Conspiracionismo supranacional: El 11S

[Pit]

He encontrado un nuevo video,no es Loose Change,aunque eso si,solo he podido ver 5 minutos del mismo porque no me carga mucho mas.En fin,aquí algunas discrepancias:

Dazed by the news,the American public soon believed the fires in the towers had burned so hot they caused the steel frames of the buldings to give way.A myth developed,fed by official sources through the media to a bewildered audience.

Elements of the myth: The impact of the airplanes,gallons of burning jet fuel,steel melting,the buildings failing and suddenly imploding.In a mere 10 seconds,110 stories hurtled earthward, pulverizing into dust.

Right from the start,on the street itself,the official story was born.

.

Observamos primero el comienzo del documental.Ya comienzan hablando de que el 11S es un mito alimentado por fuentes "oficialistas",antes de pasar presuntamente a demostrarlo.Es decir,primero dan como premisa que existe una gran conspiracion,para luego pasar a intentar demostrar dicha conspiracion.Bien.

The myth bled into the FEMA report and was echoed by the experts

Textual: the structural damage sustained by each tower from the impact,combined with the ensuing fires resulted in total collapse of each building.As the towers collapsed, massive debris clouds consisting of....

La revista arquitectónica Structures coincide con ese punto,en un PDF donde hacen una reconstruccion digital del atentado.

http://www.structuremag.org/archives/2007/March 2007/D-Spotlight-ComputerModeling-Mar07.pdf

Tambien el sumario del 11S del que citaban esta parte.


9/11 Executive Summary

"The chiefs concluded that this would be a rescue operation,not a firefight=ing operation. One of the chiefs present explained:
We realized that,because of the impact of the plane,that there was some structural damage to the building, and most likely that the fire suppres-HEROISM AND HORROR 291
sion systems within the building were probably damaged and possibly inoperable....We knewthat at the height of the day there were as many as 50,000 people in this building.We had a large volume of fire on the upper floors. Each floor was approximately an acre in size. Several floors of fire would have been beyond the fire-extinguishing capability of the forces that we had on hand. So we determined, very early on, that this was going to be strictly a rescue mission.We were going to vacate the building, get everybody out, and then we were going to get out.58 "

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec9.pdf

"It was the combination of the impact load doing great damage to the building followed by the fire,that caused collapse.

-W. Gene Corley,Ph D. American Society of Civil Engineers

Ya.

John Skilling and Les Robertson were the structural engineers who designed the streamlined steelframes of the twin towers in the 1960's


Because a wayward bomber flew into the Empire State Building in 1945,the towers were built with skyscrapper crashes in mind.The airplane we were envisioning was the largest airplane of its time(B-29???),flying slowly and low,lost in the fog,we designed the buildings to take the impact of the Boeing 707,hitting the building at any location.

[""""Oficial Story""""] But the aircraft that hit the towers was a boeing 767,heavier than a 707,fueled for a transcontinental flight and travelling fast" - 707 and 767 are comparable.The maximum take off weight of a fully loaded 707 is almost 334000 pounds.As airplanes only carry the fuel load they need,the smaller-model 767s that struck the towers were not,in actuality,maximally fueled.

Jnani.org responde a éste punto:

But the CD theorists consistently overlook two factors here. Firstly that the designers had in mind an aircraft coming in to land at New York airport, at speeds of around 180 mph (according to the FEMA report, page 1:17). But the aircraft hit the towers at an average of nearly three times that speed. Given that the impact damage hinges on the kinetic energy of the projectile, which rises with the square of speed, the planes hit the Twin Towers with nearly nine times the impact anticipated. (Note that the NIST report - on page 6 - contradicts this argument by stating that the Towers were designed for a 600 mph impact. I would be pleased to hear from anyone who can settle this discrepancy one way or the other.) Secondly, design is an art not a science: the Titanic was designed not to sink; the space shuttle was designed not to explode on takeoff, and designed not to break up on re-entry. Etc

Es decir,que los diseñadores si tuvieron en cuenta el impacto de un avion(carece de relevancia que fuese un 707 para el que estuvieran diseñados),pero lo hicieron por si se repetia en citado supuesto de 1945;Un avion en aproximacion al aeropuerto,a baja velocidad,a unas 180 millas por hora de acuerdo con el informe oficial.Pero los 767 que impactaron en las torres llevaban una velocidad mucho mayor: El que impactó contra la torre norte llevaba una velocidad de 470 mph,el que impacto contra la torre sur,590 millas por hora,es decir,más de 3 veces esa velocidad.La web nos dice posteriormente que la energía cinética del proyectil es el cuadrado de la velocidad,con lo que en total el impacto soportado fue casi 7 veces mayor en el caso de la torre norte y más de 10 veces mayor en el caso de la torre sur.

180^2= 32400
470^2= 220900
590^2= 348100

Por otra parte¿Quien dijo que fuesen cargados al máximo?

As for the heat of the fires,listen to the radio communications of these NYC Firemen:

(Grabacion)
"Ladder 15,we've got two isolated pockets of fire.We should be able to knock it down with two lines.Radio that,78 th floor".

Isolated pockets of fire.Two water lines to knock them down.FEMA executive summary relays that much of the fuel in the planes(jet graded kerosene) was consumed by the initial fireballs

Bien,algo que he podido observar durante mi estancia aqui,y ya sin temor a equivocarme,es la tendencia de todos los conspiracionismos de sacar de contexto las citas,en este caso las de los bomberos(en otros,las de muchos ingenieros).En el caso del 11S,se sugiere que el fuego nunca fue de suficiente envergadura para que el acero se fundiese.Olvidemonos momentaneamente de que NIST nunca dijo que necesariamente el acero debiera fundirse,pero el acero deberia estar puesto a una gran temperatura para expandirse y debilitarse..En este caso tratan de decirnos que en el piso 78 sólo habia dos focos independientes de fuego.


La cita completa es:

9:25 a.m.

Ladder 15: "Go ahead, Irons."

Ladder 15 Irons: "Just got a report from the director of Morgan Stanley. Seventy-eight seems to have taken the brunt of this stuff, there's a lot of bodies, they say the stairway is clear all the way up, though."

9:52 a.m.

Battalion Seven Chief: "Battalion Seven to Battalion Seven Alpha."

"Freddie, come on over. Freddie, come on over by us."

Battalion Seven Chief: "Battalion Seven ... Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones."
Ladder 15: "What stair are you in, Orio?"

Battalion Seven Aide: "Seven Alpha to lobby command post."

Ladder Fifteen: "Fifteen to Battalion Seven."

Battalion Seven Chief: "... Ladder 15."

Ladder 15: "Chief, what stair you in?"

Battalion Seven Chief: "South stairway Adam, South Tower."

Orio palmer,que es ésa voz que oimos, estaba en la escalera sur(Adam),en la torre sur,que no quedo dañada por la gran bateria de equipos de ascensores que lo protegia.No es descabellado pensar en dos pequeños focos de fuego en un piso donde sólo entró una pequeña parte de un ala.Lo que habia encima de esos pisos es la pregunta a la que no responde el bombero,y por extension,no resulta aplicable a que el fuego no fuese suficiente para recalentar las estructuras de acero.El piso 78 era un "Sky Lobby",algo de lo que puedes encontrar definicion en Wikipedia(donde además podemos ver un esquema que precisamente es del WTC para que se vea que el piso 78 lo era),un piso intermedio donde la gente cambia de los ascensores express,que llegan hasta el coronamiento de las torres y solo paran en el Sky Lobby,a los ascensores ordinarios que pueden parar en todas las plantas.De ahi,por cierto,lo que comentaba en un principio al respecto de la escalera protegida por la maquinaria masiva de ascensores.Bien,ésa planta no tenia mucho material de oficina inflamable para extender el fuego.Si habia dos fuegos en la planta 78 donde sólo entro una parte minima de un ala(un Wingtip),como debia ser la planta 81 donde chocó el fuselaje y el morro del avion con todo el queroseno que no se consumiese con el propio impacto?¿Si habia dos pequeños fuegos antes del colapso de las torres,significa que no hubo mayores incendios en momentos anteriores?Esa cita fue escogida omitiendo lo demas para dar al lector,u oyente general,la impresion de que solo habia pequeños incendios,implica sesgar informacion y una tendenciosidad muy clara.

Y hasta aqui es donde llego porque el documental no me sigue cargando.De todas formas se ven un par de tergiversaciones importantes en solo 5 minutos de video.Lo que debe ser la hora y media entera!

PD: Se me olvido

http://stage6.divx.com/911-InsideJob/vid...Substitles