From: Andrew Johnson

Date: 2012-02-28 19:07:34

nomoregames.net/2012…   Bombs Did Not Unravel the Towers Posted on February 27, 2012  By Morgan Reynolds It does not take much, only 1,000 words, to prove five popular theories of World Trade Center destruction wrong.  You might ask how I got this smart.  True, I don’t look that smart.  Here’s my secret: I bought Ph.D. engineer Judy Wood’s 9/11 textbook.  You too can be brilliant about what happened in New York City on 9/11 for a mere $39.95 plus shipping and time to study it.  You wanted an independent investigation and it has arrived. I did a radio interview recently to lay out how five facts prove the popular theories false.  The host, Kevin Barrett, challenged only one of the five facts I offered, namely, the absence of loud blasts—no big booms from exploding bombs happened—a proposition supported by videos, witnesses, and the official report of NIST.  An associated fact is that we have no evidence of loud screeching and screaming during destruction, which would happen if thousands of tons of massive steel beams sheered, collided, scraped and smashed to the ground, metal against metal, concrete against metal.  (See Chapter 6 in the Wood text). My contention is not that destruction of the towers and WTC7 was silent, but that the noise never rose to the levels of conventional or thermonuclear blasts.  For example, listen to the staccato “bang, bang, bang,” of conventional explosives imploding the Seattle Kingdome in March, 2000: or a 12-story building in Arlington , VA : Look up other conventional controlled demolitions, same story. A bang, bang, bang throughout a building undergoing conventional controlled demolition is always followed, with a slight delay, by gravity bringing the building down and smashing it into chunks.  That does not describe what happened on September 11, 2001.  It would have taken an immense number of blasts, topdown, throughout the towers, given their massive size and strength, to bring them down and smash them into chunks. Watch and listen carefully to any video of tower destruction you like, for example: The sound of a 110-story tower unraveling on 9/11 was more like a deep, continuous “whoosh” than a series of loud, concussive blasts. What about eye- and ear-witness testimony?  Kevin Cosgrove, only five floors from the top of the South Tower , was tragically killed in the midst of his 911 telephone call as the top 33 stories of his tower tilted and turned to dust in mid-air.  Listen for the big explosions at the end of Kevin’s life.  Didn’t happen: British 9/11 researcher Andrew Johnson (free pdf e-book here) studied the interviews of 502  first responders on 9/11 and found: “The repeated sequence of timed explosions heard during a controlled demolition is very distinctive and none of the witness accounts I studied described hearing this sort of sound as the towers collapsed.”  Instead, witnesses described the collapses as possibly like the sound of an approaching plane or rocket: “You just heard this thrushing, thrushing noise like a rocket,” said Faisel Abed.  “I thought the building was under attack again…’” (p. 99). Emergency Medical Technician Michael Ober was mystified by what he heard at WTC7: “I don’t remember the sound of the building hitting the ground…If the building hit the ground that hard, how do I not remember the sound of it?” (Wood text p. 71).  The audio track of this video of WTC7, whose demise registered only a 0.6 on the Richter scale, basically no seismic impact, registers no bang, bang: NIST’s Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (pdf here) noted: The calculations showed that all the hypothetical blast scenarios and charge sizes would have broadcast significant sound levels from all of the building faces…approximately 130 dB to 140 dB at a distance of 1km (0.6 mile) from WTC 7…more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert…However, soundtracks from videos being recorded at the time of the collapse did not contain any sound as intense as would have accompanied such a blast. Sensibly enough, the NIST Investigation Team “concluded that there was no demolition-type blast that would have been intense enough to lead to the collapse of WTC 7 on September 11, 2001.”  (p. 70 of 130).  That doesn’t imply WTC 7 was not deliberately destroyed, only that conventional explosives were not responsible. “True, many witnesses reported hearing explosions,” Dr. Wood writes.  “But the sound of an explosion does not necessarily mean a bomb was detonated.  Everything that goes ‘boom’ is not necessarily a bomb.  A raw egg cooked in a microwave oven explodes due to a steam expansion.  When water is heated and becomes steam, it expands in volume by 1,600 times” (p. 110). Scott Paks are a brand name for a Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus worn by rescue workers, firefighters and others to provide portable, breathable air in a hostile environment.  “The Scott cylinders and the oxygen cylinders were all letting go,” said Firefighter Todd Heaney.  “They were all blowing up left and right.” (p. 110).  Cars were blowing up too: “I remember too, the cars started to explode inside the parking lot,” said EMT Michael D’Angelo.  “I mean, the cars started cooking off, they started going off, boom, boom, boom, boom.”  (p. 111). During destruction, squibs or “squirts” were seen in the towers, squirting out in advance of the dustification wave front as each tower unraveled downward.  Bombs?  No, likely it was pressurized containers within the towers giving way during disintegration because of liquids or gas expanding under stress and/or weakening their pressure vessels, such as water tanks. “Big explosive booms” did not happen that day, but most debris was missing too (no pile or “stack”), the bathtub remained unbroken, and seismic impact was nil.  Why?  These huge buildings turned to dust in mid-air.  These facts contradict every popular explanation: jet fuel and office fires in the upper floors, conventional controlled demolition, thermite cutter charges, conventional explosives and nuclear bombs. Unfortunately, most 9/11 “truth” leaders and researchers still push thermite, conventional explosives and nukes as the weapons used to destroy the WTC.  They mislead.  No surprise.  Isn’t that what they were hired to do?  

Related articles...

Comments are closed.