The last [recorded] words of Frank De Martini "Express elevators are going to collapse."

[Len Colby]

Frank De Martini is frequently quoted by truthers. They love repeating what he said in a January 2001 interview:

I believe the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door, this intense grid, and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing the screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.

It should be pointed out he was neither an engineer nor involved in the design or construction of the towers thus his views on what the towers could withstand can not be considered expert opinion. An architect he was the onsite construction manager of the WTC complex. He first started working there when Leslie R. Robertson hired him to assess the damage done by the Feb. 1993 bombing. Robertson was the structural engineer who had designed the towers and had a contract with the Port Authority. In a certain sense he was right none of the professional reports indicated that impact damage was the principle cause of the collapses which are blamed on the failure of structural elements exposed to fire after their fireproofing had been removed.

On 9/11 he was still working there among his responsibilities was approving proposed renovations or changes tenants wanted to make to their spaces. His office was on the 88th floor of the North Tower. Rather than evacuate he “and Pablo Ortiz, a construction inspector — attacked the lethal web of obstacles that trapped people who had survived the impact of the plane but could not get to an exit” they “and others tore away rubble, broke down doors and answered calls for help.”

Just before the building collapsed they were in the 78th floor sky lobby and De Martini used his two way radio:

"Construction manager to base, be advised that the express elevators are in danger of collapse. Do you read?"

Only his end of the conversation is recorded. A few minutes later, he returns with another message: "Relay, that, Chris, to the firemen that the elevators — "

There is an interruption in the transmission.

"Express elevators are going to collapse."

He did not give his location, but Gerry Drohan, a colleague who was outside the building, said he also had a radio conversation with Mr. De Martini about the conditions on the 78th floor. Mr. De Martini wanted structural engineers brought up to the floor to look at steel, Mr. Drohan said, but police officers would not let them back into the building.

Mr. Drohan said that Mr. De Martini had asked him to pass his two-way radio to a police official in an attempt to persuade him, but that he was unsuccessful.

None of these conversations appear on the transcripts.

Another reason Mr. De Martini might have gone to the 78th floor was to help free Anthony Savas, who worked with him and was stuck in an elevator. He had sent out repeated radio requests for help. Alan Reiss, the former director of the World Trade Department for the Port Authority, who worked with both men, said Mr. Savas apparently did get out of the elevator, because his body was found in the remnants of a stairwell.

JIM DWYER "Fresh Glimpse in 9/11 Files of the Struggles for Survival"

NY Times

August 29, 2003

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/29/nyregion/29WTC.html?pagewanted=all

Truthers might claim he was afraid the elevator cars were in danger of plummeting down their shafts but that does not make sense, it would justify neither a radio call nor asking to have a structural engineer sent up to the 78th floor. The express elevators ran from 78th floor down to the lobby. The elevators were of course in the tower’s core and columns ran though the shafts. Obviously he saw some thing wrong with those columns they led him to conclude were going to collapse.

[Len Colby]

De Martini was far from being the only person who observed that the towers were unstable. Many of the others were structural engineers, architects and often high ranking fire fighters. Here are but a few examples:

The North Tower

"Who cannot (sic) forget that eerie creaking sound that emanated throughout the city right before the North Tower fell?" –Marc Morial, President and CEO, National Urban League Source

***

• At 9:30 am, a FDNY Chief Officer inside WTC 1 feels the building move and makes the decision that the building is no longer safe.

• At 9:49 am, NYPD helicopters provide a radio report stating that “large pieces” are falling from WTC 2.

• At 10:07 am, NYPD aviation units warn that WTC 1 may collapse.

• At 10:20 am, NYPD aviation unit reports that WTC 1 is leaning to the south. Source

FDNY Assistant Chief Joseph Callan: "Approximately 40 minutes after I arrived in the lobby, I made a decision that the building was no longer safe. And that was based on the conditions in the lobby, large pieces of plaster falling, all the 20 foot high glass panels on the exterior of the lobby were breaking.

There was obvious movement of the building, and that was the reason on the handy talky I gave the order for all Fire Department units to leave the north tower

."Source

Callan: "For me to make the decision to take our firefighters out of the building with civilians still in it, that was very tough for me, but I did that because

I did not think the building was safe any longer

, and that was just prior to 9:30."–Source

EMS Division Chief John Peruggia: "I was in a discussion with Mr. Rotanz and I believe it was a representative from the Department of Buildings, but I'm not sure. Some engineer type person, and several of us were huddled talking in the lobby and it was brought to my attention, it was believed that the structural damage that was suffered to the towers was quite significant and

they were very confident that the building's stability was compromised and they felt that the north tower was in danger of a near imminent collapse

.

I grabbed EMT Zarrillo, I advised him of that information. I told him he was to proceed immediately to the command post where Chief Ganci was located. Told him where it was across the street from number 1 World Trade Center. I told him "You see Chief Ganci and Chief Ganci only. Provide him with the information that the building integrity is severely compromised and they believe the building is in danger of imminent collapse." So, he left off in that direction."

[…]

NYPD Aviation Reports

FDNY firefighter Kevin Gorman:"Guys were giving us water, wet rags to put on our head, and we were standing there, and there was a cop I knew who came by and gave me a drink of water, and then as he was standing there,

he said, "Aviation just reported that the north tower is leaning

." I said, "Which way is it leaning?" He said, "This way." So we started to turn around walking. John Malley, who was right behind me, I turned around for him, because he was doing something, either putting his coat on or something, and as I was looking at him I heard the explosion, looked up, and saw like three floors explode, saw the antenna coming down, and turned around and ran north.

Q. About how long would you say it was from when the police officer told you it was leaning?

A. Within 30 seconds."

FDNY Firefighter Brendan Lowrey: "We started walking south to the command center when

a Police Officer stopped us and said, "hold up, guys. I have helicopters --" he was on the cell phone "--on the cell phone here." And he says, "when this one comes down, it's coming right for us

." Meaning coming up West Street.

[…]

Firefighter Mike Cancel, Ladder 10:

We could feel the building starting to twist above us

. I called Ladder 10 three times, Ladder 10 roof to Ladder 10. There was no answer. I said

we have to evacuate, the building's coming down

. Again, there was no response.Source

On the 56th floor, an architect believes the building was failing structurally.

Architect Bob Shelton had his foot in a cast; he'd broken it falling off a curb two weeks ago. He heard the explosion of the first plane hitting the north tower from his 56th-floor office in the south tower. As he made his way down the stairwell, his building came under attack as well. "You could hear the building cracking. It sounded like when you have a bunch of spaghetti, and you break it in half to boil it." Shelton knew that what he was hearing was bad. "It was structural failure," Shelton says. "Once a building like that is off center, that's it."Source

Structural Engineer Al Masetti: At some point, perhaps when I was down around the 20th floor (north tower),

there was a very clear and distinct radio message: "...structural instability...."

It seemed obvious to me that some lightly dressed and unencumbered fireman had reached the scene of the impact, was able to evaluate what was there, and was able to report what he saw. Source

An engineer from the Department of Buildings reported that the structural damage appeared to be immense. The stability of both buildings was compromised. In particular, the engineer was worried about how long the north tower would stand

. Jim Dwyer and Kevin Flynn. "102 Minutes: The Untold Story of the Fight to Survive Inside the Twin Towers" New York: Times Books, 2004

Roy Bell: "They said they had stretchers and wheelchairs down there, but I just wanted to get the hell out of the building," he said. "I ran into a building engineer, who told me there was only one safe exit out and that the building wasn't stable."

For many more and linls to the sources look at this page:

http://sites.google.com/site/911stories/accountsoftowerstructuralinstabilityande

[Steven Gaal]

For those who love the truth,two links

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t14700.html

An audio file ,for your soul. (the piano plays melody to below lyrics)

http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/j/e/jesussav.htm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We have heard the joyful sound: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Spread the tidings all around: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Bear the news to every land, climb the mountains, cross the waves;

Onward! ’tis our Lord’s command; Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Waft it on the rolling tide: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Tell to sinners far and wide: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Sing, you islands of the sea; echo back, you ocean caves;

Earth shall keep her jubilee: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Sing above the battle strife: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

By His death and endless life Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Shout it brightly through the gloom, when the heart for mercy craves;

Sing in triumph o’er the tomb: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Give the winds a mighty voice: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Let the nations now rejoice: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Shout salvation full and free; highest hills and deepest caves;

This our song of victory: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^#########################################################

################################### a comment from dMole Re first link

#############################################

the dMole asked why Videos removed......I think I know why

Dec 12 2008, 03:22 PM

I believe here is where one needs to look, paying attention to names and captions.

http://www.archive.org/details/ABC_TV

It would be interesting to have a better time coordinate on the Jim Gartenberg call.

EDIT: One of the recent comments at that page:

http://www.archive.org/details/abc200109110831-0912

"Daladim - [5.0 out of 5 stars] - December 2, 2008

Subject: What happened here?

I have been watching these videos for some time now, starting at the beginning, up until just around a week ago. Now none of the videos are available?

This doesn't make any sense. Why remove these videos? I want to finish watching what I haven't seen yet. This is the ONLY available information we have today that may have ANY possibility of containing truth. ALL else is just speculation. Don't let this wonderfully archived collection of information disappear from public access."

Edited September 23, 2010 by Steven Gaal

[Len Colby]

For those who love the truth,two links

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t14700.html

Thanks for that, it is yet more confirmation the structure's of the towers were compromised well before they collapsed. The South Tower is still standing thus it was before 9:58 the North Tower collapsed at 10:28. One of the reporters said the brides and tunnels were "just closed" so it was shortly after this was ordered at 9:21, some one on the forum said it was 9:32. Thus he was speaking about a hour before the building collapsed. It is known that there were fuel air explosions in the elevator shafts Gartenberg's comments are consistent with this.

Dec 12 2008, 03:22 PM

I believe here is where one needs to look, paying attention to names and captions.

http://www.archive.org/details/ABC_TV

It would be interesting to have a better time coordinate on the Jim Gartenberg call.

EDIT: One of the recent comments at that page:

http://www.archive.org/details/abc200109110831-0912

"Daladim - [5.0 out of 5 stars] - December 2, 2008

Subject: What happened here?

I have been watching these videos for some time now, starting at the beginning, up until just around a week ago. Now none of the videos are available?

This doesn't make any sense. Why remove these videos? I want to finish watching what I haven't seen yet. This is the ONLY available information we have today that may have ANY possibility of containing truth. ALL else is just speculation. Don't let this wonderfully archived collection of information disappear from public access."

The links are still working either 1) Daladim does know how to play videos

2) there was a problem with his computer

3) there was a temporary glitch

[Terry Mauro]

These arguments on how the Twin Towers collapsed, be it by controlled demolition, or missiles hitting the TT's is as worthless as the arguments usually waged around the JFK assassination. These false arguments keep people from asking the proper questions. It ties people to the ground where they spend all their time sniffing dog turds.

During January 2001 Lyndon LaRouche conducted an international webcast. During the Q&A some members of the Black Caucus asked LaRouche about the nomination by Bush of John Ashcroft(sp?).

LaRouche reviewed the history of the Nazi's in Germany with an emphasis on the Reichstag Fire.

LaRouche then describes the "nature" of the Bush administration, it's problems, shortcomings and methods for solving these problems. He pointed out that in all cases when a group like that which represented GW Bush is faced with difficulty in passing their policies that they will go with "crisis managment", in order to gain dictatorial power. They'll set off small wars and other provocations like 911 as a "pre text" to dictatorial measures.

If you go to approximately the 7:30 minute mark of this tape, you'll hear Lyndon LaRouche virtually forecast 911. As Lyndon remarks "this is their method, know it".

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3760260910701909343#

Lyndon LaRouche knew a 911 or something like it could very well happen under the Bush regime, and under conditions of financial collapse, which has plagued the USA financial and banking system since the October 1987 stock market collapse.

This webcast was a full 8 months or more before the events of 911.

Edited September 24, 2010 by Terry Mauro

[Steven Gaal]

For those who love the truth,two links

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t14700.html

Thanks for that, it is yet more confirmation the structure's of the towers were compromised well before they collapsed. The South Tower is still standing thus it was before 9:58 the North Tower collapsed at 10:28. One of the reporters said the brides and tunnels were "just closed" so it was shortly after this was ordered at 9:21, some one on the forum said it was 9:32. Thus he was speaking about a hour before the building collapsed. It is known that there were fuel air explosions in the elevator shafts Gartenberg's comments are consistent with this.

Dec 12 2008, 03:22 PM

I believe here is where one needs to look, paying attention to names and captions.

http://www.archive.org/details/ABC_TV

It would be interesting to have a better time coordinate on the Jim Gartenberg call.

EDIT: One of the recent comments at that page:

http://www.archive.org/details/abc200109110831-0912

"Daladim - [5.0 out of 5 stars] - December 2, 2008

Subject: What happened here?

I have been watching these videos for some time now, starting at the beginning, up until just around a week ago. Now none of the videos are available?

This doesn't make any sense. Why remove these videos? I want to finish watching what I haven't seen yet. This is the ONLY available information we have today that may have ANY possibility of containing truth. ALL else is just speculation. Don't let this wonderfully archived collection of information disappear from public access."

The links are still working either 1) Daladim does know how to play videos

2) there was a problem with his computer

3) there was a temporary glitch

********************************************************************************************

The fuel-air-explosion generated an overpressure of about 3psi - enough to compress the air in the elevator shafts down to the 77th floor and upwards as well. That overpressure surely cause a lot of damage to glass, gypsum walls and elevator doors. Some people were burnt near the elevator shaft at these floors e.g. Carmen Griffith at the 78th floor.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2002/america.r...er/charles.html

or page 127

http://books.google.com/books?id=3C7JSfnMsbIC&lpg=PA127&ots=udXnm4dr00&dq=911%20WTC%20PSI&pg=PA127#v=onepage&q&f=false says 2.5 to 3 psi

??????????????????????????? 3 PSI weakened stuctures ?????????????????????????????????????

[Len Colby]

The fuel-air-explosion generated an overpressure of about 3psi - enough to compress the air in the elevator shafts down to the 77th floor and upwards as well. That overpressure surely cause a lot of damage to glass, gypsum walls and elevator doors. Some people were burnt near the elevator shaft at these floors e.g. Carmen Griffith at the 78th floor.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2002/america.r...er/charles.html

or page 127

http://books.google.com/books?id=3C7JSfnMsbIC&lpg=PA127&ots=udXnm4dr00&dq=911%20WTC%20PSI&pg=PA127#v=onepage&q&f=false says 2.5 to 3 psi

??????????????????????????? 3 PSI weakened stuctures ?????????????????????????????????????

Arlene Charles' account is consistent with Jim Gartenberg's and Patricia Puma's accounts. The reported broken dry wall, glass and possibly door frames. It is not clear if when they said the cores and elevators were blown out if he is reporting damage to the columns or just the drywall.

Can you provide an exact quote regarding the 3 PSI? That is actually more than you think:

"Figure 7.4 pictures the same house shown in Fig. 7.1 after it had been struck by the blast effects of a small nuclear test explosion at the 5-psi overpressure range. (If the house had been hit by the blast effects of a multimegaton weapon, with longer-lasting blast winds, it would have been wrecked about as completely at the 3-psi overpressure range. At the 3-psi overpressure range, the blast winds from an explosion 1000 times as powerful as the Nevada test explosion that wrecked this house would blow 10 times as long. This longer-duration, 100-mph blast wind would increase the damage done by the blast wave. The 3-psi overpressure range from a 20- megaton surface burst is about 10 miles from the center of the crater, and from a one-megaton surface burst, about 4 miles.6)"

http://www.oism.org/nwss/s73p918.htm

[Steven Gaal]

Im sorry,its unkind to trap someone. see

COLBY WROTE Can you provide an exact quote regarding the 3 PSI? ENDQUOTE . Sooooo eger you seem to be to find high PSI information. This just shows weakness in the establishment argument.

COLBY WROTE ###########################################################################################

Just before the building collapsed they were in the 78th floor sky lobby and De Martini used his two way radio:

"Construction manager to base, be advised that the express elevators are in danger of collapse. Do you read?"

Only his end of the conversation is recorded. A few minutes later, he returns with another message: "Relay, that, Chris, to the firemen that the elevators — "

#################################################################################################################

Yes you said == just before ( just before ,just before) NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The damage to the core was very early ,NOT LATE !!! as you said.

################ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ PER JIM GARTENBERG^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^##################

Female anchor: What time did you get to work?

Jim: I got to work around 8 o'clock this morning, and . . I think this happened about 8:45.

Female anchor: It did. Describe what you felt.

Jim: I felt .. eh .. I felt . . just the whole build .. I heard a noise, felt the building shake, saw glass blown out.

The glass on my floor was blown out from the inside of the building out; rather than the exterior windows being blown out.

Female anchor: What were you

Jim: the glass fully shattered with the core of the building .. ehh .. and the interior core, ehh part of the building collapsed.

Female anchor: SILENCE

Male anchor: SILENCE

Jim: hello

Complete loss of interest by the male and female anchors even though Jim can still be heard faintly talking in the background.

The bastards must have turned the sound down. They could have had a nice long interview with him until either his cell phone

died or the building fell 53 minutes later. But they didn't give a damn did they? A whole bunch of information about the building

and the fires and possible explosions might have been learned, but I guess they wanted no part of any of that. Two people trapped

on the 86th floor would at least have had caring human support, but these two asshole ABC anchors just did not give a sh*t did they?

The building collaspe came from planted demolition and not from any airplane collision or fuel air explosion.. 3 PSI is very high and would have killed DeMartini and Gartenberg. There was a forceful burnoff of fuel from the planes ,but not creating any structural damage of any large scale. Their ear drums were intact (not a large Fuel Air Explosion) for planted demolitions separated by large period of time and space would not cause ear damage. Elevators are very air leaky places (my father worked 15 of his 35 years on his City Job with elevators -I KNOW they are very air leaky places!!). Not good places for Fuel Air explosions. From the link you can see a picture of dust being expelled from the 75th floor in a unidirectional manner and also a diagram of the HVAC system. If there had been a large Fuel Air explosion you would have seen that after the sheet metal of the HVAC system burst, there then would be dust expelled in all directions from the 75th floor . (North,East,West,North) and not unidirectional as seen in photos.

####################################################################################### link

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t14700.html

I am very busy and have to leave this forum for at least 9 months. LORD CHRIST IS THE TRUE KING WE HUMANS YEARN FOR.

Edited September 29, 2010 by Steven Gaal

[Len Colby]

Once again I'm unsure what you are trying to say most of the time, if you are willing to send me a secret decoder ring I'll give you my snail mail address, PM me.

It is not clear if the damage Gartenberg saw was extensive as the damage that led DeMartini to conclude the core columns we close to collapse. The former described mostly superficial damage and had no technical training, the latter was an architect would worked in the towers for over 8 years and was originally hired by the engineer who designed them.

But structural damage to the towers shortly after the crash would not fit the controlled demo theory. In CD the explosives go of with in seconds or less not over an hour before collapse.

And you still have to provide a source for the 3 PSI and it is still more than you think

[Steven Gaal]

Once again I'm unsure what you are trying to say most of the time, if you are willing to send me a secret decoder ring I'll give you my snail mail address, PM me.

It is not clear if the damage Gartenberg saw was extensive as the damage that led DeMartini to conclude the core columns we close to collapse. The former described mostly superficial damage and had no technical training, the latter was an architect would worked in the towers for over 8 years and was originally hired by the engineer who designed them.

But structural damage to the towers shortly after the crash would not fit the controlled demo theory. In CD the explosives go of with in seconds or less not over an hour before collapse.

And you still have to provide a source for the 3 PSI and it is still more than you think

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

http://911blogger.com/news/2010-10-06/new-video-911-firefighters-reveal-huge-explosions-towers-collapsed

I said in a thread above 3 PSI would have killed them = since they did not die - it had to be less than 3 PSI (not to flame /are u a little stupid ??) Yes in a regular CD they go off in a few seconds ++++ (but not to flame again -are you a little studid ??) BECAUSE THIS WTC takedown is not a regular CD ---- a HIDDEN CD A HIDDEN CD A HIDDEN CD ----

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& GAGE LISTS REF TO massive testimony of EXPLOSIONS pre WTC collapse. U KNOW WHO GAGE IS and YOU KNOW HIS REFS... just out from suppression this fireman video link ...a hidden CD + done over a period of time.

http://911blogger.com/news/2010-10-06/new-video-911-firefighters-reveal-huge-explosions-towers-collapsed

Edited October 19, 2010 by Steven Gaal

[Len Colby]

LOL Someguy incapable of making coherent posts calls others "stupid" I guess it is a sign of your desperation. There already are numerous CD threads and even one dealing with the sounds of the explosions.

So where exactly did you say "above 3 PSI would have killed them = since they did not die - it had to be less than 3 PSI".

Time to go back on your meds!

Edited October 19, 2010 by Len Colby

[Steven Gaal]

LOL Someguy incapable of making coherent posts calls others "stupid" I guess it is a sign of your desperation. There already are numerous CD threads and even one dealing with the sounds of the explosions.

So where exactly did you say "above 3 PSI would have killed them = since they did not die - it had to be less than 3 PSI".

Time to go back on your meds!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ YOU DO NOT READ MY POSTS < THUS U SAY OF ME "LOL Someguy incapable of making coherent posts calls others "stupid" SIR, i DIDNT SAY U ARE STUPId, i asked "are u stupid ??" ......I HAVE MY ANSWER For YOU NON READRER OF MY POSTS....you my need a few grammer lessons as to punctuation and/or reading comprehension course.

REPEATING FOR NONREADER////////////

The building collaspe came from planted demolition and not from any airplane collision or fuel air explosion.. 3 PSI is very high and would have killed DeMartini and Gartenberg. There was a forceful burnoff of fuel from the planes ,but not creating any structural damage of any large scale. Their ear drums were intact (not a large Fuel Air Explosion) for planted demolitions separated by large period of time and space would not cause ear damage. Elevators are very air leaky places (my father worked 15 of his 35 years on his City Job with elevators -I KNOW they are very air leaky places!!). Not good places for Fuel Air explosions. From the link you can see a picture of dust being expelled from the 75th floor in a unidirectional manner and also a diagram of the HVAC system. If there had been a large Fuel Air explosion you would have seen that after the sheet metal of the HVAC system burst, there then would be dust expelled in all directions from the 75th floor . (North,East,West,North) and not unidirectional as seen in photos.

***********************

In answer to two of your questions to me in your last 2 posts.

***********************

I said they did not die. I said explosions over a period of time. (NOT A REGULAR CD)

Guess its med time in Brazil. SG

[Len Colby]

You wrote:

“.. 3 PSI is very high and would have killed DeMartini and Gartenberg”

It depends how far they were from the explosion

“Elevators are very air leaky places (my father worked 15 of his 35 years on his City Job with elevators -I KNOW they are very air leaky places!!). Not good places for Fuel Air explosions.”

Sorry I’ll take the word of witnesses and structural engineers ovet the speculation of the son of a retired elevator man.

Edited October 20, 2010 by Len Colby

[Steven Gaal]

|

Mr.COLBY,

You first say 3 PSI very high. QUOTE COLBY START QUOTE "Figure 7.4 pictures the same house shown in Fig. 7.1 after it had been struck by the blast effects of a small nuclear test explosion at the 5-psi overpressure range. (If the house had been hit by the blast effects of a multimegaton weapon, with longer-lasting blast winds, it would have been wrecked about as completely at the 3-psi overpressure range. At the 3-psi overpressure range, the blast winds from an explosion 1000 times as powerful as the Nevada test explosion that wrecked this house would blow 10 times as long. This longer-duration, 100-mph blast wind would increase the damage done by the blast wave. The 3-psi overpressure range from a 20- megaton surface burst is about 10 miles from the center of the crater, and from a one-megaton surface burst, about 4 miles.6)"QUOTE COLBY END QUOTE

++++++++++++++++then you say QUOTE COLBY START QUOTE

"It depends how far they were from the explosion" QUOTE COLBY END QUOTE

********** What say what ?? First 3PSI is equvalent to 20 megaton 10 miles away,then you casually say," depends how far they were from the explosion". You seem to want it both ways.(??) ................. I say no Fuel Air explosion. You see

EARDRUMS INTACT AND THAT THERE DOES NOT SEEM TO BE ANY HEARING PROBLEMS == BOTH OF THESE INDICATE A LOW TO NEAR ZERO PSI EVENT...2) 100 first responders report explosions (see below) 3) IMHO YOU , THATS YOU LEN COLBY, HANG BY THE THREAD OF FIRE CAUSED COLLASPE.

TO REFUTE YOU SIR just

^^^^^^^^^^ see below. I WILL GO BY THE SCIENCE NOT BOUGHT AND PAYED FOR BY THE ESTABLISHMENT (BTW since you brought up the topic of my SAINTED Father ,was not your father a TOBACCO whore scientist ?? Didnt he work on making tobacco more killing/addictive(?) and all my Dad did was insure a safe trip up/down ?? ) I do believe this is on topic because tobacco scientists changed findings away from the truth for cash ....just like NIST did ????????????????????????????? I ask the question ,does Mr. Colby have a soft spot for scientists who present false findings for a paycheck ? (see below)

This evidence not payed for by CIA or Big Tobacco.

Evidence Refutes the Official 9/11 Investigation: The Scientific Forensic Facts

by Richard Gage and Gregg Roberts

Global Research, October 13, 2010

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth - 2010-10-04

AE911Truth Delivers the Evidence to the Media: Press Conference - National Press Club – Washington DC

Ed. – This is the actual 10-minute statement read by Richard Gage, AIA, to the media at the AE911Truth press conference at the National Press Club in Washington DC on September 9, 2010.

Good afternoon, my name is Richard Gage, AIA. I’m a member of the American Institute of Architects; I’ve been a licensed architect for 22 years; And I’m the founder of the non-profit organization, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth).

As a group, we now have more than 1,270 architect and engineer petition signers. Collectively, we have more than 25,000 years of building and technical experience. This press conference is being given by our petition signers and supporters today in 65 [it turned out to be 67] locations around the world, including 30 states and 4 countries.

Today, we’re here to inform you that we have uncovered evidence that the official investigations into what happened to the World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11 were deeply flawed, or worse. The scientific forensic facts we have discovered have very troubling implications.

For example, a technologically advanced, highly energetic material has been discovered in World Trade Center dust from the 9/11 catastrophe.

This follows the discovery, by the United States Geological Survey and others, of high concentrations of unusual previously molten iron-rich microspheres in the WTC dust. These microspheres can only have been formed during the destruction of the World Trade Center at temperatures far higher than can be explained by the jet fuel and office fires. Those fires, we are told by engineers employed by NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, were allegedly the cause of the World Trade Center’s destruction. The discovery of this advanced energetic material, in the form of red/gray chips distributed throughout the dust, both explains the iron-rich microspheres and confirms the inadequacy of the official account of what happened that tragic day.

Even before the microspheres and red/gray chips had been identified and brought to our attention, we were deeply concerned about other aspects of the destruction of these iconic buildings, and how they were investigated. More than two dozen firefighters, engineers, and other witnesses reported seeing substantial quantities of molten iron or steel, flowing like lava in the debris under all three World Trade Center high-rises. Office fires and jet fuel cannot possibly reach the temperatures necessary to liquefy iron or steel. A mixture called thermite, consisting of pulverized iron oxide and aluminum, CAN generate temperatures above 4000°F -- far more than is needed to melt iron or steel, which melts at about 2750°F.

The energetic material that was found in the WTC dust by an international team of scientists (led by Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen in Denmark) was reported in the peer-reviewed Bentham Open Journal of Chemical Physics. It consists of nano-engineered iron oxide and aluminum particles 1000th the size of a human hair, embedded in another substance consisting of carbon, oxygen, and silicon. The sizes of the iron oxide particles are extremely uniform, and neither they nor the ultra-fine-grain aluminum platelets could possibly have been created by a natural process such as a gravitational collapse or the impact of jetliners. The red/gray chips in which these particles were found exhibit the same characteristics as advanced energetic materials developed in US national laboratories in the years leading up to 9/11. They have no reason to be in this dust. Given all the horrific costs in human lives, lost civil liberties, and trillions of tax dollars spent in response to the official account of 9/11, there can be no more urgent need than for our country and the world to find out who put those materials in the World Trade Center – and why.

This need makes it all the more disturbing that top engineers in charge of the government’s investigation would avoid dealing straightforwardly with ALL the evidence that AE911Truth and others have repeatedly brought to their attention, much of which has been available in the public record since the beginning. John Gross, NIST co-project leader, has denied the existence of – or even any reports of – molten iron or steel at the World Trade Center.

They stopped their analysis of the towers’ complete and highly energetic destruction at the very point when the destruction began. And they have dismissed or avoided serious analysis of the additional evidence with which we are concerned, such as:

1. Both Twin Towers were completely dismembered and destroyed in just 10 to 14 seconds - which occurs at near free-fall acceleration. For this to happen, all 47 of their massive core columns as well as a large fraction of their external columns would have to be compromised with explosives beforehand.

2. More than 100 first responders reported hearing explosions and seeing flashes of light at the onset of destruction. Light flashes indicate explosive detonations. These witnesses are documented in NYC’s “Oral Histories” by City Fire Commissioner Thomas Von Essen

3. Multi-ton steel perimeter wall sections were ejected laterally at 60 mph to a distance of 600 ft. That speed and distance indicates that a high-pressure explosion initiated the ejection.

4. 90,000 tons of concrete and metal decking was pulverized in mid-air, again indicating explosions.

5. World Trade Center 7, a 47-story building which was not hit by an aircraft, fell at free-fall acceleration for more than 100 feet – a significant fact that NIST’s Shyam Sunder was forced to admit after being presented with our research. Yet NIST has failed to review or acknowledge the obvious implications of this fact, which is that the columns must have been explosively severed within fractions of a second of each other.

6. The complete destruction and dismemberment of Building 7, collapsing in just 6 ½ seconds—which is near freefall acceleration—through the path of what was greatest resistance, symmetrically vertical, including 2 ½ seconds of pure free-fall (zero resistance), is an occurrence only possible with expertly-placed explosives.

There are other falsehoods and omissions in NIST’s official report:

1. NIST overstated the severity and duration of the fires in all three skyscrapers, apparently in order to more credibly attribute the destruction to the fires, yet without exaggerating them enough to account for molten iron or steel.

2. NIST and FEMA did not follow the National Fire Protection Association’s standard procedures for fire and explosion investigations and test building debris for explosive residues.

3. NIST did not test for explosives when explosive demolition was the most likely hypothesis.

4. NIST’s animated computer model of Building 7’s destruction, showing the outer walls crumpling inward like a piece of foil, bears no resemblance to the actual collapse as seen in the videos.

5. NIST claims that the falling section of each of the Twin Towers, above the jetliner impact zones, crushed the much larger and more massive intact lower section. But [in the case of the North tower,] video analysis reveals clearly that the upper [section] disintegrated in waves of explosions prior to any crushing of the lower [section]. This indicates that the top sections could not have been the cause of the destruction of the lower [section].

6. NIST’s technical analysis into the twin towers’ collapses stops at the “initiation of collapse.” There is no technical analysis of the structural behavior of the building during the collapse itself. In response to our Request for Correction on this matter, NIST acknowledged that they were “unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse.”

In short, NIST’s official technical explanation is fraudulent and inconsistent with the basic laws of physics. By contrast, the hypothesis of controlled demolition is consistent with all of the available technical evidence.

This week, here in Washington, DC, we personally delivered our DVD “9/11: Blueprint for Truth – The SF Press Conference Edition,” which included highlights of the forensic evidence, into the hands of staffers for the science advisors of every elected representative on Capitol Hill. In addition, we have sat down with over a dozen of them and presented in detail the overwhelming evidence of explosive controlled demolition. We have personally invited over 400 of them to today’s event. How many Congressional science advisors are here today? [None].

I urge you to go to our website AE911Truth.org for more information, including comments by our members on the problems with the official investigation. At this point, we are calling for Attorney General Eric Holder to ask a federal grand jury to investigate those responsible for the NIST report, including Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder and Co-Project Leader John Gross.

We’d like any and all reporters who will be covering this story to know that Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth are here to give you any technical support you need.

Finally, I’d like to thank the thousands of scientists, senior level members of the military, intelligence and other government officials, pilots and aviation professionals, firefighters, scholars and university professionals, 9/11 survivors and their family members and concerned citizens here and around the world for their continuing support.

We also want to thank our growing family of more than three hundred sustaining financial supporters. We could not do this without you.

Now, I will answer any quick questions you may have. Keep in mind that most of your questions will probably be answered during the Mock Debate – which will be starting in just a minute. Also, more detailed information is available in our DVD, 9/11: Blueprint for Truth – The Architecture of Destruction, which is available on our website AE911Truth.org.

LINK ABOVE ARTICLE

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21436

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited October 21, 2010 by Steven Gaal

[Len Colby]

|

Mr.COLBY,

You first say 3 PSI very high. QUOTE COLBY START QUOTE "Figure 7.4 pictures the same house shown in Fig. 7.1 after it had been struck by the blast effects of a small nuclear test explosion at the 5-psi overpressure range. (If the house had been hit by the blast effects of a multimegaton weapon, with longer-lasting blast winds, it would have been wrecked about as completely at the 3-psi overpressure range. At the 3-psi overpressure range, the blast winds from an explosion 1000 times as powerful as the Nevada test explosion that wrecked this house would blow 10 times as long. This longer-duration, 100-mph blast wind would increase the damage done by the blast wave. The 3-psi overpressure range from a 20- megaton surface burst is about 10 miles from the center of the crater, and from a one-megaton surface burst, about 4 miles.6)"QUOTE COLBY END QUOTE

++++++++++++++++then you say QUOTE COLBY START QUOTE

"It depends how far they were from the explosion" QUOTE COLBY END QUOTE

********** What say what ?? First 3PSI is equvalent to 20 megaton 10 miles away,then you casually say," depends how far they were from the explosion". You seem to want it both ways.(??)

No you are showing your ignorance again. The FAE supposedly was 3 PSI at the point of detonation and thus the pressure would be weaker at a distance. In an open space the energy would dissipate per the inverse square rule but with in the WTC we would have to factor in (or rather, factor out) the energy absorbed by the building’s structure and contents. So what was the PSI where DeMartini and Gartenberg's were? And you have yet to provide the supposed quote from Debunking 9/11 Myths. Even if they said it that could have been in error. If you want to refute the “official story” show that the NIST report was wrong.

I say no Fuel Air explosion. You see

But people far more qualified than you (or your dad) have said otherwise and people who were there have described explosions consistent with FAEs. You miss the obvious possibility that there could have been an FAE less powerful than the one you claim Debunking 9/11 Myths said there was.

EARDRUMS INTACT AND THAT THERE DOES NOT SEEM TO BE ANY HEARING PROBLEMS == BOTH OF THESE INDICATE A LOW TO NEAR ZERO PSI EVENT

If this chart is correct, you are wrong again it says 1 PSI is equal to 170 dB and that severe damage occurs at 140 dB (which I guess is about 0.8 PSI). So the question once again is, what was the PSI where these people were? Since most of these people did not survive the collapse your assumption that they did not have “ANY HEARING PROBLEMS” is without basis.

...2) 100 first responders report explosions (see below)

You keep migrating away from the topic of the thread, DeMartini and others indicated there was severe structural damage to the structures of all three towers before they collapsed. There were lots of things that explode in big fires and lots of things that sound like (but aren’t) explosions. Photocopy and printer toner for example, can “pose a fire risk if not stored adequately” and can even be explosive*. This has been discussed here before.There were reports of explosions in the Windsor Tower as well.

* http://63.234.227.130/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_id=19584&p_table=INTERPRETATIONS

http://www.repairfaq.org/samnew/printfaq/pcfwavct.htm

TO REFUTE YOU SIR just

^^^^^^^^^^ see below. I WILL GO BY THE SCIENCE NOT BOUGHT AND PAYED FOR BY THE ESTABLISHMENT

IE you put your trust in crackpots theorizing about phenomena far outside their areas of expertise. Funny after over 9 years of fulminating the truth movement has only managed to publish one paper in a properly peer reviewed journal. And that one was about the chemical make up of dust samples in “The Environmentalist”

(BTW since you brought up the topic of my SAINTED Father ,was not your father a TOBACCO whore scientist ?? Didnt he work on making tobacco more killing/addictive(?) and all my Dad did was insure a safe trip up/down ?? ) I do believe this is on topic because tobacco scientists changed findings away from the truth for cash ....just like NIST did ????????????????????????????? I ask the question ,does Mr. Colby have a soft spot for scientists who present false findings for a paycheck ? (see below).

I brought up your father? Look at your previous post, YOU brought him up! I could stoop to your level but will refrain from doing so. Get back to me when you can cite more qualified experts (i.e. structural engineers with experience in steel framed buildings) who have read the NIST and reject it than wrote it.

This evidence not payed for by CIA or Big Tobacco.

Evidence Refutes the Official 9/11 Investigation: The Scientific Forensic Facts

by Richard Gage and Gregg Roberts

Global Research, October 13, 2010

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth - 2010-10-04

AE911Truth Delivers the Evidence to the Media: Press Conference - National Press Club – Washington DC

Ed. – This is the actual 10-minute statement read by Richard Gage, AIA, to the media at the AE911Truth press conference at the National Press Club in Washington DC on September 9, 2010.

Good afternoon, my name is Richard Gage, AIA. I’m a member of the American Institute of Architects; I’ve been a licensed architect for 22 years; And I’m the founder of the non-profit organization, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth).

As a group, we now have more than 1,270 architect and engineer petition signers. Collectively, we have more than 25,000 years of building and technical experience. This press conference is being given by our petition signers and supporters today in 65 [it turned out to be 67] locations around the world, including 30 states and 4 countries.

Gage’s group represents only a minuscule fraction of a percent of America’s architects and engineers and even more insignificant proportion of these professionals worldwide. Most of the members have areas of expertise far removed from the collapses of tall buildings, i.e. they are electrical, chemical, petroleum or aerospace engineers, landscape architects, civil engioneers specialized in irrigation or road building but only about 22 structural engineers some of whom are specialized in offshore platforms or ship hulls etc. Only one Steven Merritt claims to have experience with tall buildings. Only one Ronald H. Brookman makes a serious attempt to refute the NIST report. Bill Boggia criticized it a bit but seems to have cribbed his ideas from truther sites and his areas of expertise are “offshore wind, wave and tidal energy projects” and “offshore oil and gas”.

As for architects they are not especially qualified to question the conclusions of structural engineers regarding a structural failure. That especially goes for Gage who as per his CV spent his career designing 1 -2 storey buildings (school gyms, fast food joints etc) and perhaps one 3 storey building. It’s hilarious that he insists on tacking AIA to his name, that’s like a lawyer or doctor using ABA or AMA as if it were a title.

To make a long story short, there are no explosives or controlled demolitions experts in Gage's group and the only SE who seems to have bothered reading the NIST report doesn't claim to have experience with tall buildings and the only one who claims expertise with tall buildings seems not to read the report.

The logical or factual errors in the article are many and are far outside the scope of this thread, there already are dozens of 9/11 threads. When you turn up evidence the towers were not structurally unstable before the collapses initiated post it here.

Edited October 22, 2010 by Len Colby