The NIST World Trade Center Report:The NIST World Trade Center Report: A New Standard for DeceptionA New Standard for Deception

Kevin RyanKevin Ryan911 Truth Conference: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future

Chicago, IL June 4, 2006

IntroductionIntroduction

I’m a former manager at Underwriters I’m a former manager at Underwriters Laboratories (UL), fired for publicly questioning Laboratories (UL), fired for publicly questioning the October 2004 draft NIST WTC report the October 2004 draft NIST WTC report

NIST* is a government agency, reporting to Bush NIST* is a government agency, reporting to Bush cabinet member Gutierrez (Commerce). The cabinet member Gutierrez (Commerce). The director of NIST is also a Presidential appointeedirector of NIST is also a Presidential appointee

NIST’s WTC report is a product of the Bush NIST’s WTC report is a product of the Bush Administration (i.e. Bush Science)Administration (i.e. Bush Science)

*National Institute of Standards and Technology

““Bush Science”Bush Science” The Bush Administration has been “deliberately and The Bush Administration has been “deliberately and

systematically distorting scientific fact in the service systematically distorting scientific fact in the service of policy goals”of policy goals”

Open letter from 60 prominent scientists, including 20 Nobel laureatesOpen letter from 60 prominent scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates

““We found a serious pattern of undermining science We found a serious pattern of undermining science by the Bush Administration”by the Bush Administration”

Union of Concerned ScientistsUnion of Concerned Scientists

““[We] found numerous instances where the [We] found numerous instances where the Administration has manipulated the scientific process Administration has manipulated the scientific process and distorted or suppressed scientific findings”and distorted or suppressed scientific findings”House Committee on Government ReformHouse Committee on Government Reform

Important WTC collapse considerationsImportant WTC collapse considerations

• No tall buildings have ever collapsed from fire, No tall buildings have ever collapsed from fire, but on 9/11, we’re told there were threebut on 9/11, we’re told there were three

• No building exhibiting all the characteristics of No building exhibiting all the characteristics of demolition has ever NOT been a demolitiondemolition has ever NOT been a demolition

• 99.7% of steel evidence destroyed despite 99.7% of steel evidence destroyed despite outraged cries from public and fire expertsoutraged cries from public and fire experts

• More than a year passed before full More than a year passed before full investigation beganinvestigation began

Demo remembersDemo remembers The collapse of the WTC towers looked like a The collapse of the WTC towers looked like a

classic controlled demolition, said Mike Taylor of classic controlled demolition, said Mike Taylor of the National Association of Demolition Contractors, the National Association of Demolition Contractors, “It cascaded down like an implosion”“It cascaded down like an implosion”

““It appeared to me that charges had been placed in It appeared to me that charges had been placed in the building” -- Ronald Hamburger, structural the building” -- Ronald Hamburger, structural engineer and contributor to FEMA and NIST reportsengineer and contributor to FEMA and NIST reports

Official investigations never considered demolitionOfficial investigations never considered demolition

Early support for the official storyEarly support for the official story

““Experts” said jet fuel fires melted the Experts” said jet fuel fires melted the steelsteel• BBC (Chris Wise, etc.)BBC (Chris Wise, etc.)• Scientific American (Eduardo Kausel)Scientific American (Eduardo Kausel)• NOVA video (Matthys Levy)NOVA video (Matthys Levy)• Henry Koffman from USCHenry Koffman from USC• Tom Mackin from Univ. of IllinoisTom Mackin from Univ. of Illinois• The New ScientistThe New Scientist

Temperatures exaggeratedTemperatures exaggerated• National Geographic Today - 2,900 FNational Geographic Today - 2,900 F• A&E /History Channel video – 2500 FA&E /History Channel video – 2500 F

Jet fuel fires melted steel?Jet fuel fires melted steel?

• Steel melts at ~2800 FSteel melts at ~2800 F

• Jet fuel fires burn at maximum of ~1500 F Jet fuel fires burn at maximum of ~1500 F unless in special combustion chamberunless in special combustion chamber

• Gas temps are not steel tempsGas temps are not steel temps

• Thermodynamic calculations suggest steel Thermodynamic calculations suggest steel temperatures in impact zones could have temperatures in impact zones could have reached maximum of 600 Freached maximum of 600 F

Where are the real experts?Where are the real experts?

Our nation’s air defenses don’t stand downOur nation’s air defenses don’t stand down

Terrorists don’t come back to life after Terrorists don’t come back to life after stealing our freedomsstealing our freedoms

Tall buildings do not collapse from fireTall buildings do not collapse from fire

Because these are unique events, there Because these are unique events, there are no experts on these subjectsare no experts on these subjects

But there is always an official explanation But there is always an official explanation for terrorist eventsfor terrorist events

Disturbing questions about the OKC Murrah Disturbing questions about the OKC Murrah Building bombingBuilding bombing• Survivors reported multiple explosionsSurvivors reported multiple explosions• Many media reports and witness accounts of un-Many media reports and witness accounts of un-

detonated bombs left in buildingdetonated bombs left in building• FBI confiscated videos and would not release themFBI confiscated videos and would not release them• Experts said demolition charges requiredExperts said demolition charges required

Official story stuck with one guy, one truck bombOfficial story stuck with one guy, one truck bomb• Small group of engineers provided reportSmall group of engineers provided report

Official “investigations” into the collapse of Official “investigations” into the collapse of the WTC buildingsthe WTC buildings

ASCEASCE

FEMA BPATFEMA BPAT• Turned ASCE investigation into an “assessment”Turned ASCE investigation into an “assessment”• Report released May 2002Report released May 2002

Silverstein/WeidlingerSilverstein/Weidlinger• report released October 2002report released October 2002

NIST NIST • report released September 2005report released September 2005

ASCE Team = Murrah Building TeamASCE Team = Murrah Building Team

Initial ASCE team Initial ASCE team leaders (9/14/01)leaders (9/14/01)

• Gene CorleyGene Corley• Charles ThorntonCharles Thornton• Paul MlakarPaul Mlakar• Mete SozenMete Sozen• Other volunteersOther volunteers

OKC Murrah building OKC Murrah building report authorsreport authors

• Gene CorleyGene Corley• Charles ThorntonCharles Thornton• Paul MlakarPaul Mlakar• Mete SozenMete Sozen

ASCE says there are 1.5 million US engineers.

Why so few when it comes to terrorism?

Pre-determined conclusionsPre-determined conclusions

• Gene Corley -- knew once the jets hit the building that Gene Corley -- knew once the jets hit the building that the WTC would collapse as it did, “I just didn’t know the WTC would collapse as it did, “I just didn’t know when it was going to happen”, said Corleywhen it was going to happen”, said Corley(reported by St. Petersburg Times)(reported by St. Petersburg Times)

• Charles Thornton -- "Karl, we all know what caused the Charles Thornton -- "Karl, we all know what caused the collapse." collapse." (From Karl Koch’s book Men of Steel)(From Karl Koch’s book Men of Steel)

• Shankar Nair -- "Already there is near-consensus as to Shankar Nair -- "Already there is near-consensus as to the sequence of events that led to the collapse of the the sequence of events that led to the collapse of the World Trade Center.”World Trade Center.”(Chicago Tribune September 19, 2001)(Chicago Tribune September 19, 2001)

The first official leadersThe first official leaders Gene Corley in charge of ASCE investigationGene Corley in charge of ASCE investigation

NYC put Thornton-Tomasetti in charge of siteNYC put Thornton-Tomasetti in charge of site

Richard Tomasetti (Thornton’s partner) “cleared” Richard Tomasetti (Thornton’s partner) “cleared” the decision to recycle the steel, later saying had the decision to recycle the steel, later saying had he “known the direction that investigations into he “known the direction that investigations into the disaster would take, he would have adopted a the disaster would take, he would have adopted a different stance.”different stance.”

Anyone smell a rat?

Restrictions on ASCE investigationRestrictions on ASCE investigation

No access to blueprintsNo access to blueprints

Not allowed to ask for help from publicNot allowed to ask for help from public

Team members threatened with dismissal for Team members threatened with dismissal for speaking to pressspeaking to press

No access to steel until first week of OctoberNo access to steel until first week of October

FEMA obstructionFEMA obstruction

FEMA BPATFEMA BPAT ASCE expanded and was named FEMA BPATASCE expanded and was named FEMA BPAT

• John Gross, NIST engineer with oil and gas historyJohn Gross, NIST engineer with oil and gas history• Therese McAllister, Greenhorne and O’Mara (G&O)Therese McAllister, Greenhorne and O’Mara (G&O)• Other government contractors (Arup, Hughes)Other government contractors (Arup, Hughes)

When FEMA took over, $1 million was When FEMA took over, $1 million was allocated, but only $100,000 was spent by allocated, but only $100,000 was spent by DecemberDecember

At the same time, Bush was telling us “It At the same time, Bush was telling us “It costs a lot to fight this war. We have spent costs a lot to fight this war. We have spent more than a billion dollars a month…”more than a billion dollars a month…”

By January, it was a half-baked farceBy January, it was a half-baked farce

• Bill Manning, editor of Fire Engineering magazine, said Bill Manning, editor of Fire Engineering magazine, said the “official investigation…is a half-baked farce that may the “official investigation…is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure.”full disclosure.”

• Dick Cheney called Senate leader Tom Daschle and Dick Cheney called Senate leader Tom Daschle and asked him to “limit the scope and overall review of what asked him to “limit the scope and overall review of what happened [on 9/11]”, claiming resources would be happened [on 9/11]”, claiming resources would be pulled from the War on Terrorism. President Bush met pulled from the War on Terrorism. President Bush met with Daschle privately and asked him to limit the with Daschle privately and asked him to limit the investigation.investigation.

MeanwhileMeanwhile

Astaneh-Asl, a lone scientist working on a Astaneh-Asl, a lone scientist working on a National Science Foundation study, got National Science Foundation study, got access to the steel before the ASCE/FEMA access to the steel before the ASCE/FEMA teamteam

““The impact did nothing to this building” The impact did nothing to this building” (reported by CNN) (reported by CNN)

““So now we know, the column did not fail, So now we know, the column did not fail, it was a failure of the floor in most cases” it was a failure of the floor in most cases” (reported by Wired)(reported by Wired)

Who would design a building for plane Who would design a building for plane crashes but forget the jet fuel fires?crashes but forget the jet fuel fires?

• Eduardo Kausel – The WTC buildings were designed Eduardo Kausel – The WTC buildings were designed to withstand Boeing 707 impacts but were “never to withstand Boeing 707 impacts but were “never designed for the massive explosions nor the designed for the massive explosions nor the intense jet fuel fires that came next – a key design intense jet fuel fires that came next – a key design omission.”omission.”

• Loring Knoblauch (CEO of UL) – the jet fuel fires Loring Knoblauch (CEO of UL) – the jet fuel fires were not “reasonably foreseeable.”were not “reasonably foreseeable.”

• What? How would the planes get to the buildings? What? How would the planes get to the buildings? Who would really do this?Who would really do this?

Not the WTC’s design EngineerNot the WTC’s design Engineer

• Towers designed by John SkillingTowers designed by John Skilling

• Skilling had this to say in 1993 when asked if Skilling had this to say in 1993 when asked if he considered plane crashes in his design.he considered plane crashes in his design.

““Our analysis indicated the biggest problem Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel would dump would be the fact that all the fuel would dump into the building. [But] the building structure into the building. [But] the building structure would still be there.”would still be there.”City in the Sky, Glanz and LiptonCity in the Sky, Glanz and Lipton

                            

Where’s the fire?Where’s the fire?

Windsor building, Madrid, February 2005

                    

                    

Twin towers shortly after WTC2 hit

ASCE / FEMA findingsASCE / FEMA findings

April 2002 NOVA video by commentators April 2002 NOVA video by commentators Corley and ThorntonCorley and Thornton

Fireproofing easily blown offFireproofing easily blown off Floors collapsedFloors collapsed Columns buckled outwardColumns buckled outward

May 2002 final FEMA reportMay 2002 final FEMA report• ““a pancake-type of collapse of successive a pancake-type of collapse of successive

floors”floors”

June 2002 – NIST drafts planJune 2002 – NIST drafts plan

National Institute of Standards and National Institute of Standards and TechnologyTechnology• Director is Presidential appointeeDirector is Presidential appointee• Repository for national reference standardsRepository for national reference standards

First meeting included “Public” comments byFirst meeting included “Public” comments by• Gene CorleyGene Corley• Richard TomasettiRichard Tomasetti• Shankar NairShankar Nair• Other contributors to official reportsOther contributors to official reports

FEMA authors become NIST authorsFEMA authors become NIST authors

FEMA Chapter 1 authorsFEMA Chapter 1 authors• Therese McAllister: co-wrote NIST report 1-6 and 1-7Therese McAllister: co-wrote NIST report 1-6 and 1-7• John Gross: co-wrote NIST report 1-6 and 1-7John Gross: co-wrote NIST report 1-6 and 1-7• Ronald Hamburger: NIST contributorRonald Hamburger: NIST contributor

FEMA Chapter 2 authorsFEMA Chapter 2 authors• Ronald Hamburger: see aboveRonald Hamburger: see above• William Baker: NIST contributor, Freedom towerWilliam Baker: NIST contributor, Freedom tower• Harold Nelson: co-wrote NIST report 1-5 and 1-7Harold Nelson: co-wrote NIST report 1-5 and 1-7

FEMA chapter 5 authors (WTC 7)FEMA chapter 5 authors (WTC 7)• Ramon Gilsanz: co-wrote NIST report 1-6FRamon Gilsanz: co-wrote NIST report 1-6F• Harold Nelson: see aboveHarold Nelson: see above

Oct 2002 - Silverstein / Weidlinger reportOct 2002 - Silverstein / Weidlinger report

Corley and Thornton-Tomasetti involved in Corley and Thornton-Tomasetti involved in study to establish Silverstein insurance claimstudy to establish Silverstein insurance claim

Report resultsReport results • No floor failure of any kindNo floor failure of any kind• Column failure onlyColumn failure only• Directly contradicts FEMA report, NOVA video and Directly contradicts FEMA report, NOVA video and

most other experts (e.g. Astaneh-Asl)most other experts (e.g. Astaneh-Asl)

Apparently floor failure would have meant Apparently floor failure would have meant design failure and therefore “one event”design failure and therefore “one event”

They knew from the start what happened?They knew from the start what happened?

””Experts” Towering InfernoExperts” Towering Inferno• Steel meltedSteel melted

FEMA FEMA • Floor failure: “A pancake-type of collapse of successive Floor failure: “A pancake-type of collapse of successive

floors”floors”

Silverstein/Weidlinger Silverstein/Weidlinger • Column failure onlyColumn failure only

NIST NIST • External column failure from sagging floors and softened External column failure from sagging floors and softened

core columns ,etc…leading to pile driver collapsecore columns ,etc…leading to pile driver collapse(TNRAT – They’ll Never Read All This theory)(TNRAT – They’ll Never Read All This theory) TNRAT

Demo points out Demo points out characteristics of demolitioncharacteristics of demolition

Sudden onsetSudden onset Straight downStraight down Nearly free-fall speedNearly free-fall speed Total collapseTotal collapse Sliced steelSliced steel Pulverization of Pulverization of

concreteconcrete

Dust cloudsDust clouds Horizontal ejections Horizontal ejections

(squibs)(squibs) Demolition ringsDemolition rings Sounds of explosionsSounds of explosions Pools of molten steelPools of molten steel

All supported by photographic evidence and All supported by photographic evidence and eyewitness testimonies eyewitness testimonies

Sept 2005 - The NIST WTC ReportSept 2005 - The NIST WTC Report

42 sub-reports and 42 sub-reports and 10,000 pages10,000 pages

Only for Twin TowersOnly for Twin Towers

Like others, focused only Like others, focused only on political storyon political story

Same people as FEMASame people as FEMA TNRAT

NFPA 921 used?NFPA 921 used?Standard for fire investigationStandard for fire investigation

Sec 6-5: Important to remember that conflict of Sec 6-5: Important to remember that conflict of interest should be avoidedinterest should be avoided• NIST used specialists/contractors who were dependent NIST used specialists/contractors who were dependent

on government contracts or on the official story itselfon government contracts or on the official story itself

Sec 12-4: Unusual residues …could arise from Sec 12-4: Unusual residues …could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materialsmaterials• NIST report does not mention FEMA’s puzzling sulfur NIST report does not mention FEMA’s puzzling sulfur

residueresidue

Our focusOur focus

NIST’s stated goals NIST’s stated goals • Goal 1 – Why and How three buildings Goal 1 – Why and How three buildings

collapsedcollapsed• Goal 3 – What design factors should have Goal 3 – What design factors should have

prevented this?prevented this?

NIST’s approach and final storyNIST’s approach and final story• 5 methods to investigate5 methods to investigate• 7 steps to collapse7 steps to collapse

NIST’s investigation methodsNIST’s investigation methods

A. Review of documentsA. Review of documents

B. Interviews with eyewitnessesB. Interviews with eyewitnesses

C. Analysis of steelC. Analysis of steel

D. Laboratory testsD. Laboratory tests

E. Computer SimulationsE. Computer Simulations

A. NIST’s review of documentsA. NIST’s review of documents

Reports of original design claims?Reports of original design claims?• No, many relevant claims not mentionedNo, many relevant claims not mentioned

Fire resistance test data (e.g. UL test Fire resistance test data (e.g. UL test documents)?documents)?• No, documents came up missingNo, documents came up missing

Skilling’s fire resistance analysis?Skilling’s fire resistance analysis?• No, documents missingNo, documents missing

Original design claimsOriginal design claims ““The World Trade Center towers would have an inherent The World Trade Center towers would have an inherent

capacity to resist unforeseen calamities.” capacity to resist unforeseen calamities.”

For the perimeter columns (83% of total columns), “live For the perimeter columns (83% of total columns), “live loads on these columns can be increased more than loads on these columns can be increased more than 2,000% before failure occurs.”2,000% before failure occurs.”

One “could cut away all the first story columns on one side One “could cut away all the first story columns on one side of the building, and partway from the corners of the of the building, and partway from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building could still withstand perpendicular sides, and the building could still withstand design live loads and a 100 mph wind from any direction.”design live loads and a 100 mph wind from any direction.”

All quotes from Engineering News-Record, 1964

A. Were the WTC steel components tested A. Were the WTC steel components tested for fire resistance?for fire resistance?

NIST said they found no documents, yet states NIST said they found no documents, yet states the buildings were rated as Class 1B (3 hours for the buildings were rated as Class 1B (3 hours for columns and 2 hours for floors)columns and 2 hours for floors)

Underwriters Laboratories’ CEO -- UL tested the Underwriters Laboratories’ CEO -- UL tested the steel to NYC code (meaning 40 years ago)steel to NYC code (meaning 40 years ago)

Port Authority -- “there are no test records in our Port Authority -- “there are no test records in our files”files”

ASTM E119 is used for testing both steel ASTM E119 is used for testing both steel components and floor assembliescomponents and floor assemblies

ASTM E119 Time-temperature curveASTM E119 Time-temperature curve

A. UL comments on testing the WTC steelA. UL comments on testing the WTC steel

September 2001September 2001• Loring Knoblauch, UL’s CEO, told staff that UL had certified the Loring Knoblauch, UL’s CEO, told staff that UL had certified the

steel used in the WTCsteel used in the WTC November 2003November 2003

• I asked Knoblauch in writing about UL’s involvement, and he I asked Knoblauch in writing about UL’s involvement, and he responded in December confirming details.responded in December confirming details.

““We tested the steel with all the required fireproofing on, We tested the steel with all the required fireproofing on, and it did beautifully.”and it did beautifully.”

““As we do not do follow-up service on this kind of product, As we do not do follow-up service on this kind of product, we can give an opinion only on the test sample which was we can give an opinion only on the test sample which was indeed properly coated.”indeed properly coated.”

““We test to the code requirements, and the steel clearly We test to the code requirements, and the steel clearly met [the NYC code] requirements and exceeded them.”met [the NYC code] requirements and exceeded them.”

A. Our “Public Safety Guardian” (UL) lying?A. Our “Public Safety Guardian” (UL) lying?

August 2004August 2004• UL performed tests of WTC floor modelsUL performed tests of WTC floor models• Floors barely affected and didn’t collapseFloors barely affected and didn’t collapse• Loring Knoblauch resigned suddenlyLoring Knoblauch resigned suddenly

October 2004 October 2004 • NIST report update showed contradictions NIST report update showed contradictions

November 2004November 2004• My letter to NIST became publicMy letter to NIST became public• UL quickly backtracked, saying UL quickly backtracked, saying

““No evidence” any firm tested the steelNo evidence” any firm tested the steel They played only a “limited” role in investigationThey played only a “limited” role in investigation

B. NIST’s performance on interviewsB. NIST’s performance on interviews

NIST started planning for eyewitness interviews in NIST started planning for eyewitness interviews in April 2003 April 2003 (7 months after start of investigation, and 19 months after 9/11)(7 months after start of investigation, and 19 months after 9/11)

By October, still no NIST interviews and no NIST By October, still no NIST interviews and no NIST access to NYC interviewsaccess to NYC interviews

NYC finally agreed to allow NIST access to original NYC finally agreed to allow NIST access to original interviews by December 2003interviews by December 2003

……but only in NYC offices (sound familiar?)but only in NYC offices (sound familiar?)

B. Eyewitness interviews not usedB. Eyewitness interviews not used Paramedic Daniel Rivera – “[Did] you ever see

professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear ‘Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop?’…I thought it was that.”

Witness Timothy Burke – “the building popped, lower than the fire…I was going oh, my God, there is a secondary device because the way the building popped. I thought it was an explosion.”

Firefighter Edward Cachia – “It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. We originally thought there was like an internal detonation, explosives…”

Assistant Commissioner Stephen Gregory -- “I thought…that I saw low-level flashes…[at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building?”

B. Eyewitness interviews not usedB. Eyewitness interviews not used Firefighter Richard Banaciski – “It seemed like on television

[when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all around like a belt, all these explosions.”

Deputy Commissioner Thomas Fitzpatrick – “My initial reaction was that this was exactly the way it looks when they show you those implosions on TV.”

Battalion Chief Brian Dixon – “the lowest floor of the fire in the south tower actually looked like someone had planted explosives all around it because…everything blew out on the one floor.”

Firefighter Kenneth Rogers – “there was an explosion in the south tower…I kept watching. Floor after floor after floor. [It] looked like a synchronized deliberate kind of thing.”

C. Analysis of steelC. Analysis of steel

Most of the steel evidence destroyedMost of the steel evidence destroyed• Tomasetti decision (Thornton’s partner)Tomasetti decision (Thornton’s partner)• 236 samples saved for testing (0.3%)236 samples saved for testing (0.3%)

NIST testsNIST tests• Paint test indicated low steel temps (480 F ) Paint test indicated low steel temps (480 F )

“despite pre-collapse exposure to fire”“despite pre-collapse exposure to fire”• Microstructure test showed no steel reached Microstructure test showed no steel reached

critical (half-strength) valuescritical (half-strength) values

NIST comments before and AfterNIST comments before and After

Before steel temperature analysis Before steel temperature analysis (12/02/03)(12/02/03)

• ““Regions of impact and fire damage Regions of impact and fire damage emphasized in selection of steel pieces.”emphasized in selection of steel pieces.”

After steel temperature analysis After steel temperature analysis (final report)(final report)

• ““None of the samples were from zones where None of the samples were from zones where [high] heating was predicted.”[high] heating was predicted.”

D. Laboratory testsD. Laboratory tests

Tests to prove loss of fireproofing?Tests to prove loss of fireproofing?• Fifteen rounds from a shotgunFifteen rounds from a shotgun

Workstation burn testsWorkstation burn tests• Gas temperatures, not steel temperaturesGas temperatures, not steel temperatures• Used double the average amount of jet fuelUsed double the average amount of jet fuel• Used “Over-ventilation”Used “Over-ventilation”

UL floor model tests evaluated Pancake UL floor model tests evaluated Pancake TheoryTheory

Pancake TheoryPancake Theory

• ““I could see it in my mind’s eye: The fire I could see it in my mind’s eye: The fire burned until the steel was weakened and the burned until the steel was weakened and the floors above collapsed, starting a chain floors above collapsed, starting a chain reaction of gravity, floor falling upon floor upon reaction of gravity, floor falling upon floor upon floor, clunk – clunk – clunk, the load gaining floor, clunk – clunk – clunk, the load gaining weight and momentum by the nanosecond, weight and momentum by the nanosecond, unstoppable. Once enough floors collapsed, the unstoppable. Once enough floors collapsed, the exterior walls and the core columns were no exterior walls and the core columns were no longer laterally supported and folded in.”longer laterally supported and folded in.” -- -- Karl KochKarl Koch(from Koch’s book Men of Steel)(from Koch’s book Men of Steel)

WTC floor model tests by UL (Aug 2004)WTC floor model tests by UL (Aug 2004) Used less fireproofing than was known to exist in Used less fireproofing than was known to exist in

WTC1, and then reduced fireproofing furtherWTC1, and then reduced fireproofing further Used “maximum load” (i.e. applied doubled the Used “maximum load” (i.e. applied doubled the

weight known to have been on floors)weight known to have been on floors) Heated floors according to ASTM E119Heated floors according to ASTM E119

Minimal floor saggingMinimal floor sagging No floor collapseNo floor collapse ““The results established that this type of The results established that this type of

assembly was capable of sustaining a large assembly was capable of sustaining a large gravity load, without collapsing, for a substantial gravity load, without collapsing, for a substantial period of time relative to the duration of the fires period of time relative to the duration of the fires in any given location on September 11th.”in any given location on September 11th.”

NIST comments before and afterNIST comments before and after

Before UL floor testsBefore UL floor tests• ““[Tests will] determine the fire rating of typical [Tests will] determine the fire rating of typical

WTC floor systems under both as-built and WTC floor systems under both as-built and specified conditions”specified conditions”

After UL floor testsAfter UL floor tests• ““The Investigation Team was cautious about The Investigation Team was cautious about

using these results directly in the formulation using these results directly in the formulation of collapse hypotheses”of collapse hypotheses”

E. Computer SimulationsE. Computer Simulations

Input parameters could be tweakedInput parameters could be tweaked

““Realistic” parameters tossed in Realistic” parameters tossed in favor of “More severe” parametersfavor of “More severe” parameters

Animations generated to “compare Animations generated to “compare with observed events”with observed events”

E. NIST’s computer simulated E. NIST’s computer simulated “animations”“animations”

Does your future depend on these cartoons?

NIST’s investigative practices were NIST’s investigative practices were deceptive and unscientificdeceptive and unscientific

Documents needed just happened to be missingDocuments needed just happened to be missing Eyewitnesses to demolition characteristics were Eyewitnesses to demolition characteristics were

ignoredignored Physical tests that disproved pre-determined Physical tests that disproved pre-determined

conclusions were downplayed or ignoredconclusions were downplayed or ignored Entire theory is built on fudged, inaccessible Entire theory is built on fudged, inaccessible

computer simulationscomputer simulations

TNRAT

NIST’s Final, Computer-Based StoryNIST’s Final, Computer-Based Story

1. The aircraft severed “a number of columns”1. The aircraft severed “a number of columns”

2. Loads were redistributed (from -20% to +25%)2. Loads were redistributed (from -20% to +25%)

3. Insulation (fireproofing) was widely dislodged3. Insulation (fireproofing) was widely dislodged

4. High temperatures softened columns and floors 4. High temperatures softened columns and floors

5. Some floors began to sag5. Some floors began to sag

6. Sagging floors pulled exterior columns inward 6. Sagging floors pulled exterior columns inward

causing them to bucklecausing them to buckle

7. Instability spread around entire building7. Instability spread around entire building

““Global collapse ensued”Global collapse ensued”

1. How many columns were severed?1. How many columns were severed?

NIST now admits only a small percentage NIST now admits only a small percentage of columns were severedof columns were severed• 14% in WTC114% in WTC1• 15% in WTC215% in WTC2

But since one “could cut away all the first story columns on But since one “could cut away all the first story columns on one side of the building, and partway from the corners of one side of the building, and partway from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building could still the perpendicular sides, and the building could still withstand design live loads and a 100 mph wind from any withstand design live loads and a 100 mph wind from any direction”, we know the buildings could withstand > direction”, we know the buildings could withstand > 25% 25% column losscolumn loss without a problem. without a problem.

2. How much load was re-distributed?2. How much load was re-distributed?

NIST says loads on some columns were decreased NIST says loads on some columns were decreased (as much as 20%) and other loads were increased (as much as 20%) and other loads were increased (up to 25%).(up to 25%).

But again, since the original design claims were But again, since the original design claims were that, “live loads on these [perimeter] columns that, “live loads on these [perimeter] columns can be increased more than 2,000% before failure can be increased more than 2,000% before failure occurs”, these columns should have supported occurs”, these columns should have supported the extra load and much, much morethe extra load and much, much more

So far, no reason to even suspect collapseSo far, no reason to even suspect collapse

3. Fireproofing widely dislodged?3. Fireproofing widely dislodged?

“ “The towers would not have collapsed under the The towers would not have collapsed under the

combined effects of aircraft impact and the combined effects of aircraft impact and the

subsequent multi-floor fires if the insulation had subsequent multi-floor fires if the insulation had

not been not been widely dislodgedwidely dislodged or had been only or had been only

minimally dislodged by aircraft impact.” -- NISTminimally dislodged by aircraft impact.” -- NIST

What does “widely dislodged” mean?What does “widely dislodged” mean?

3. NIST must have done extensive testing to 3. NIST must have done extensive testing to prove fireproofing was widely dislodged!prove fireproofing was widely dislodged!

No, they shot 15 rounds from a shotgun at non-No, they shot 15 rounds from a shotgun at non-representative samples in a plywood box representative samples in a plywood box (were (were they in a hurry?)they in a hurry?)

No evidence that Boeing 767 would transform No evidence that Boeing 767 would transform into so many shotgun blasts into so many shotgun blasts (many thousands would be needed)(many thousands would be needed)

Shotgun test actually proved fireproofing could Shotgun test actually proved fireproofing could not have been widely dislodged because the not have been widely dislodged because the energy was simply not availableenergy was simply not available

No energy left to dislodge fireproofingNo energy left to dislodge fireproofing

NIST says 2500 MJ of kinetic energy from NIST says 2500 MJ of kinetic energy from plane that hit WTC1plane that hit WTC1• Calculations show that all this energy was Calculations show that all this energy was

consumed in crushing aircraft and breaking consumed in crushing aircraft and breaking columns & floors*columns & floors*

• Shotgun tests found that 1 MJ per sq meter was Shotgun tests found that 1 MJ per sq meter was needed to dislodge fireproofingneeded to dislodge fireproofing

• For the areas in question, intact floors and For the areas in question, intact floors and columns had > 6000 sq meters of surface areacolumns had > 6000 sq meters of surface area

*Calculations by Tomasz Wierzbicki of MIT*Calculations by Tomasz Wierzbicki of MIT

4. How hot could the steel have become?4. How hot could the steel have become?

NIST now says about 4,500 gallons of jet fuel were NIST now says about 4,500 gallons of jet fuel were available to feed fires. This would have provided available to feed fires. This would have provided 590,000 MJ of energy.590,000 MJ of energy.

Office furnishings in the impact zone would have Office furnishings in the impact zone would have provided 490,000 MJ of energy.provided 490,000 MJ of energy.

Using masses and specific heats for materials heated, Using masses and specific heats for materials heated, a maximum temperature in the impact zone can be a maximum temperature in the impact zone can be calculated.calculated.

The result is less than 600 degrees FThe result is less than 600 degrees F• Assuming fuel burnt with perfect efficiency, that no hot gases left the Assuming fuel burnt with perfect efficiency, that no hot gases left the

impact zone, that no heat escaped by conduction, and that the steel impact zone, that no heat escaped by conduction, and that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat. and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat.

Steel Temperatures Discussed (F)Steel Temperatures Discussed (F)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Paint test Calculated Steel at halfstrength

Steel Forged ASTM E119 TV Program Steel melts

Review Review NIST Story and and ProblemsProblems

Column breakage (14%) weakened building, then external columns saw up to 25% increases in total load

Fireproofing “widely dislodged”

High steel temps required for long time

Can lose an additional 30 Can lose an additional 30 or more before challenging or more before challenging design claims; external design claims; external columns designed to columns designed to withstand 2000% increases withstand 2000% increases in live loadin live load

No evidence that Boeing No evidence that Boeing 767 would transform into 767 would transform into thousands of shotgun thousands of shotgun blasts; no energy available blasts; no energy available to dislodge fireproofingto dislodge fireproofing

Tests and calculations Tests and calculations show steel temps were show steel temps were way too lowway too low

5. Some floors began to sag?5. Some floors began to sag? Only very slight sagging is visible in NIST photos Only very slight sagging is visible in NIST photos

from UL tests (and no collapse)from UL tests (and no collapse)

After two hours* in high temp furnace, the deck of After two hours* in high temp furnace, the deck of 35 ft floor model sagged only a few inches in the 35 ft floor model sagged only a few inches in the middle, and the major joist parts did not sag at allmiddle, and the major joist parts did not sag at all

NIST’s computer turned this into dramatic 42 inch NIST’s computer turned this into dramatic 42 inch sagging, with joists bending downward severelysagging, with joists bending downward severely

*Remember, WTC2 collapsed after only 56 minutes and*Remember, WTC2 collapsed after only 56 minutes and

WTC1 fires on south face had only ~ 45 minutesWTC1 fires on south face had only ~ 45 minutes

6. How did the sagging floors pull exterior 6. How did the sagging floors pull exterior columns inward causing them to buckle?columns inward causing them to buckle?

Over 30 columns would have to be pulled in to Over 30 columns would have to be pulled in to challenge design claimchallenge design claim

What new force did a few inches of deck sagging What new force did a few inches of deck sagging apply to those 30+ columns? NIST says 14 kips apply to those 30+ columns? NIST says 14 kips per truss seat were applied but does not per truss seat were applied but does not adequately explain how this challenged the adequately explain how this challenged the designed axial load of 1174 kips per columndesigned axial load of 1174 kips per column

What tests did NIST do to prove inward buckling, What tests did NIST do to prove inward buckling, and was the application of the results consistent?and was the application of the results consistent?

The triple double bare steel computer resultThe triple double bare steel computer result ““An exterior wall section (9 columns wide and 9 An exterior wall section (9 columns wide and 9

floors high) was found to bow inward when floor floors high) was found to bow inward when floor connections applied an inward force.”connections applied an inward force.”(computer result for one case out of nine)(computer result for one case out of nine)

Same report says sagging area only 5 floors high!Same report says sagging area only 5 floors high!

NIST had to exaggerate temperatures (1300 F), NIST had to exaggerate temperatures (1300 F), apply these temps for 90 minutes, strip all apply these temps for 90 minutes, strip all fireproofing, and then double the height of the fireproofing, and then double the height of the inward pull zone to produce even a hint of inward inward pull zone to produce even a hint of inward bowing from fire*bowing from fire*

*Note: There are other ways to produce bowing and buckling of columns – just ask Demo

7. Instability spread around entire 7. Instability spread around entire building perimeter?building perimeter?

Buildings fell at nearly free-fall speed. How fast would Buildings fell at nearly free-fall speed. How fast would instability have to spread first? How much of the ~10 instability have to spread first? How much of the ~10 sec fall time could be spared?sec fall time could be spared?

Perimeter of building was 832 feet. If complete in 0.5 Perimeter of building was 832 feet. If complete in 0.5 seconds, speed of “instability spread” would have been seconds, speed of “instability spread” would have been >1100 mph (Mach 1.5)>1100 mph (Mach 1.5)

““A steel structure, generally speaking, does not collapse A steel structure, generally speaking, does not collapse suddenly when attacked by fire. There are unmistakable suddenly when attacked by fire. There are unmistakable warning signs, namely, large deformations.” warning signs, namely, large deformations.” Hart, Multi-Storey Buildings in Steel, Halsted PressHart, Multi-Storey Buildings in Steel, Halsted Press

NIST’s collapse initiation sequence: NIST’s collapse initiation sequence: What would objective scientists have found?What would objective scientists have found?

1. Relatively few columns were lost on impact1. Relatively few columns were lost on impact

2. Remaining columns had considerable extra capacity 2. Remaining columns had considerable extra capacity

3. Fireproofing could not have been widely dislodged3. Fireproofing could not have been widely dislodged

4. Steel could not have softened at the temps found 4. Steel could not have softened at the temps found

5. Even at higher temps and longer periods tests showed 5. Even at higher temps and longer periods tests showed

minimal sagging of floorsminimal sagging of floors

6. Forces were not produced to pull columns inward6. Forces were not produced to pull columns inward

7. “Instability spread” would have taken much more time 7. “Instability spread” would have taken much more time

and would not result in uniform free-falland would not result in uniform free-fall

NIST’s computer story is Bush ScienceNIST’s computer story is Bush Science

The parameters NIST originally considered The parameters NIST originally considered “realistic” were discarded because computer “realistic” were discarded because computer results “did not compare to observed events.”results “did not compare to observed events.”

““More severe” parameters were substituted until More severe” parameters were substituted until animations gave the desired resultanimations gave the desired result

NIST will not release 6,899 photographs and NIST will not release 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of real video footage6,977 segments of real video footage

““Global collapse ensued?”Global collapse ensued?”

What about resistance of floors below? If these floors What about resistance of floors below? If these floors each caused hesitation of only half a second, an extra each caused hesitation of only half a second, an extra 40 seconds would be needed.40 seconds would be needed.

What about the observed squibs?  (Pile-driving is not What about the observed squibs?  (Pile-driving is not Pancaking)Pancaking)

    What about the large pools of molten metal observed What about the large pools of molten metal observed

in the basement areas of both Towers and WTC 7? in the basement areas of both Towers and WTC 7? 

What about the sulfur residue found on the steel?What about the sulfur residue found on the steel?

The NIST WTC report is false because…The NIST WTC report is false because… They did not explain why and how the buildings They did not explain why and how the buildings

collapsed, and their investigation was deceptive collapsed, and their investigation was deceptive and unscientific at every stepand unscientific at every step

They reported findings that were in direct They reported findings that were in direct contradiction to their physical testingcontradiction to their physical testing

They omitted or distorted many important factsThey omitted or distorted many important facts• Original design claims and John Skilling’s analysisOriginal design claims and John Skilling’s analysis• Resistance from building structure belowResistance from building structure below• WTC 1 antenna moving firstWTC 1 antenna moving first• Pools of molten metal lingering for weeksPools of molten metal lingering for weeks• Numerous eyewitness testimonies about explosionsNumerous eyewitness testimonies about explosions• Sulfur residue on steelSulfur residue on steel

Researchers call for examination of the Researchers call for examination of the demolition hypothesisdemolition hypothesis

Demolition squibs seen ejected from floors far Demolition squibs seen ejected from floors far from impact zonefrom impact zone

Everything pulverizedEverything pulverized

Molten metal found under rubble piles of all three Molten metal found under rubble piles of all three buildings for weeksbuildings for weeks

Site cleaned up by “Controlled Demolition, Inc.”Site cleaned up by “Controlled Demolition, Inc.”

Many reports of explosions and flashes of lightMany reports of explosions and flashes of light

WTC 7WTC 7 Would have been tallest building in 33 statesWould have been tallest building in 33 states

Collapsed in 6.6 secondsCollapsed in 6.6 seconds

Larry Silverstein, leaseholder for all three Larry Silverstein, leaseholder for all three buildings -- “I said…maybe the smartest thing to buildings -- “I said…maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And [the fire department do is pull it. And [the fire department commander and I] made that decision to pull and commander and I] made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.” PBS, 2002we watched the building collapse.” PBS, 2002

FEMA -- “the collapse was due primarily to fire, FEMA -- “the collapse was due primarily to fire, rather than any impact damage from the rather than any impact damage from the collapsing towers” collapsing towers”

It takes weeks to plan and implement It takes weeks to plan and implement a controlled demolitiona controlled demolition

Thank you for listening Thank you for listening and watch out for more rats and elephantsand watch out for more rats and elephants

Demo

TNRAT