Looking forward to your VSD takedown data. Let's also wake up to brainwashing in the name VSD. Over and over, we see the words "vaccine" and "safety" together. Is that just a coincidence? "Vaccine safety signals," in CDC-speak, is a euphemism and a lie. It is meant to lull you into believing that the words "safety" and "vaccine" go together. The real term needs to be, "Vaccine danger signals" or "Death signals." Vaccine Safety Data should be called "Vaccine Risk Data." There is no such thing as a medical intervention that is safe, with zero risks. Intervention always entails risk, sometimes tiny, sometimes huge, as does the option to do nothing. But consumers have been taught by Pharma to have a false expectation of safety, so that the lack of vaccine manufacturer liability doesn't trouble us. Risk/benefit ratio is a useful, rational term. "Safety" and "safe" and "stay safe" are the most overused, useless, emotionally manipulative words of the past two years. Be aware of how language is used to manipulate your perception. Thanks for the conference description - wish I could have been there- time to start planning for Fall 2023.
I look forward to your exploration with the women who cured their children of autism. This is of particular interest to my sister and, to a lesser although significant extent, me too.
My sister-in-law works with autistic kids in the UK now. Her son had Aspergers syndrome and so she came to the US to find out about the Son-Rise Program about 15 years ago. She used what she learnt for her son who was about 8 at the time and who she took out of regular school for a few years as it was not working for him. They also cut out dairy and gluten to reduce gut and brain inflammation while doing the Son-Rise program. He was able to go back to school in his early teens and just graduated this year from Uni in the UK with a masters degree in mathematics and is a chess whiz. He is doing very well.
The people I talked to both went through up to ten programs which worked or failed in different ways. I don't know enough to talk about much of it yet, but this is why interviews are educational.
Mathew! I looked all around that room on Monday for you to no avail. I did luck out and met Toby Rogers.
What a profound thing to be in the presence of over 700 other like-minded souls. Those were two very inspiring days.
I hope we can meet one day in the future at another meeting. I certainly need these to soothe my aching spirit. So glad you and your wife were able to spend some fun time together. Now back to fighting the war. 🙏
Sorry not to have met you. And I figured that Toby wasn't there since I didn't see him. That's a shame that we all had too little time to come together.
I was also sad to find out that Meryl's fight with the Main board kept her away. She is one of the figures who has worked the longest, and I admire her and hope to shake her hand in the near future.
The main covid/vaccine problem is that - along the lines of Mattias Desmet's argument - is that people have been well and truly 'captured'. Big Pharma has got away with their shenanigans for so long that it has become as mainstream and very much part of the Government in the US, and getting so in the rest of the industrialised world. Along with the Puritans et al, and every other sort of adventuring grifter, peddling snake-oil is a hard-core US 'thing', and its 'success' has sadly spilled over to effect all walks of life.The opioid crises in the US is a glaring example of such a crazy world. Statin's is another. Billy-bob knows all this too well. It's a bunch of psychologists that is needed, and most definitely not of the Breggin kind. Already far too many nutters have slipped streamed behind this debacle. I've had countless vaccinations, and for extensive travel etc., etc, but I'm unjabbed for covid. I'm not anti-vaxx, but I am getting there. Anyway, thank you for all you do. You are a gem.
Captured is an apt term, well put. For your consideration, I offer the nuanced term "vaccine risk-aware" as an alternative to the adrenaline-charged term "anti-vaxxer."
Matthew, re: 9/11. Wanted to re-share this post with you. Many of the fruits of 9/11 fed directly into the debacle of now.
-
The very first tell was visible exactly as the first tower began to fall. I watched it happen on TV, about 45 minutes after the planes hit the buildings. Strangely, the second tower struck collapsed before the first. Weird.
The collapse that unfolded went against every structural engineering principle known and employed to construct buildings of this size. I saw the buildings fall straight down at astonishing speed. Basic physics seemed suspended. I was shocked.
The WTC towers are a Type I structure, which require 3 hours of fire protection. This is because Type I structures don’t have a height limitation. Very tall structures require time to evacuate and deploy firefighters. So while a two story apartment building might only have a 1 hour rating, tall buildings are held to a stricter standard. This is primarily driven by insurance, as most building codes have been since their inception. This doesn’t mean 3 hours to collapse, but 3 hours until a certain level of deformation takes place. The building is still expected to stand, not collapse. In real life, no fire-protected Type I building has ever suffered catastrophic collapse before or since the WTC. This is very important.
We have to remember that these were, at one time, the tallest towers on the planet. They weren’t built to simply *meet* the building codes of the time, but to vastly *exceed* them. These towers were designed with a highly redundant structural system that paired vertical load bearing and shear resistance in its interior and a web-like network of structural steel at its perimeter that lent the towers remarkable stiffness and resiliency (an essential characteristic for tall buildings subjected to hurricane force winds which can come from any direction). In addition to the robust redundancy of the structural design, all of the steel was either encased or covered with fire-protective material, be it concrete, gypsum, or asbestos-containing coatings available at the time.
I have personally worked intimately on the design and construction of these kinds of tall buildings, and when I saw these buildings collapse on that fateful day, I knew immediately it was an Op. And a very large and elaborate one.
On that day, the TV told me to ignore training, education, and experience, and just be afraid. It told us that somehow jetliners crashing into the buildings made them fall, like Luke Skywalker—a single X-Wing taking down the Death Star. That’s fine for a movie plot line, with accompanying special effects; but from a structural engineering perspective, it’s utter fantasy. It would take much more than a single plane, and the collapse wouldn’t have looked like that. What it looked like was controlled demolition. Full stop.
Every structural engineer and architect worth their salt should have jumped out of their seats and exclaimed, “WTF?” Instead, most sat and waited, silent. My team members and peers were curiously silent, hesitant to ask questions. Most said nothing and changed the topic when probed. They were uncertain. Afraid to speak out. Like an unmasked person in a crowd of masked faces, they feared being isolated. Perhaps there was something they didn’t know?
There were so many angles to pick this apart based on basic principles, but almost no one noticed and fewer said anything. No one seemed to see the rate of fall, the way the collapse self-corrected early on at the top third. No one seemed to question how it is that relatively minor damage to one side of a redundant structure played out as a very uniform and organized collapse.
Almost that very day, a blanket of silence spread out over the topic. It was as if a mass suggestion spell had been cast and nearly everyone had bought the ruse. It was as if the TV and headlines had been scripted beforehand, structured to obscure and direct inquiry away from the forensic evidence. Is it any wonder that the overwhelming majority of the steel remains were quickly freighted off to asia for smelting? Forensic examination wasn’t a goal, it was to be avoided.
Many point to the Pentagon and the Pennsylvania crash as big tells, but for me, it was the WTC collapses that spoke volumes. Basic physics, Newtonian Mechanics, high rise design principles, all had been violated; and we’re not talking about particle physics here, but basic principles that have been used to design buildings for centuries. How could this possibly be?
Immediately, within the space of weeks, the industry rags devoted special issues reporting theories of collapse. The theories were all ridiculous, but like the NEJM or the Lancet, does anyone question Architecture or Structure? Never mind that all of a sudden, the normal advertisements changed on a dime to market security bollards, fire-rated glass, and terrorist-resistant building security systems. The people who read these initial theories fell into three camps: skeptics, acceptors, and those who stayed silent. I would estimate around 75% were acceptors, 5% were skeptical, and 20% were afraid to give voice to their questions.
Much like the doctors during the pandemic outbreak, only a few professionals in connected fields spoke out, many were cowed into silence, and a great many went along in blind acceptance. Honest truth: a huge number of architects suck at structural engineering, even on an intuitive level, and outsource even fundamental design to engineers—they like to spend an inordinate amount of effort on prettifying the packaging. People who raised questions were drowned out by official pronouncements via NIST and the media.
What followed reads like a template for now. Computer models were created to cartoon animate a brand-new phenomena: Progressive Collapse. Mathematics professors were called upon to write papers demonstrating the mathematics, proving the theory. Most people couldn’t understand the language or read the papers being written. But those who could, knew the computer model was bullshit and the mathematics made no sense. I waded through the poorly written paper and confirmed it was another part of the Op.
The most oft-cited paper at the time basically tried to argue that through a combination of potential energy and momentum of collapsing floors one could numerically demonstrate that there was adequate energy in the system to demonstrate the feasibility of the collapse. What laypeople didn’t know, and what the reporting in this failed to grok, is that the equations in that paper were based on a fantasy. The analysis failed to account for the total amount of energy required to demonstrate not just the collapse, but the observable evidence: cutting of massive steel beams and columns, the pulverizing of enormous amounts of concrete into dust, along with corrugated steel, truss joists, even connecting bolts, so much reduced to dust and slag. The paper was an exercise in obfuscation—using math to bolster the psyop, invisible to all but the most intrepid.
There is nothing that will cause a steel frame structure to pancake collapse at close to free fall speed without removing vertical support below the falling mass first. This is fundamental. All of the structural connections and supports below the falling mass have to fail at each floor in order without affecting the speed of collapse. If the mechanism cited by the paper had been true, you would have observed slowing collapse, not a uniform one. Further, the pile of rubble at ground level would more likely have been a broken stack of floor plates, and not the overwhelmingly atomized debris sprayed out over many city blocks in all directions.
Eventually this deeply deceptive model was refined and tweaked, with various propositions suggesting failure of poorly-applied fire-proofing and faulty truss joist connections as the culprits behind the failure. Much of this made its way into the 9/11 Commission report even though it is all an elaborate lie. But telling a lie repeatedly to people that don’t understand the basis for the lie has been shown to be a very effective strategy. Eventually, fortified by ‘official’ decree, even the basic laws of physics must bow.
Very few considered that the towers had undergone retrofitting in the years leading up to the collapse, much of the work happening at night to avoid disruptions to public business operations. Funny that.
In the end, not very different from a virus (relatively small fire with poor fuel stock) somehow ripping through the population (the first ever/since examples of catastrophic failure in buildings of this type due to fire), mass dissemination of prepared mathematical manipulation, mixed with copious amounts of fear messaged through the media (Bin Laden, Bin Laden, Bin Laden), followed by governmental mandates (Patriot Act) and actions (War), benefitting the super-rich (war profiteers and the security state).
Thanks for driving all that way to meet face to face with those amazing people. It’s a great report and the future suddenly seems a whole lot brighter!
I couldn't go to the CHD conference. Thank you for your description of the event. I wanted to meet Whitney Webb and Catherine Austin Fitts. It sounds like they were so busy, it wouldn't have happened even if I were present. I'm glad you were able to attend. For me...maybe next year?
Really great to have met you in person Mathew. Can't wait to hear about the "Chaos Agents" at some point. Pumped for your podcast with Richard tomorrow. It's going to be explosive...
911? Wow you’re really going down the rabbit hole. Nice to have you. It’s rather lonely being told you’re crazy all the time. Well, you know what they say about todays conspiracy theorists.
I've always known that the story wasn't told and gradually came to suspect that was the real start of a World War E. But I haven't had the time to write about it or complete deep research. I keep many notes around and check some Loose Change and Corbett Report research once in a while and find it to be solid.
Magical Jenga is actually not an off-base analogy…and the reality is indeed staggering.
Here is a post that I have shared in the past on Sage Hana’s and Marc Crispin Miller’s stacks.
-
The very first tell was visible exactly as the first tower began to fall. I watched it happen on TV, about 45 minutes after the planes hit the buildings. Strangely, the second tower struck collapsed before the first. Weird.
The collapse that unfolded went against every structural engineering principle known and employed to construct buildings of this size. I saw the buildings fall straight down at astonishing speed. Basic physics seemed suspended. I was shocked.
The WTC towers are a Type I structure, which require 3 hours of fire protection. This is because Type I structures don’t have a height limitation. Very tall structures require time to evacuate and deploy firefighters. So while a two story apartment building might only have a 1 hour rating, tall buildings are held to a stricter standard. This is primarily driven by insurance, as most building codes have been since their inception. This doesn’t mean 3 hours to collapse, but 3 hours until a certain level of deformation takes place. The building is still expected to stand, not collapse. In real life, no fire-protected Type I building has ever suffered catastrophic collapse before or since the WTC. This is very important.
We have to remember that these were, at one time, the tallest towers on the planet. They weren’t built to simply *meet* the building codes of the time, but to vastly *exceed* them. These towers were designed with a highly redundant structural system that paired vertical load bearing and shear resistance in its interior and a web-like network of structural steel at its perimeter that lent the towers remarkable stiffness and resiliency (an essential characteristic for tall buildings subjected to hurricane force winds which can come from any direction). In addition to the robust redundancy of the structural design, all of the steel was either encased or covered with fire-protective material, be it concrete, gypsum, or asbestos-containing coatings available at the time.
I have personally worked intimately on the design and construction of these kinds of tall buildings, and when I saw these buildings collapse on that fateful day, I knew immediately it was an Op. And a very large and elaborate one.
On that day, the TV told me to ignore training, education, and experience, and just be afraid. It told us that somehow jetliners crashing into the buildings made them fall, like Luke Skywalker—a single X-Wing taking down the Death Star. That’s fine for a movie plot line, with accompanying special effects; but from a structural engineering perspective, it’s utter fantasy. It would take much more than a single plane, and the collapse wouldn’t have looked like that. What it looked like was controlled demolition. Full stop.
Every structural engineer and architect worth their salt should have jumped out of their seats and exclaimed, “WTF?” Instead, most sat and waited, silent. My team members and peers were curiously silent, hesitant to ask questions. Most said nothing and changed the topic when probed. They were uncertain. Afraid to speak out. Like an unmasked person in a crowd of masked faces, they feared being isolated. Perhaps there was something they didn’t know?
There were so many angles to pick this apart based on basic principles, but almost no one noticed and fewer said anything. No one seemed to see the rate of fall, the way the collapse self-corrected early on at the top third. No one seemed to question how it is that relatively minor damage to one side of a redundant structure played out as a very uniform and organized collapse.
Almost that very day, a blanket of silence spread out over the topic. It was as if a mass suggestion spell had been cast and nearly everyone had bought the ruse. It was as if the TV and headlines had been scripted beforehand, structured to obscure and direct inquiry away from the forensic evidence. Is it any wonder that the overwhelming majority of the steel remains were quickly freighted off to asia for smelting? Forensic examination wasn’t a goal, it was to be avoided.
Many point to the Pentagon and the Pennsylvania crash as big tells, but for me, it was the WTC collapses that spoke volumes. Basic physics, Newtonian Mechanics, high rise design principles, all had been violated; and we’re not talking about particle physics here, but basic principles that have been used to design buildings for centuries. How could this possibly be?
Immediately, within the space of weeks, the industry rags devoted special issues reporting theories of collapse. The theories were all ridiculous, but like the NEJM or the Lancet, does anyone question Architecture or Structure? Never mind that all of a sudden, the normal advertisements changed on a dime to market security bollards, fire-rated glass, and terrorist-resistant building security systems. The people who read these initial theories fell into three camps: skeptics, acceptors, and those who stayed silent. I would estimate around 75% were acceptors, 5% were skeptical, and 20% were afraid to give voice to their questions.
Much like the doctors during the pandemic outbreak, only a few professionals in connected fields spoke out, many were cowed into silence, and a great many went along in blind acceptance. Honest truth: a huge number of architects suck at structural engineering, even on an intuitive level, and outsource even fundamental design to engineers—they like to spend an inordinate amount of effort on prettifying the packaging. People who raised questions were drowned out by official pronouncements via NIST and the media.
What followed reads like a template for now. Computer models were created to cartoon animate a brand-new phenomena: Progressive Collapse. Mathematics professors were called upon to write papers demonstrating the mathematics, proving the theory. Most people couldn’t understand the language or read the papers being written. But those who could, knew the computer model was bullshit and the mathematics made no sense. I waded through the poorly written paper and confirmed it was another part of the Op.
The most oft-cited paper at the time basically tried to argue that through a combination of potential energy and momentum of collapsing floors one could numerically demonstrate that there was adequate energy in the system to demonstrate the feasibility of the collapse. What laypeople didn’t know, and what the reporting in this failed to grok, is that the equations in that paper were based on a fantasy. The analysis failed to account for the total amount of energy required to demonstrate not just the collapse, but the observable evidence: cutting of massive steel beams and columns, the pulverizing of enormous amounts of concrete into dust, along with corrugated steel, truss joists, even connecting bolts, so much reduced to dust and slag. The paper was an exercise in obfuscation—using math to bolster the psyop, invisible to all but the most intrepid.
There is nothing that will cause a steel frame structure to pancake collapse at close to free fall speed without removing vertical support below the falling mass first. This is fundamental. All of the structural connections and supports below the falling mass have to fail at each floor in order without affecting the speed of collapse. If the mechanism cited by the paper had been true, you would have observed slowing collapse, not a uniform one. Further, the pile of rubble at ground level would more likely have been a broken stack of floor plates, and not the overwhelmingly atomized debris sprayed out over many city blocks in all directions.
Eventually this deeply deceptive model was refined and tweaked, with various propositions suggesting failure of poorly-applied fire-proofing and faulty truss joist connections as the culprits behind the failure. Much of this made its way into the 9/11 Commission report even though it is all an elaborate lie. But telling a lie repeatedly to people that don’t understand the basis for the lie has been shown to be a very effective strategy. Eventually, fortified by ‘official’ decree, even the basic laws of physics must bow.
Very few considered that the towers had undergone retrofitting in the years leading up to the collapse, much of the work happening at night to avoid disruptions to public business operations. Funny that.
In the end, not very different from a virus (relatively small fire with poor fuel stock) somehow ripping through the population (the first ever/since examples of catastrophic failure in buildings of this type due to fire), mass dissemination of prepared mathematical manipulation, mixed with copious amounts of fear messaged through the media (Bin Laden, Bin Laden, Bin Laden), followed by governmental mandates (Patriot Act) and actions (War), benefitting the super-rich (war profiteers and the security state).
Americans who wind up knowing enough Muslims to have a basic grip on Islamic politics surely wind up recognizing the impossible "logic", and that was probably one of the reasons why Muslim fear porn was blasted so hard (including encouraging poor or mafia-connected refugees into Europe in numbers too large to easily absorb while brainwashing on the other end as well).
Making the rivals fight bitterly is part of the "divide and conquer" agenda, and has been since before any of our grandparents were born.
Excellent report Mathew. Good for you to get some R&R and balance on the trip. I agree TN is a very pretty state, been there once. I'm such a west coaster I didn't even know the Cumberland River existed? lol Btw, I launched my VAERS website while you were away! https://www.vaersaware.com/
Matt, that is SO COOL you and your wife did all that!
I am happy dance happy to hear you are connecting with AE 9/11 Truth, too!
I didn't know that Bass Pro Shop was in a pyramid - kinda weirds me a little bit, but it's not too big, so I'll get over it -lol. There's a funny, being in Memphis, hence the pyramid.
I always liked fly fishing, miss being able to do it.
Looking forward to hearing about everyone you connected and synergied with!
Back in 2001 on Sept. 11 as a firefighter serving at the rank of Deputy Chief as an incident commander and also as an instructor of building construction for firefighters I was alerted to the breaking news at the World Trade Centers. I knew from my training and experience the buildings would most likely collapse. It’s intriguing to hear discussions from architects and structural engineers about the events of that day.
What were you told about the buildings that would suggest collapse from these circumstances?
What bothers me most is the idea that they would collapse through the path of greatest resistance at almost freefall speed. That requires an extremely even loss of support, which seems extraordinarily unlikely for steel structures as it would require heating to be evenly applied to all supports, and without chaotic dissipation to perturb the process. Not once, but three time over. I'm not a professional engineer, but have done modeling projects for a couple of them. I'd rather take my chances at the horse track than try to reproduce that event.
Most of the dust in all probability was not from concrete, but rather from the gypsum impregnated drywall and ceiling materials used throughout most, if not all, floors of the building. The drywall applied over lightweight steel studs forms the interior spaces inside the building. If you have ever witnessed the installation or demolition of drywall materials, then you would not be surprised to see extremely huge amounts of dust looking almost exactly like concrete dust.
As to paper being untouched when it seems almost all other things were destroyed, that too should not be surprising. The lightweight paper could have been simply blown around and away by the rapid changes in air pressure. Heavier materials remaining in place would be crushed/pulverized by the downward force of the collapsing structure and other contents.
The major number of floors of each of the buildings were not involved with fire. Much, if not most of the damage to the steel, gypsum and other building components and furnishings was result of the collapse of the buildings, not the fire.
The buildings were built with steel. The advantages of steel are light weight and pound for pound strength. The disadvantage of steel is its rapid loss of strength in an uncontrolled fire situation. Steel in a structure like a high rise building is protected from fire primarily by automatic fire suppression water sprinkler systems. The water is supplied to an array of heat activated sprinkler heads by a system of steel piping. An impact by a large plane would have immediately destroyed the integrity of the water supply piping as well as some of the structural steel frame. Broken pipes even if they are just upon upper floors would tax the integrity of the water supply for the entire building. Most automatic fire suppression water sprinkler systems can only be practically designed to control a fire on one floor with a maximum, limited number of heads operating. At internal temperatures of 800 degrees Fahrenheit steel begins to expand and lose strength. The heat generated by the uncontrolled raging fire would have quickly raised the internal temperature of the steel to temperatures well above 800 degrees. The expanding steel would actually act to push the framework apart and the steel to deform. As more heat is applied the steel becomes like wet spaghetti. At some point collapse becomes inevitable. The structural steel framework below the initial collapse would experience a sudden impact load well beyond its design strength forcing a downward pancake style collapse of the entire building. I’m am not an engineer either, just a firefighter (now retired) who studied building construction. Buildings often take years to construct. In a fire situation buildings some time only take hours or minutes to destruct. It was my job to know what to expect to protect my fellow firefighters, the people in the community I served, and myself.
"The disadvantage of steel is its rapid loss of strength in an uncontrolled fire situation..."
This looks like a lot of nonsense and babble, and I'd be very interested to find out what sources you've learned from that led you to these conclusions.
Every material gains and loses properties under changes in conditions. Anyone who talks about steel turning into "wet spaghetti" as if the process happens uniformly seems ill-qualified to comment about such a once-in-history event. The heating of such a metal results in a highly chaotic process. We're not yet talking about star plasma, of course, but the analogy should bring home the point that dynamical systems (melting steel certainly qualifies) do not model simply. In fact, such modeling for skyscrapers has never been confidently established because problems at this level may be worked out on paper (or computer models), but only sometimes match experience. Top engineering firms have asked me to work on far less complex tasks because they sometimes don't have anyone on hand to do that for them. But your training as a firefighter was in excess of the knowledge of engineering professors I've worked with who build these structures? This sounds not simply unlikely, but either psychotic or propagandizing.
"The expanding steel would actually act to push the framework apart and the steel to deform."
Yes, and if this is the reason for collapse, that would need to take place in a way that is [much] more uniform than the process of balancing a pin on its head---by orders of magnitude of tolerance. Ever try balancing a billion-pound pin?
If this were easy, we wouldn't see Chinese engineers have so much trouble learning how to collapse buildings in on themselves. There are only a handful of engineering firms in the world that have perfected the process. We would also not be waiting after 20 [more] years of any other examples of skyscrapers collapsing in on themselves due to fire---or even missile strikes more similar in dynamics. It just doesn't happen, and doesn't make sense.
I'd love to see in print any materials any firefighter has ever received suggesting what you believe, published before 9/11/2001. Please don't bother writing more paragraphs of nonsense without citation. It's offensive.
To me it seems you have it right Mathew. I wonder if Jack Bergeron has been following the analyses of David Chandler. A few years ago - I think it was in 2016, but I’m not sure - I saw a video for the first time of WTC 7 coming down, and I got a very depressing, sinking feeling because I felt an unwelcome tug on a thread of the fabric of my understanding of the world and the fabric began to unravel. Since then I’ve paid attention to many truthers, one of whom is Chandler. This video is old, but good: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vek2naWv7is, though there may be even better videos put out since this one that I have not seen. If any of your readers watch this, but begin to get impatient with the physics you might want to skip to minute 54 where Chandler lays out a sketch of the implications.
If engineers and architects don’t know about the main disadvantage of using steel in high rise building construction there’s something definitely lacking in their education. Steel loses its strength at very low internal heat temperatures in comparison to the heat generated by an uncontrolled fire inside a building such as a high rise. One of the primary, overriding goals in the design of a steel frame high-rise building is to prevent the heat from a fire from ever reaching the steel. Maybe the architects and engineers really do not know the main disadvantage of steel and just add fire and heat resistant elements to the design simply because “that’s the way it’s done.” But I doubt that. The International Building Code as well as the National Fire Protection Association Standards have been developed and evolved over the years in response to devastating and costly events such as uncontrolled fires, hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, snow storms, etc. The annals of fire disasters and resultant changes in building codes are extensive. It is my understanding the World Trade Center Towers were designed to withstand a strike from a light plane. A strike from a fully fueled air line passenger plane is an exceptional, rare, unexpected event. To design and build any building to withstand an exceptional, rare event would be cost prohibitive.
Firefighters are the people other people call upon when all those design elements fail. The firefighters and other first responders entering the buildings on September 11 did so (as they often do) in risk to their own lives.
"Steel loses its strength at very low internal heat temperatures in comparison to the heat generated by an uncontrolled fire inside a building such as a high rise."
Such an unquantified statement has no business in the discussion.
This is the point at which you either find one other example of a high rise tower losing such strength in its steel that it pancakes, or look dishonest or psychotic.
Looks like Scientific American's spin job but with more bad analogies and excuses than 9-11 Report. You are also the first FDNY to cross my path saying free-fall collapse was an expected outcome, much less for WTC7... struck by nothing and BBC reporter announced the collapse while it was still standing behind her live on air ffs.
The world has yet to see it happen anywhere else since that day either..
How many other high rise buildings have you seen that have been struck by fully fueled passenger air planes?
The WTC7 suffered from an out of control fire on a lower floor. Elements designed and installed to protect the steel from the heat of a fire are destroyed over time (hours in an out of control fire situation). Any water distribution system in that neighborhood would most likely have been severely comprised that day. Disasters happen.
Try looking at research not pundits your claims are right out of presstitute reporting & plausible only if you ignore physics and science.. try facts...
Watch the free fall & spare me the ridiculous fire theory
Contrary to the conclusions of NIST, the UAF research team found that the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11 was caused not by fires but by the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.
Following the release of this report, AE911Truth and 10 family members of 9/11 victims submitted a formal request for correction to NIST’s report on WTC 7 based partially on the UAF findings. They are now suing NIST over the agency's evasive response to the request.
For 37 years as a full time firefighter I studied and dealt with the reality (facts) of what fire can do. Many people are totally unaware of what happens to steel in an uncontrolled fire situation where temperatures inside of a building can rapidly exceed 1000 degrees Celsius. Without any automatic or manual efforts to control the fire the heat produced will penetrate any fire/heat resistant building elements designed, installed and maintained (inspection, maintenance and repair of fire protection features are often neglected) to protect the buildup of heat in structural steel. Columns, unlike beams, almost always fail catastrophically without warning. One column failure will immediately cause a transfer of the loads it had been supporting to other surrounding columns which in turn may also instantly fail.
The automatic fire control systems may have failed in the Meridian Plaza fire, but it is possible the non-automatic features such as drywall and protective coatings on the steel may have bought enough time for the combustible materials inside the building to burn to a sufficient extent that the heat and temperature gradients leveled off. In other words there may not have been a sufficient amount of fuel to burn to increase the heat to the level where the strength of the steel would be gravely compromised. There are also other factors that must always be considered as well:
- Outside air temperatures and wind speed throughout the duration of the fire.
- Proximity to other buildings. If you have ever walked near or between tall or lengthy buildings on a windy day, then you may have experienced the micro weather conditions.
- Wind, the movement of air, can be of aid or hindrance in removing the heat generated by a fire inside a building.
- The inspection, maintenance and repair of a building’s fire protection systems can be crucial in the containment and control of an interior fire. I often see doors intended to control the spread of fire, heat and smoke blocked open or in disrepair. Have the automatic water fire suppression system and fire standpipes been recently tested?
- Has the type of occupancy changed from the original design? Buildings are specifically designed and built to meet the requirements of the expected occupancy.
- The internal configuration of the building. Have rooms been reconfigured and were necessary alterations made to the water fire suppression sprinkler distribution?
- The quality and type of materials used in the construction. Did the materials meet the respective standards for quality, strength, fire resistance, flame spread characteristics, etc., etc.?
- The quality of the construction itself. Were the architects and engineers fully involved in the construction process to assure and certify their plans were built as they specified?
There are just too many factors to compare one fire situation to another and expect to see similar results. In my experience as a fire incident commander I found it was best to err on the side of expectation of the worst case scenario, hence I was not surprised to witness (via television video) the collapse of the two towers. It is interesting to note the fire command at the Meridian Plaza fire incident ordered the full evacuation of the building at some point during the course of the fire. Other fire commanders have often made the same decision to evacuate and abandon all interior operations. In consideration of the number of people occupying the World Trade Center buildings in need of evacuation assistance and whatever protection the firefighters could provide, the fire incident command really had no other option other than to hope for the best and assume the risks. The September 11, 2001 incident in many ways has no similar comparison.
Having a brain has never guaranteed the ability to analyze information and make wise judgments. Many people of great learning and vast knowledge are fools. I make no judgment of participants in this discussion. I suggest you do likewise.
The AISC material I referenced provides information on the effects of fire and heat on exposed steel. It supports my view the buildings would collapse as a result of the impact of the passenger plane, the resultant destruction to the building’s structure and fire protection features, and the accompanying uncontrolled intense fire. IMHO there are many other reasons and circumstances to question whether or not our own government had malicious intent and involvement in the events that transpired that day.
Looking forward to your VSD takedown data. Let's also wake up to brainwashing in the name VSD. Over and over, we see the words "vaccine" and "safety" together. Is that just a coincidence? "Vaccine safety signals," in CDC-speak, is a euphemism and a lie. It is meant to lull you into believing that the words "safety" and "vaccine" go together. The real term needs to be, "Vaccine danger signals" or "Death signals." Vaccine Safety Data should be called "Vaccine Risk Data." There is no such thing as a medical intervention that is safe, with zero risks. Intervention always entails risk, sometimes tiny, sometimes huge, as does the option to do nothing. But consumers have been taught by Pharma to have a false expectation of safety, so that the lack of vaccine manufacturer liability doesn't trouble us. Risk/benefit ratio is a useful, rational term. "Safety" and "safe" and "stay safe" are the most overused, useless, emotionally manipulative words of the past two years. Be aware of how language is used to manipulate your perception. Thanks for the conference description - wish I could have been there- time to start planning for Fall 2023.
I look forward to your exploration with the women who cured their children of autism. This is of particular interest to my sister and, to a lesser although significant extent, me too.
My sister-in-law works with autistic kids in the UK now. Her son had Aspergers syndrome and so she came to the US to find out about the Son-Rise Program about 15 years ago. She used what she learnt for her son who was about 8 at the time and who she took out of regular school for a few years as it was not working for him. They also cut out dairy and gluten to reduce gut and brain inflammation while doing the Son-Rise program. He was able to go back to school in his early teens and just graduated this year from Uni in the UK with a masters degree in mathematics and is a chess whiz. He is doing very well.
The people I talked to both went through up to ten programs which worked or failed in different ways. I don't know enough to talk about much of it yet, but this is why interviews are educational.
Cheers.
Mathew! I looked all around that room on Monday for you to no avail. I did luck out and met Toby Rogers.
What a profound thing to be in the presence of over 700 other like-minded souls. Those were two very inspiring days.
I hope we can meet one day in the future at another meeting. I certainly need these to soothe my aching spirit. So glad you and your wife were able to spend some fun time together. Now back to fighting the war. 🙏
Sorry not to have met you. And I figured that Toby wasn't there since I didn't see him. That's a shame that we all had too little time to come together.
I was also sad to find out that Meryl's fight with the Main board kept her away. She is one of the figures who has worked the longest, and I admire her and hope to shake her hand in the near future.
Yes - those two days went by way too fast.
Meryl is one of the few I haven't had the honor of meeting yet. It's tragic what is being done to her.
I'm feeling especially low today. Praying for the damn to break. God bless you Mathew.
"women who helped their sons recover from autism."
I need to learn more about this. Eagerly awaiting interviews, and if you can point to a resource in the meantime, I'd appreciate that too!
I wish I had a resource, but I have no idea what works/worked as of yet.
The main covid/vaccine problem is that - along the lines of Mattias Desmet's argument - is that people have been well and truly 'captured'. Big Pharma has got away with their shenanigans for so long that it has become as mainstream and very much part of the Government in the US, and getting so in the rest of the industrialised world. Along with the Puritans et al, and every other sort of adventuring grifter, peddling snake-oil is a hard-core US 'thing', and its 'success' has sadly spilled over to effect all walks of life.The opioid crises in the US is a glaring example of such a crazy world. Statin's is another. Billy-bob knows all this too well. It's a bunch of psychologists that is needed, and most definitely not of the Breggin kind. Already far too many nutters have slipped streamed behind this debacle. I've had countless vaccinations, and for extensive travel etc., etc, but I'm unjabbed for covid. I'm not anti-vaxx, but I am getting there. Anyway, thank you for all you do. You are a gem.
Captured is an apt term, well put. For your consideration, I offer the nuanced term "vaccine risk-aware" as an alternative to the adrenaline-charged term "anti-vaxxer."
or vaccine critical.
Or even "rational".
Matthew, re: 9/11. Wanted to re-share this post with you. Many of the fruits of 9/11 fed directly into the debacle of now.
-
The very first tell was visible exactly as the first tower began to fall. I watched it happen on TV, about 45 minutes after the planes hit the buildings. Strangely, the second tower struck collapsed before the first. Weird.
The collapse that unfolded went against every structural engineering principle known and employed to construct buildings of this size. I saw the buildings fall straight down at astonishing speed. Basic physics seemed suspended. I was shocked.
The WTC towers are a Type I structure, which require 3 hours of fire protection. This is because Type I structures don’t have a height limitation. Very tall structures require time to evacuate and deploy firefighters. So while a two story apartment building might only have a 1 hour rating, tall buildings are held to a stricter standard. This is primarily driven by insurance, as most building codes have been since their inception. This doesn’t mean 3 hours to collapse, but 3 hours until a certain level of deformation takes place. The building is still expected to stand, not collapse. In real life, no fire-protected Type I building has ever suffered catastrophic collapse before or since the WTC. This is very important.
We have to remember that these were, at one time, the tallest towers on the planet. They weren’t built to simply *meet* the building codes of the time, but to vastly *exceed* them. These towers were designed with a highly redundant structural system that paired vertical load bearing and shear resistance in its interior and a web-like network of structural steel at its perimeter that lent the towers remarkable stiffness and resiliency (an essential characteristic for tall buildings subjected to hurricane force winds which can come from any direction). In addition to the robust redundancy of the structural design, all of the steel was either encased or covered with fire-protective material, be it concrete, gypsum, or asbestos-containing coatings available at the time.
I have personally worked intimately on the design and construction of these kinds of tall buildings, and when I saw these buildings collapse on that fateful day, I knew immediately it was an Op. And a very large and elaborate one.
On that day, the TV told me to ignore training, education, and experience, and just be afraid. It told us that somehow jetliners crashing into the buildings made them fall, like Luke Skywalker—a single X-Wing taking down the Death Star. That’s fine for a movie plot line, with accompanying special effects; but from a structural engineering perspective, it’s utter fantasy. It would take much more than a single plane, and the collapse wouldn’t have looked like that. What it looked like was controlled demolition. Full stop.
Every structural engineer and architect worth their salt should have jumped out of their seats and exclaimed, “WTF?” Instead, most sat and waited, silent. My team members and peers were curiously silent, hesitant to ask questions. Most said nothing and changed the topic when probed. They were uncertain. Afraid to speak out. Like an unmasked person in a crowd of masked faces, they feared being isolated. Perhaps there was something they didn’t know?
There were so many angles to pick this apart based on basic principles, but almost no one noticed and fewer said anything. No one seemed to see the rate of fall, the way the collapse self-corrected early on at the top third. No one seemed to question how it is that relatively minor damage to one side of a redundant structure played out as a very uniform and organized collapse.
Almost that very day, a blanket of silence spread out over the topic. It was as if a mass suggestion spell had been cast and nearly everyone had bought the ruse. It was as if the TV and headlines had been scripted beforehand, structured to obscure and direct inquiry away from the forensic evidence. Is it any wonder that the overwhelming majority of the steel remains were quickly freighted off to asia for smelting? Forensic examination wasn’t a goal, it was to be avoided.
Many point to the Pentagon and the Pennsylvania crash as big tells, but for me, it was the WTC collapses that spoke volumes. Basic physics, Newtonian Mechanics, high rise design principles, all had been violated; and we’re not talking about particle physics here, but basic principles that have been used to design buildings for centuries. How could this possibly be?
Immediately, within the space of weeks, the industry rags devoted special issues reporting theories of collapse. The theories were all ridiculous, but like the NEJM or the Lancet, does anyone question Architecture or Structure? Never mind that all of a sudden, the normal advertisements changed on a dime to market security bollards, fire-rated glass, and terrorist-resistant building security systems. The people who read these initial theories fell into three camps: skeptics, acceptors, and those who stayed silent. I would estimate around 75% were acceptors, 5% were skeptical, and 20% were afraid to give voice to their questions.
Much like the doctors during the pandemic outbreak, only a few professionals in connected fields spoke out, many were cowed into silence, and a great many went along in blind acceptance. Honest truth: a huge number of architects suck at structural engineering, even on an intuitive level, and outsource even fundamental design to engineers—they like to spend an inordinate amount of effort on prettifying the packaging. People who raised questions were drowned out by official pronouncements via NIST and the media.
What followed reads like a template for now. Computer models were created to cartoon animate a brand-new phenomena: Progressive Collapse. Mathematics professors were called upon to write papers demonstrating the mathematics, proving the theory. Most people couldn’t understand the language or read the papers being written. But those who could, knew the computer model was bullshit and the mathematics made no sense. I waded through the poorly written paper and confirmed it was another part of the Op.
The most oft-cited paper at the time basically tried to argue that through a combination of potential energy and momentum of collapsing floors one could numerically demonstrate that there was adequate energy in the system to demonstrate the feasibility of the collapse. What laypeople didn’t know, and what the reporting in this failed to grok, is that the equations in that paper were based on a fantasy. The analysis failed to account for the total amount of energy required to demonstrate not just the collapse, but the observable evidence: cutting of massive steel beams and columns, the pulverizing of enormous amounts of concrete into dust, along with corrugated steel, truss joists, even connecting bolts, so much reduced to dust and slag. The paper was an exercise in obfuscation—using math to bolster the psyop, invisible to all but the most intrepid.
There is nothing that will cause a steel frame structure to pancake collapse at close to free fall speed without removing vertical support below the falling mass first. This is fundamental. All of the structural connections and supports below the falling mass have to fail at each floor in order without affecting the speed of collapse. If the mechanism cited by the paper had been true, you would have observed slowing collapse, not a uniform one. Further, the pile of rubble at ground level would more likely have been a broken stack of floor plates, and not the overwhelmingly atomized debris sprayed out over many city blocks in all directions.
Eventually this deeply deceptive model was refined and tweaked, with various propositions suggesting failure of poorly-applied fire-proofing and faulty truss joist connections as the culprits behind the failure. Much of this made its way into the 9/11 Commission report even though it is all an elaborate lie. But telling a lie repeatedly to people that don’t understand the basis for the lie has been shown to be a very effective strategy. Eventually, fortified by ‘official’ decree, even the basic laws of physics must bow.
Very few considered that the towers had undergone retrofitting in the years leading up to the collapse, much of the work happening at night to avoid disruptions to public business operations. Funny that.
In the end, not very different from a virus (relatively small fire with poor fuel stock) somehow ripping through the population (the first ever/since examples of catastrophic failure in buildings of this type due to fire), mass dissemination of prepared mathematical manipulation, mixed with copious amounts of fear messaged through the media (Bin Laden, Bin Laden, Bin Laden), followed by governmental mandates (Patriot Act) and actions (War), benefitting the super-rich (war profiteers and the security state).
Additional discussion and commentary here:
https://sagehana.substack.com/p/outside-voices-911-wtc-collapse-structural
yes, but this was much bigger than PNAC.
Thanks for driving all that way to meet face to face with those amazing people. It’s a great report and the future suddenly seems a whole lot brighter!
I couldn't go to the CHD conference. Thank you for your description of the event. I wanted to meet Whitney Webb and Catherine Austin Fitts. It sounds like they were so busy, it wouldn't have happened even if I were present. I'm glad you were able to attend. For me...maybe next year?
Really great to have met you in person Mathew. Can't wait to hear about the "Chaos Agents" at some point. Pumped for your podcast with Richard tomorrow. It's going to be explosive...
911? Wow you’re really going down the rabbit hole. Nice to have you. It’s rather lonely being told you’re crazy all the time. Well, you know what they say about todays conspiracy theorists.
I've always known that the story wasn't told and gradually came to suspect that was the real start of a World War E. But I haven't had the time to write about it or complete deep research. I keep many notes around and check some Loose Change and Corbett Report research once in a while and find it to be solid.
I cannot wait for your take on it.
If 9/11 fraud is proved to the public, what else will the public disbelieve? Staggering thought. That would be quite a jenga-tower move. Pun intended.
Magical Jenga is actually not an off-base analogy…and the reality is indeed staggering.
Here is a post that I have shared in the past on Sage Hana’s and Marc Crispin Miller’s stacks.
-
The very first tell was visible exactly as the first tower began to fall. I watched it happen on TV, about 45 minutes after the planes hit the buildings. Strangely, the second tower struck collapsed before the first. Weird.
The collapse that unfolded went against every structural engineering principle known and employed to construct buildings of this size. I saw the buildings fall straight down at astonishing speed. Basic physics seemed suspended. I was shocked.
The WTC towers are a Type I structure, which require 3 hours of fire protection. This is because Type I structures don’t have a height limitation. Very tall structures require time to evacuate and deploy firefighters. So while a two story apartment building might only have a 1 hour rating, tall buildings are held to a stricter standard. This is primarily driven by insurance, as most building codes have been since their inception. This doesn’t mean 3 hours to collapse, but 3 hours until a certain level of deformation takes place. The building is still expected to stand, not collapse. In real life, no fire-protected Type I building has ever suffered catastrophic collapse before or since the WTC. This is very important.
We have to remember that these were, at one time, the tallest towers on the planet. They weren’t built to simply *meet* the building codes of the time, but to vastly *exceed* them. These towers were designed with a highly redundant structural system that paired vertical load bearing and shear resistance in its interior and a web-like network of structural steel at its perimeter that lent the towers remarkable stiffness and resiliency (an essential characteristic for tall buildings subjected to hurricane force winds which can come from any direction). In addition to the robust redundancy of the structural design, all of the steel was either encased or covered with fire-protective material, be it concrete, gypsum, or asbestos-containing coatings available at the time.
I have personally worked intimately on the design and construction of these kinds of tall buildings, and when I saw these buildings collapse on that fateful day, I knew immediately it was an Op. And a very large and elaborate one.
On that day, the TV told me to ignore training, education, and experience, and just be afraid. It told us that somehow jetliners crashing into the buildings made them fall, like Luke Skywalker—a single X-Wing taking down the Death Star. That’s fine for a movie plot line, with accompanying special effects; but from a structural engineering perspective, it’s utter fantasy. It would take much more than a single plane, and the collapse wouldn’t have looked like that. What it looked like was controlled demolition. Full stop.
Every structural engineer and architect worth their salt should have jumped out of their seats and exclaimed, “WTF?” Instead, most sat and waited, silent. My team members and peers were curiously silent, hesitant to ask questions. Most said nothing and changed the topic when probed. They were uncertain. Afraid to speak out. Like an unmasked person in a crowd of masked faces, they feared being isolated. Perhaps there was something they didn’t know?
There were so many angles to pick this apart based on basic principles, but almost no one noticed and fewer said anything. No one seemed to see the rate of fall, the way the collapse self-corrected early on at the top third. No one seemed to question how it is that relatively minor damage to one side of a redundant structure played out as a very uniform and organized collapse.
Almost that very day, a blanket of silence spread out over the topic. It was as if a mass suggestion spell had been cast and nearly everyone had bought the ruse. It was as if the TV and headlines had been scripted beforehand, structured to obscure and direct inquiry away from the forensic evidence. Is it any wonder that the overwhelming majority of the steel remains were quickly freighted off to asia for smelting? Forensic examination wasn’t a goal, it was to be avoided.
Many point to the Pentagon and the Pennsylvania crash as big tells, but for me, it was the WTC collapses that spoke volumes. Basic physics, Newtonian Mechanics, high rise design principles, all had been violated; and we’re not talking about particle physics here, but basic principles that have been used to design buildings for centuries. How could this possibly be?
Immediately, within the space of weeks, the industry rags devoted special issues reporting theories of collapse. The theories were all ridiculous, but like the NEJM or the Lancet, does anyone question Architecture or Structure? Never mind that all of a sudden, the normal advertisements changed on a dime to market security bollards, fire-rated glass, and terrorist-resistant building security systems. The people who read these initial theories fell into three camps: skeptics, acceptors, and those who stayed silent. I would estimate around 75% were acceptors, 5% were skeptical, and 20% were afraid to give voice to their questions.
Much like the doctors during the pandemic outbreak, only a few professionals in connected fields spoke out, many were cowed into silence, and a great many went along in blind acceptance. Honest truth: a huge number of architects suck at structural engineering, even on an intuitive level, and outsource even fundamental design to engineers—they like to spend an inordinate amount of effort on prettifying the packaging. People who raised questions were drowned out by official pronouncements via NIST and the media.
What followed reads like a template for now. Computer models were created to cartoon animate a brand-new phenomena: Progressive Collapse. Mathematics professors were called upon to write papers demonstrating the mathematics, proving the theory. Most people couldn’t understand the language or read the papers being written. But those who could, knew the computer model was bullshit and the mathematics made no sense. I waded through the poorly written paper and confirmed it was another part of the Op.
The most oft-cited paper at the time basically tried to argue that through a combination of potential energy and momentum of collapsing floors one could numerically demonstrate that there was adequate energy in the system to demonstrate the feasibility of the collapse. What laypeople didn’t know, and what the reporting in this failed to grok, is that the equations in that paper were based on a fantasy. The analysis failed to account for the total amount of energy required to demonstrate not just the collapse, but the observable evidence: cutting of massive steel beams and columns, the pulverizing of enormous amounts of concrete into dust, along with corrugated steel, truss joists, even connecting bolts, so much reduced to dust and slag. The paper was an exercise in obfuscation—using math to bolster the psyop, invisible to all but the most intrepid.
There is nothing that will cause a steel frame structure to pancake collapse at close to free fall speed without removing vertical support below the falling mass first. This is fundamental. All of the structural connections and supports below the falling mass have to fail at each floor in order without affecting the speed of collapse. If the mechanism cited by the paper had been true, you would have observed slowing collapse, not a uniform one. Further, the pile of rubble at ground level would more likely have been a broken stack of floor plates, and not the overwhelmingly atomized debris sprayed out over many city blocks in all directions.
Eventually this deeply deceptive model was refined and tweaked, with various propositions suggesting failure of poorly-applied fire-proofing and faulty truss joist connections as the culprits behind the failure. Much of this made its way into the 9/11 Commission report even though it is all an elaborate lie. But telling a lie repeatedly to people that don’t understand the basis for the lie has been shown to be a very effective strategy. Eventually, fortified by ‘official’ decree, even the basic laws of physics must bow.
Very few considered that the towers had undergone retrofitting in the years leading up to the collapse, much of the work happening at night to avoid disruptions to public business operations. Funny that.
In the end, not very different from a virus (relatively small fire with poor fuel stock) somehow ripping through the population (the first ever/since examples of catastrophic failure in buildings of this type due to fire), mass dissemination of prepared mathematical manipulation, mixed with copious amounts of fear messaged through the media (Bin Laden, Bin Laden, Bin Laden), followed by governmental mandates (Patriot Act) and actions (War), benefitting the super-rich (war profiteers and the security state).
Americans who wind up knowing enough Muslims to have a basic grip on Islamic politics surely wind up recognizing the impossible "logic", and that was probably one of the reasons why Muslim fear porn was blasted so hard (including encouraging poor or mafia-connected refugees into Europe in numbers too large to easily absorb while brainwashing on the other end as well).
Making the rivals fight bitterly is part of the "divide and conquer" agenda, and has been since before any of our grandparents were born.
Perhaps the PATRIOT Act was pre-planned, and just needed a catalyst to allow its acceptance by the American people to be passed in Congress.
After all, KYC and a lot of other government encroachment on our liberty was born with that.
Excellent report Mathew. Good for you to get some R&R and balance on the trip. I agree TN is a very pretty state, been there once. I'm such a west coaster I didn't even know the Cumberland River existed? lol Btw, I launched my VAERS website while you were away! https://www.vaersaware.com/
Matt, that is SO COOL you and your wife did all that!
I am happy dance happy to hear you are connecting with AE 9/11 Truth, too!
I didn't know that Bass Pro Shop was in a pyramid - kinda weirds me a little bit, but it's not too big, so I'll get over it -lol. There's a funny, being in Memphis, hence the pyramid.
I always liked fly fishing, miss being able to do it.
Looking forward to hearing about everyone you connected and synergied with!
That sounds like a great experience to meet these people you've been collaborating with. How lovely.
😄 Love the hockey insults!
Also acceptable would be, "You call those hockey insults, rookie?"
😄
Back in 2001 on Sept. 11 as a firefighter serving at the rank of Deputy Chief as an incident commander and also as an instructor of building construction for firefighters I was alerted to the breaking news at the World Trade Centers. I knew from my training and experience the buildings would most likely collapse. It’s intriguing to hear discussions from architects and structural engineers about the events of that day.
What were you told about the buildings that would suggest collapse from these circumstances?
What bothers me most is the idea that they would collapse through the path of greatest resistance at almost freefall speed. That requires an extremely even loss of support, which seems extraordinarily unlikely for steel structures as it would require heating to be evenly applied to all supports, and without chaotic dissipation to perturb the process. Not once, but three time over. I'm not a professional engineer, but have done modeling projects for a couple of them. I'd rather take my chances at the horse track than try to reproduce that event.
Jet fuel turned concrete and steel and people into dust, but paper was untouched and floated down? Hmmmm. Very strange. What would do that?
Most of the dust in all probability was not from concrete, but rather from the gypsum impregnated drywall and ceiling materials used throughout most, if not all, floors of the building. The drywall applied over lightweight steel studs forms the interior spaces inside the building. If you have ever witnessed the installation or demolition of drywall materials, then you would not be surprised to see extremely huge amounts of dust looking almost exactly like concrete dust.
As to paper being untouched when it seems almost all other things were destroyed, that too should not be surprising. The lightweight paper could have been simply blown around and away by the rapid changes in air pressure. Heavier materials remaining in place would be crushed/pulverized by the downward force of the collapsing structure and other contents.
What kind of fire reduces steel and concrete...or gypsum...to dust but leaves paper unmolested?
The major number of floors of each of the buildings were not involved with fire. Much, if not most of the damage to the steel, gypsum and other building components and furnishings was result of the collapse of the buildings, not the fire.
The buildings were built with steel. The advantages of steel are light weight and pound for pound strength. The disadvantage of steel is its rapid loss of strength in an uncontrolled fire situation. Steel in a structure like a high rise building is protected from fire primarily by automatic fire suppression water sprinkler systems. The water is supplied to an array of heat activated sprinkler heads by a system of steel piping. An impact by a large plane would have immediately destroyed the integrity of the water supply piping as well as some of the structural steel frame. Broken pipes even if they are just upon upper floors would tax the integrity of the water supply for the entire building. Most automatic fire suppression water sprinkler systems can only be practically designed to control a fire on one floor with a maximum, limited number of heads operating. At internal temperatures of 800 degrees Fahrenheit steel begins to expand and lose strength. The heat generated by the uncontrolled raging fire would have quickly raised the internal temperature of the steel to temperatures well above 800 degrees. The expanding steel would actually act to push the framework apart and the steel to deform. As more heat is applied the steel becomes like wet spaghetti. At some point collapse becomes inevitable. The structural steel framework below the initial collapse would experience a sudden impact load well beyond its design strength forcing a downward pancake style collapse of the entire building. I’m am not an engineer either, just a firefighter (now retired) who studied building construction. Buildings often take years to construct. In a fire situation buildings some time only take hours or minutes to destruct. It was my job to know what to expect to protect my fellow firefighters, the people in the community I served, and myself.
"The disadvantage of steel is its rapid loss of strength in an uncontrolled fire situation..."
This looks like a lot of nonsense and babble, and I'd be very interested to find out what sources you've learned from that led you to these conclusions.
Every material gains and loses properties under changes in conditions. Anyone who talks about steel turning into "wet spaghetti" as if the process happens uniformly seems ill-qualified to comment about such a once-in-history event. The heating of such a metal results in a highly chaotic process. We're not yet talking about star plasma, of course, but the analogy should bring home the point that dynamical systems (melting steel certainly qualifies) do not model simply. In fact, such modeling for skyscrapers has never been confidently established because problems at this level may be worked out on paper (or computer models), but only sometimes match experience. Top engineering firms have asked me to work on far less complex tasks because they sometimes don't have anyone on hand to do that for them. But your training as a firefighter was in excess of the knowledge of engineering professors I've worked with who build these structures? This sounds not simply unlikely, but either psychotic or propagandizing.
"The expanding steel would actually act to push the framework apart and the steel to deform."
Yes, and if this is the reason for collapse, that would need to take place in a way that is [much] more uniform than the process of balancing a pin on its head---by orders of magnitude of tolerance. Ever try balancing a billion-pound pin?
If this were easy, we wouldn't see Chinese engineers have so much trouble learning how to collapse buildings in on themselves. There are only a handful of engineering firms in the world that have perfected the process. We would also not be waiting after 20 [more] years of any other examples of skyscrapers collapsing in on themselves due to fire---or even missile strikes more similar in dynamics. It just doesn't happen, and doesn't make sense.
I'd love to see in print any materials any firefighter has ever received suggesting what you believe, published before 9/11/2001. Please don't bother writing more paragraphs of nonsense without citation. It's offensive.
To me it seems you have it right Mathew. I wonder if Jack Bergeron has been following the analyses of David Chandler. A few years ago - I think it was in 2016, but I’m not sure - I saw a video for the first time of WTC 7 coming down, and I got a very depressing, sinking feeling because I felt an unwelcome tug on a thread of the fabric of my understanding of the world and the fabric began to unravel. Since then I’ve paid attention to many truthers, one of whom is Chandler. This video is old, but good: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vek2naWv7is, though there may be even better videos put out since this one that I have not seen. If any of your readers watch this, but begin to get impatient with the physics you might want to skip to minute 54 where Chandler lays out a sketch of the implications.
If engineers and architects don’t know about the main disadvantage of using steel in high rise building construction there’s something definitely lacking in their education. Steel loses its strength at very low internal heat temperatures in comparison to the heat generated by an uncontrolled fire inside a building such as a high rise. One of the primary, overriding goals in the design of a steel frame high-rise building is to prevent the heat from a fire from ever reaching the steel. Maybe the architects and engineers really do not know the main disadvantage of steel and just add fire and heat resistant elements to the design simply because “that’s the way it’s done.” But I doubt that. The International Building Code as well as the National Fire Protection Association Standards have been developed and evolved over the years in response to devastating and costly events such as uncontrolled fires, hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, snow storms, etc. The annals of fire disasters and resultant changes in building codes are extensive. It is my understanding the World Trade Center Towers were designed to withstand a strike from a light plane. A strike from a fully fueled air line passenger plane is an exceptional, rare, unexpected event. To design and build any building to withstand an exceptional, rare event would be cost prohibitive.
Firefighters are the people other people call upon when all those design elements fail. The firefighters and other first responders entering the buildings on September 11 did so (as they often do) in risk to their own lives.
"Steel loses its strength at very low internal heat temperatures in comparison to the heat generated by an uncontrolled fire inside a building such as a high rise."
Such an unquantified statement has no business in the discussion.
This is the point at which you either find one other example of a high rise tower losing such strength in its steel that it pancakes, or look dishonest or psychotic.
https://www.aisc.org/steel-solutions-center/engineering-faqs/11.2.-steel-exposed-to-fire/
Looks like Scientific American's spin job but with more bad analogies and excuses than 9-11 Report. You are also the first FDNY to cross my path saying free-fall collapse was an expected outcome, much less for WTC7... struck by nothing and BBC reporter announced the collapse while it was still standing behind her live on air ffs.
The world has yet to see it happen anywhere else since that day either..
How many other high rise buildings have you seen that have been struck by fully fueled passenger air planes?
The WTC7 suffered from an out of control fire on a lower floor. Elements designed and installed to protect the steel from the heat of a fire are destroyed over time (hours in an out of control fire situation). Any water distribution system in that neighborhood would most likely have been severely comprised that day. Disasters happen.
Try looking at research not pundits your claims are right out of presstitute reporting & plausible only if you ignore physics and science.. try facts...
Watch the free fall & spare me the ridiculous fire theory
https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/free-fall-acceleration
Contrary to the conclusions of NIST, the UAF research team found that the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11 was caused not by fires but by the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.
Following the release of this report, AE911Truth and 10 family members of 9/11 victims submitted a formal request for correction to NIST’s report on WTC 7 based partially on the UAF findings. They are now suing NIST over the agency's evasive response to the request.
Downloads: Final Report | Abstract https://www.ae911truth.org/wtc7?idU=2
For 37 years as a full time firefighter I studied and dealt with the reality (facts) of what fire can do. Many people are totally unaware of what happens to steel in an uncontrolled fire situation where temperatures inside of a building can rapidly exceed 1000 degrees Celsius. Without any automatic or manual efforts to control the fire the heat produced will penetrate any fire/heat resistant building elements designed, installed and maintained (inspection, maintenance and repair of fire protection features are often neglected) to protect the buildup of heat in structural steel. Columns, unlike beams, almost always fail catastrophically without warning. One column failure will immediately cause a transfer of the loads it had been supporting to other surrounding columns which in turn may also instantly fail.
They burned for hours. The fire control systems failed. The buildings didn't collapse.
https://6abc.com/one-meridian-plaza-fire-deadly-philadelphia-firefighters-killed-high-rise/10363814/
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40301289
The automatic fire control systems may have failed in the Meridian Plaza fire, but it is possible the non-automatic features such as drywall and protective coatings on the steel may have bought enough time for the combustible materials inside the building to burn to a sufficient extent that the heat and temperature gradients leveled off. In other words there may not have been a sufficient amount of fuel to burn to increase the heat to the level where the strength of the steel would be gravely compromised. There are also other factors that must always be considered as well:
- Outside air temperatures and wind speed throughout the duration of the fire.
- Proximity to other buildings. If you have ever walked near or between tall or lengthy buildings on a windy day, then you may have experienced the micro weather conditions.
- Wind, the movement of air, can be of aid or hindrance in removing the heat generated by a fire inside a building.
- The inspection, maintenance and repair of a building’s fire protection systems can be crucial in the containment and control of an interior fire. I often see doors intended to control the spread of fire, heat and smoke blocked open or in disrepair. Have the automatic water fire suppression system and fire standpipes been recently tested?
- Has the type of occupancy changed from the original design? Buildings are specifically designed and built to meet the requirements of the expected occupancy.
- The internal configuration of the building. Have rooms been reconfigured and were necessary alterations made to the water fire suppression sprinkler distribution?
- The quality and type of materials used in the construction. Did the materials meet the respective standards for quality, strength, fire resistance, flame spread characteristics, etc., etc.?
- The quality of the construction itself. Were the architects and engineers fully involved in the construction process to assure and certify their plans were built as they specified?
There are just too many factors to compare one fire situation to another and expect to see similar results. In my experience as a fire incident commander I found it was best to err on the side of expectation of the worst case scenario, hence I was not surprised to witness (via television video) the collapse of the two towers. It is interesting to note the fire command at the Meridian Plaza fire incident ordered the full evacuation of the building at some point during the course of the fire. Other fire commanders have often made the same decision to evacuate and abandon all interior operations. In consideration of the number of people occupying the World Trade Center buildings in need of evacuation assistance and whatever protection the firefighters could provide, the fire incident command really had no other option other than to hope for the best and assume the risks. The September 11, 2001 incident in many ways has no similar comparison.
Do they send you checks or do you use direct deposit?
Meridian burned for a long time. There wasn't even a partial collapse.
Grenfell Tower was engulfed in flames and burned for a long, long time. Did not collapse.
Anyone with a brain who watched those towers fall on 9/11 understood something wasn't right. It didn't make sense then. It doesn't make sense now.
Who are “they?”
Having a brain has never guaranteed the ability to analyze information and make wise judgments. Many people of great learning and vast knowledge are fools. I make no judgment of participants in this discussion. I suggest you do likewise.
This is not how steel framed buildings perform. This runs counter to structural steel design and basic material characteristics.
https://www.aisc.org/steel-solutions-center/engineering-faqs/11.2.-steel-exposed-to-fire/
You can’t post an AISC link and think that this is any kind of serious rebuttal.
The AISC material I referenced provides information on the effects of fire and heat on exposed steel. It supports my view the buildings would collapse as a result of the impact of the passenger plane, the resultant destruction to the building’s structure and fire protection features, and the accompanying uncontrolled intense fire. IMHO there are many other reasons and circumstances to question whether or not our own government had malicious intent and involvement in the events that transpired that day.
Sounds like a great trip. I hope to meet you in person one of these days.
I would enjoy that. You've done tremendous work in short time that has been eye opening.