Slashdot Mirror

I've spent a lot of time at the various WTC conspiracy Web site and if there's any real science...

There is. Plenty of it. For example linked in the very post you were responding to. Here is that link again http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM.

Sad, though, that the magazine has been abused for political gain by engaging in a straw man attack, instead of addressing the science properly.

Nano-scale aluminum can have quite useful and interesting applications. See for example here.

There was a similar story going around the conspiracy theory websites about a paper published by bentham.org relating to active thermitic material (flakes of paint that burn under intense heat).

The Open Chemical Physics Journal

Checkout http://s3.amazonaws.com/nasathermalimages/public/video/Pretext.wmv and http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

You do not need to say more as science has already spoken. Go get a clue here: http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

Here is a recently published article by these "9/11 truthers."
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCIEJ/2008/00000002/00000001/35TOCIEJ.SGM

Also, it takes a considerable amount of scientific illiteracy to look at new experimental findings and declare that scientists are "changing their story." Truly, 9/11 truthers are the creationists of the 21st century.

NIST's webiste:

As for fuel fires, the team found that they could not have been sustained long enough, could not have generated sufficient heat to fail a critical column, and/or would have produced "large amounts of visible smoke" from Floors 5 and 6, which was not observed.

Finally, the report notes that "while debris impact from the collapse of WTC 1 initiated fires in WTC 7, the resulting structural damage had little effect in causing the collapse of WTC 7."

I'll leave finding their previous statements up to you. They can be found in Popular Mechanics, which states that anyone who doesn't believe the last two statements is crazy.

Rather than, say, setting fire to a real 40-story skyscraper? Wow, those scientists and engineers sure are underachievers.

NIST claims that the collapse of Building 7 is "The first known instance of fire causing the total collapse of a tall building".

You could also compare it to other skyscrapers that have had worst fires than WTC7.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html

You could also read a leaked NIST report which was never meant to be shown to the public.
http://www.infowars.net/WTC7Report/WTC%207%20chapter%20Pitts.doc

Chapter 1: WTC 7 Visual Evidence, Damage Estimates, and Timeline Analysis (William Pitts) is a thorough analysis of window fires by video and picture evidence, which concludes that all major fires before floors 7 and 13 died out prior to collapse.

The report states, "At 4:38 p.m. all of the windows between 13-44A and 13-47C were open, and the fires responsible for opening the windows had died down to the point where they could no longer be observed."

"Just prior to the collapse of the building at 5:20:52 p.m. a jet of flames was pushed from windows in the same area. The event that caused this unusual behavior has not been identified."

The report describes the nature of fires from floors 7-13 and also states, "With the exception of the fires on the 19th, 22nd, 29th, and 30th floors discussed at the start of this section, there is essentially no direct visual evidence of fires on other floors of WTC 7."

Don't forget Appendix C of FEMA's World Trade Center Building Performance Study, which stated:

Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel... The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.

I'm sorry for have scientific illiteracy. I better tell my boss that I can no longer carry out my duties because some random person on the internet is too lazy to read the governments own reports and would attack me instead of the facts.