building could still withstand design live loads and a 100 mph wind from any direction”, we know the buildings could withstand > 25% column loss without a problem.

52 2. How much load was re-distributed? NIST says loads on some columns were decreased (as much as 20%) and other loads were increased (up to 25%). NIST says loads on some columns were decreased (as much as 20%) and other loads were increased (up to 25%). But again, since the original design claims were that, “live loads on these [perimeter] columns can be increased more than 2,000% before failure occurs”, these columns should have supported the extra load and much, much more But again, since the original design claims were that, “live loads on these [perimeter] columns can be increased more than 2,000% before failure occurs”, these columns should have supported the extra load and much, much more So far, no reason to even suspect collapse So far, no reason to even suspect collapse

53 3. Fireproofing widely dislodged? “The towers would not have collapsed under the combined effects of aircraft impact and the subsequent multi-floor fires if the insulation had not been widely dislodged or had been only minimally dislodged by aircraft impact.” -- NIST “The towers would not have collapsed under the combined effects of aircraft impact and the subsequent multi-floor fires if the insulation had not been widely dislodged or had been only minimally dislodged by aircraft impact.” -- NIST What does “widely dislodged” mean?

54 3. NIST must have done extensive testing to prove fireproofing was widely dislodged! No, they shot 15 rounds from a shotgun at non- representative samples in a plywood box (were they in a hurry?) No, they shot 15 rounds from a shotgun at non- representative samples in a plywood box (were they in a hurry?) No evidence that Boeing 767 would transform into so many shotgun blasts (many thousands would be needed) No evidence that Boeing 767 would transform into so many shotgun blasts (many thousands would be needed) Shotgun test actually proved fireproofing could not have been widely dislodged because the energy was simply not available Shotgun test actually proved fireproofing could not have been widely dislodged because the energy was simply not available

55 No energy left to dislodge fireproofing NIST says 2500 MJ of kinetic energy from plane that hit WTC1 NIST says 2500 MJ of kinetic energy from plane that hit WTC1 Calculations show that all this energy was consumed in crushing aircraft and breaking columns & floors*Calculations show that all this energy was consumed in crushing aircraft and breaking columns & floors* Shotgun tests found that 1 MJ per sq meter was needed to dislodge fireproofingShotgun tests found that 1 MJ per sq meter was needed to dislodge fireproofing For the areas in question, intact floors and columns had > 6000 sq meters of surface areaFor the areas in question, intact floors and columns had > 6000 sq meters of surface area *Calculations by Tomasz Wierzbicki of MIT *Calculations by Tomasz Wierzbicki of MIT

56 4. How hot could the steel have become? NIST now says about 4,500 gallons of jet fuel were available to feed fires. This would have provided 590,000 MJ of energy. NIST now says about 4,500 gallons of jet fuel were available to feed fires. This would have provided 590,000 MJ of energy. Office furnishings in the impact zone would have provided 490,000 MJ of energy. Office furnishings in the impact zone would have provided 490,000 MJ of energy. Using masses and specific heats for materials heated, a maximum temperature in the impact zone can be calculated. Using masses and specific heats for materials heated, a maximum temperature in the impact zone can be calculated. The result is less than 600 degrees F The result is less than 600 degrees F Assuming fuel burnt with perfect efficiency, that no hot gases left the impact zone, that no heat escaped by conduction, and that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat.Assuming fuel burnt with perfect efficiency, that no hot gases left the impact zone, that no heat escaped by conduction, and that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat.

57 Steel Temperatures Discussed (F)

58 Review and Problems Review NIST Story and Problems Column breakage (14%) weakened building, then external columns saw up to 25% increases in total load Fireproofing “widely dislodged” High steel temps required for long time Can lose an additional 30 or more before challenging design claims; external columns designed to withstand 2000% increases in live load Can lose an additional 30 or more before challenging design claims; external columns designed to withstand 2000% increases in live load No evidence that Boeing 767 would transform into thousands of shotgun blasts; no energy available to dislodge fireproofing No evidence that Boeing 767 would transform into thousands of shotgun blasts; no energy available to dislodge fireproofing Tests and calculations show steel temps were way too low Tests and calculations show steel temps were way too low

59 5. Some floors began to sag? Only very slight sagging is visible in NIST photos from UL tests (and no collapse) Only very slight sagging is visible in NIST photos from UL tests (and no collapse) After two hours* in high temp furnace, the deck of 35 ft floor model sagged only a few inches in the middle, and the major joist parts did not sag at all After two hours* in high temp furnace, the deck of 35 ft floor model sagged only a few inches in the middle, and the major joist parts did not sag at all NIST’s computer turned this into dramatic 42 inch sagging, with joists bending downward severely NIST’s computer turned this into dramatic 42 inch sagging, with joists bending downward severely *Remember, WTC2 collapsed after only 56 minutes and WTC1 fires on south face had only ~ 45 minutes

60 6. How did the sagging floors pull exterior columns inward causing them to buckle? Over 30 columns would have to be pulled in to challenge design claim Over 30 columns would have to be pulled in to challenge design claim What new force did a few inches of deck sagging apply to those 30+ columns? NIST says 14 kips per truss seat were applied but does not adequately explain how this challenged the designed axial load of 1174 kips per column What new force did a few inches of deck sagging apply to those 30+ columns? NIST says 14 kips per truss seat were applied but does not adequately explain how this challenged the designed axial load of 1174 kips per column What tests did NIST do to prove inward buckling, and was the application of the results consistent? What tests did NIST do to prove inward buckling, and was the application of the results consistent?

61 The triple double bare steel computer result “An exterior wall section (9 columns wide and 9 floors high) was found to bow inward when floor connections applied an inward force.” “An exterior wall section (9 columns wide and 9 floors high) was found to bow inward when floor connections applied an inward force.” (computer result for one case out of nine) Same report says sagging area only 5 floors high! Same report says sagging area only 5 floors high! NIST had to exaggerate temperatures (1300 F), apply these temps for 90 minutes, strip all fireproofing, and then double the height of the inward pull zone to produce even a hint of inward bowing from fire* NIST had to exaggerate temperatures (1300 F), apply these temps for 90 minutes, strip all fireproofing, and then double the height of the inward pull zone to produce even a hint of inward bowing from fire* *Note: There are other ways to produce bowing and buckling of columns – just ask Demo

62 7. Instability spread around entire building perimeter? Buildings fell at nearly free-fall speed. How fast would instability have to spread first? How much of the ~10 sec fall time could be spared? Buildings fell at nearly free-fall speed. How fast would instability have to spread first? How much of the ~10 sec fall time could be spared? Perimeter of building was 832 feet. If complete in 0.5 seconds, speed of “instability spread” would have been >1100 mph (Mach 1.5) Perimeter of building was 832 feet. If complete in 0.5 seconds, speed of “instability spread” would have been >1100 mph (Mach 1.5) “A steel structure, generally speaking, does not collapse suddenly when attacked by fire. There are unmistakable warning signs, namely, large deformations.” “A steel structure, generally speaking, does not collapse suddenly when attacked by fire. There are unmistakable warning signs, namely, large deformations.” Hart, Multi-Storey Buildings in Steel, Halsted Press

63 NIST’s collapse initiation sequence: What would objective scientists have found? 1. Relatively few columns were lost on impact 2. Remaining columns had considerable extra capacity 3. Fireproofing could not have been widely dislodged 4. Steel could not have softened at the temps found 5. Even at higher temps and longer periods tests showed minimal sagging of floors 6. Forces were not produced to pull columns inward 7. “Instability spread” would have taken much more time and would not result in uniform free-fall

64 NIST’s computer story is Bush Science The parameters NIST originally considered “realistic” were discarded because computer results “did not compare to observed events.” The parameters NIST originally considered “realistic” were discarded because computer results “did not compare to observed events.” “More severe” parameters were substituted until animations gave the desired result “More severe” parameters were substituted until animations gave the desired result NIST will not release 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of real video footage NIST will not release 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of real video footage

65 “Global collapse ensued?” What about resistance of floors below? If these floors each caused hesitation of only half a second, an extra 40 seconds would be needed. What about resistance of floors below? If these floors each caused hesitation of only half a second, an extra 40 seconds would be needed. What about the observed squibs? (Pile-driving is not Pancaking) What about the observed squibs? (Pile-driving is not Pancaking) What about the large pools of molten metal observed in the basement areas of both Towers and WTC 7? What about the large pools of molten metal observed in the basement areas of both Towers and WTC 7? What about the sulfur residue found on the steel? What about the sulfur residue found on the steel?

66 The NIST WTC report is false because… They did not explain why and how the buildings collapsed, and their investigation was deceptive and unscientific at every step They did not explain why and how the buildings collapsed, and their investigation was deceptive and unscientific at every step They reported findings that were in direct contradiction to their physical testing They reported findings that were in direct contradiction to their physical testing They omitted or distorted many important facts They omitted or distorted many important facts Original design claims and John Skilling’s analysisOriginal design claims and John Skilling’s analysis Resistance from building structure belowResistance from building structure below WTC 1 antenna moving firstWTC 1 antenna moving first Pools of molten metal lingering for weeksPools of molten metal lingering for weeks Numerous eyewitness testimonies about explosionsNumerous eyewitness testimonies about explosions Sulfur residue on steelSulfur residue on steel

67 Researchers call for examination of the demolition hypothesis Demolition squibs seen ejected from floors far from impact zone Demolition squibs seen ejected from floors far from impact zone Everything pulverized Everything pulverized Molten metal found under rubble piles of all three buildings for weeks Molten metal found under rubble piles of all three buildings for weeks Site cleaned up by “Controlled Demolition, Inc.” Site cleaned up by “Controlled Demolition, Inc.” Many reports of explosions and flashes of light Many reports of explosions and flashes of light

68 WTC 7 Would have been tallest building in 33 states Would have been tallest building in 33 states Collapsed in 6.6 seconds Collapsed in 6.6 seconds Larry Silverstein, leaseholder for all three buildings -- “I said…maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And [the fire department commander and I] made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.” PBS, 2002 Larry Silverstein, leaseholder for all three buildings -- “I said…maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And [the fire department commander and I] made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.” PBS, 2002 FEMA -- “the collapse was due primarily to fire, rather than any impact damage from the collapsing towers” FEMA -- “the collapse was due primarily to fire, rather than any impact damage from the collapsing towers”

69 It takes weeks to plan and implement a controlled demolition

70 Thank you for listening and watch out for more rats and elephants Demo TNRAT


Download ppt "The NIST World Trade Center Report: A New Standard for Deception Kevin Ryan 911 Truth Conference: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future Chicago, IL."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google