Refuting 9/11 Myths.

I have gone into great depth in the past detailing a number of problems with many 9/11 conspiracies. Generally, it has been a number of years since I have done this in depth, but the occasion has arisen that I should again make my thoughts public.

First, while I do believe there are 9/11 conspiracies, I tend to classify most of these as ones of omission rather than commission. We can argue until the cows come home at what levels of government there was an awareness of the intentions of the 9/11 hijackers and what response the government put forth was certainly inadequate, to the point of gross negligence.

Second, do I believe hijacked airplanes are capable of causing mortal wounds to large buildings? Yes, absolutely and that is what I intend to address.

Point 1: "Jet fuel won't melt steel" - There are a number of issues with this claim, first jet fuel will melt steel given the right conditions, however the more fundamental point is the steel needs only be heated to the point at which it's yield strength is reduced to the point that it can no longer support the load put on it. The purported 2000F temperatures created by the burning jet fuel, plane components, and materials that were in the office are more than sufficient to create these kinds of temperatures provided there is enough air to ensure good combustion. The kind of air supplied even by light winds acting over time. If you put your attention here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_working you will notice that steel has a hot working temperature of about 2000F, at these temperatures steel is neither a solid nor a liquid, it's a putty the consistency of taffy and can very easily be worked even by strong hands. Ask any blacksmith.

Point 2: "Concrete will withstand those temperatures" - No, it won't. Concrete is a complex hydrate mineral, at high temperatures the hydrate reverts to being water, usually in the form of steam, which when confined will build pressure until it overcomes the strength of the material surrounding it, blowing chunks off. This process is called spalling and the rapidity with which it happens is directly related to the heat load. Here is a video of the process: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGQvXfxprhQ

Point 3: "WTC7 was blown up" - While I don't have direct evidence to the contrary, the case is easily made that the two buildings directly adjacent to WTC7 (that were also connected) were felled by the attack. These two buildings fell straight down with a combined mass of 1.5 million tons. Without even pulling out my calculator the forces imparted to the foundations of WTC7 were easily in the kiloton range, this was exacerbated by the construction of the WTC complex, which had a large shared parking garage under the buildings. The force imparted by the WTC towers falling that it compromised the foundations and the flood control system so badly that during cleanup the east river was flooding into the lower levels of the debris pile.

Point 4: "Controlled Demolition" - Again, this is a claim made by some but is easily refuted, controlled demolition takes a significant amount of time and expertise it also requires weakening a structure significantly beforehand. But more significantly it is a process that creates a lot of tell-tale debris, namely bright yellow shock tube laying all over the damn place. So much of it in fact it would be hard for anyone to deny it was there. If you don't know what shock tube is, it's thin plastic tubing with a fine layer of PETN on the inside, it is used to carry detonation waves from charge to charge in an explosive chain. It is similar to detonation cord (detcord) except it contains much less explosive and is much safer to handle. When rigging explosives, there are also a wide variety of specialist clips, connectors, wires and other debris that are left behind. I have yet to see any evidence of any of these debris.

Point 5: "White slag coming from crash areas" - As it happens, airplanes are made out of aluminum, titanium and magnesium, plus structural steel, plastics and a wide variety of other materials, most of them are combustible. Titanium, magnesium and aluminum are all metals that do not exist free in nature because they are quite reactive. Aluminum specifically due to it's method of refinement (Hall-Heroult process) can be thought of more as solid electricity. Under normal conditions these materials create an oxide layer on the out-side that prevents further oxidation of materials inside. This layer is essentially a ceramic that allows these materials to tolerate high heat and wear conditions, but when exposed to temperatures above molten (aluminum melts at about 1400F, but is the consistency of peanut butter at 900F) will readily burn. While the properties are different for titanium and magnesium the end result is the same. Further, metal fires are quite difficult to extinguish once they get started and will aggressively move towards ground state even to the point of stripping oxygen from water to continue the process. Here is what happens when you pour water on a titanium fire: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDhnwLheoU4

I have seen a wide variety of other claims from nanothermite, thermite, to everything in between. Personally I have used thermite and it doesn't cut steel, it does pour molten iron on whatever is underneath it. There are other chemicals, notably TH3 (thermate) which do have some limited cutting potential, however these materials are designed specifically to set fire to things that are already flammable. They will do a very good job of igniting other metal fires, but iron does not undergo this process.

The point here, is that there is really no need to create a conspiracy that would take down the twin towers, the terrorists were careful in the planning stage to give themselves a "sure thing" and knew that the buildings were designed to survive the impact from a 737, which is why they hijacked larger planes and used those. I would stop short of calling the WTC towers houses of cards, but when large planes, full of fuel, made of combustible metals traveling at hundreds of miles per hour hit them it was really only a matter of time before the structural compromise of being hit, and the heat of the fires was enough to cause collapse. It is more a testament to the engineers who designed and built the WTC towers that they stood for as long as they did considering the loading conditions.

The failures of intelligence, attention to detail, and follow up are really the foundation of the conspiracies that lead up to 9/11, not the processes that resulted in the towers falling down.