Diagonal cut Support Column at WTC
DIAGONAL BEAM CUT
Thought I would share this here, posted this response on a local forum group.
Any metal smith/iron worker/torch cutter can confirm this analysis as well. I couldn't figure out how to show the photo so it is attached:
The problem is, of course, all evidence is debatable and can be supported from both sides.
Government supporting story would be that the supporting column (one of the 47 that the 9/11 Commission Report claims doesn't exist) was cut by iron workers clearing debri.
Could be supported by:
-testimony from steel worker who cut it (none known)
-testimony from eyewitnesses who saw him cut it or gave the order to cut (none known)
-looks similar to molten slag from a blow torch cut
-Photographer testifying that it was done after iron workers got started cutting steel (not known)
Our story claims it was cut by thermate charges to relieve the strength of the supporting columns.
Could be supported by:
-Shows classic dripping slag from thermate melting
-the perfectly angled cut is a classic characteristic of a demolition application to relieve the central support columns
-there are piles of rubble everywhere, the metal smiths would not likely be hacking at an undamaged beam to rescue people
-any metal smith can tell you that slag does not drip like shown since most slag is blown away and only a ribbon of slag remains above and below the cut typically with maybe a short drip or 2..
-any metal smith can also tell you that any cut would have been traced completely around the outside of the column, torch cutting does not leave slag on the outside of a cut, only on the backside. YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE SLAG dripping on the outside. This proves it was not torch cut and that it was Thermate, with no air pressure behind it which is why there is slag "running" down the inside and outside.
-any metal cutter would also question why the rear cut is not a straight line, or why the cuts are not straight or horizontal all the way around. The thermate theory can explain that more concentration in that one spot in the back for some reason would melt more steel away, like the edge of a candle melting more than the rest.
-additional supporting evidence includes molten steel found in the rubble for 12 weeks after 9/11. To date, only thermate explains this, the government provides no explanation for this, which makes this valid supporting evidence for us.
Just present this analysis to any metal smith/torch cutter, which I am, and he can confirm it. Your only supporting evidence would be an eyewitness report from the cutter or other to confirm. None exists that I know of. Or, you could ask the government to answer the question. Think you'll get an answer? Why don't you write the White House and demand that they release all evidence to shut us up if they really have it? Think they will? They won't for us who are demanding answers, and they won't for you. So now what? You going to sit there and claim that a government "for the people, of the people, and by the people" doesn't have to answer to anyone? Even if you don't believe 9/11, there are many other things they are lying about. If they aren't, then why do the refuse to answer questions? No American should have to accept that the government hides what ever they
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Cut beam.jpg | 68.76 KB |
- Larry Central Mass 911 Truth Alliance's blog
- Login to post comments
If you look closely at the
If you look closely at the original image you will also notice a semi-circular hole in the back face. This is relevant data.
Explain
Explain circular hole....
Please
SEMI circular - the image
SEMI circular - the image posted is not the largest I have seen, but in the original (higher resolution) there is a semi-circular edge along thevery back of that beam, on the left side close to the corner. There is slag dripping down from that location aswell (on inside facing camera).
On this version of the image it just appears as a gouge...
evidence
I have been looking for evidsence to support my theory that the thermite / thermate charges were placed with-in the columns.... thought the circular hole would be helpful.
I am aware of the angular severed columns.... the evidence of the pools of molten metal leads to the conclusion that there is still a reaction happening such that happens in the thermite reaction..... the fires were no maintaining the temps to keep the metal in a molten state.
It is clear that thermite was used just trying to figure out how and where..... personal exploration of evidence... not necessarily for public consumption.... huughum *space beams*... excuse me
I understand your reasoning
I understand your reasoning behind the hypothesis of thermite being used inside the beams. Many photos of the rubble shows very irregular coloration and is totally out of place. This has not been addressed to my knowledge to date.
The hole, if evidence of cutter charges, would be indicitive of a plasma cutter or some other hand held cutting device to aid in the placement of the HE cutter charges.
That was my reason for bringing up the issue.
So many questions... Here's another one, the remarkable absence of not only the concrete flooring but the corrugated steel pans in which the concrete was poured... So many interesting questions...
NOT a 'torch cut'
I've had several welders in my family and have been around welding all my life, and that is NOT a torch cut. Not even close.
As for cleanup personnel using demo charges and the like to take down structures, I think they did do some of that. Part of the problem is that we don't know when and where this photo was taken. But it looks to me like it is very early on during rescue and not afterward, due to the firefighters being there.
We can see the face of the firefighters, so someone might be able to contact them and ask them. If they would talk. And if they would speak freely.
In the recent debate with the LC guys, someone on the other side mentioned that some firefighters have stated that they can say anything they want to whenever they want -- anyone who believes that is true is so naive that they are lost to any possibility of normal thought and discussion. And there are a lot of people that fall into that category.
----
Ad hominem per factum, beyotch!
You are undeservedly egotistical.... often laughably so.
Pseudo-intellectuality does not behoove you.
Hes absolutely right about
Hes absolutely right about slag on the outside....
Work in construction company
neither of our steel experts or torchers ever seen something similar.
http://dirk-gerhardt.homepage.t-online.de/Bilder/WTC-controlleddemolitio...
Cut column
I would like to encourage retrieval of comments from wleders, iron workers to support what I posted in this analysis. I can then rewrite to submit to Steven Jones for use with his current research if he hasn't included this already. Please email supporting testimonies to info@centralmass911truth.org. I will post a re-write when it is complete, I have already added to it myself since posting yesterday.
Thanks, Larry
Dear Larry
...........More comments. The photo shows a diagonal cut, Notice on the top back side ? The circlular cut out?
This could be a blow thru,but i doubt it. When you blow through thick steel the problem is blow back.
I would assume by
the photo's this column is 3 to 4 inches thick.The problem is when cutting through steel this thick it produces blow back.It would shower the cutter with sparks and molten globs,that spray his face,go down his shirt & pants.Not fun by any means.
Also it would adhere to the copper cutting tip and inhibit the preformance of the torch.It would clog the preheat openings,as well as the oxygen port.
Also notice the angle grooves in the diagonal cut. this shows if a torch was use it was also angled. Why? It would increase they depth of the cut. All these factors don't make sence ,but is no proof/
So Larry,add this to the many justifiable questions we have ,and it equals BULLSHIT
30 Year welder fabricator.
I said before this was no torch cut.Yes slag on the outside,but more important is why make a LONGER diagonal cut? This allows from direction control.
Yes, this is the input I'm
Yes, this is the input I'm looking for, a longer cut would not make any sense to an ironworker cutting up scrap. Submit any comments to me at info@centralmass911truth.org, sign your name, provide your work history, lets back it up with verified experience and put 20 names to it. I will give it a week to compile additional inputs. Any suggestions where else to post this? Thanks, Larry
...
"This allows from direction control." What do you mean by this? Do you mean cutting it at that angle doesn't allow much control over how it will fall?
I'll add that it doesn't look like a welder could safely reach that column. There is so much debris surrounding it. It doesn't make much sense to get at that column in the first few days of recovery.
We need more information on the origin of this photo.
Rollo
This allows the beam to collapse inward.This is VERY typical in controlled demo.You can find this on the web.
Although iam sure cutting torches were used on the pile,a burning bar would have been alot faster.The column in the picture raised huge doubts with me when i first seen it. The angle cut was a dead give away.Why increase the length of the cut by going this way?Yes another topic was the slag on the outside.When cutting a tube or pipe the slag will form on the inside.
This picture was brought up here before.I would love to see a high definition close up,and if possible pictures leading up to that photo
Another reason a diagonal cut is used in demo is because the high uniform heat heat of the cutter charge,and the speed in which it slices If it was wraped on a 90 degee the weight it was supporting would want to fuse the column,or beam back together if the timing of the charges was off thus allowing uncontrolled demo.....Make sense?
Question
Why not try to find out who the people were in doing the clean up? Even with all my years of experance it would be tough to prove.Would really had to of been there.
Oh yes. I understand how
Oh yes. I understand how it's used in controlled demo. If you slice it like / in the upper portion and \ in a lower portion, that baby's not supporting anything.
I'm just interested in analyzing what we see in this picture and if in fact it is evidence of controlled demo. Personally, I believe it is. But there's a slim chance it isn't. We need to be able to convince a skeptic that this IS evidence, which is hard to do.
See what I wrote below in another comment box.
I don't think there's
I don't think there's anything wrong with the dimensions.
Doctored?
Do you have this evidence of forgery detailed anywhere... I am no expert on photo doctoring.... want to see the three photos this was comprised of
Looks good to me... but what do I know.?
Please point to results of
Please point to results of these experts as to the validity of the photo/image.
Other wise you are in essence saying "Believe me, not your lying eyes!"
Seriously, where is the research by the experts disputing the validity of this photo?
<edit: -1 ? awww not enough sugar in your kool-aid?>
Yeah
I thought that was very weird.
C'mon dude: Put up or shut up.
Seriously
Here is one of the biggest disasters of all time.... we should piece photos together and alter these columns to show them angle cut... and don't forget the slag.
Come on!
Damning evidence to the 9/11 Commission!
Those look like core columns to me?
huh?..... should ask the photo doctor about those too
Fake. Your nuts. This photo
Fake. Your nuts. This photo is in the book called Aftermath that is a photographic history of 911.
http://www.amazon.com/Aftermath-World-Trade-Center-Archive/dp/0714846554...
I've looked through this book at Barnes & Nobel. I believe the date associated with this photo is around November 11th from my recollection...
That long after?! That
That long after?!
That period of time does change things. If you look at the size of the column, you wouldn't want to use a blowtorch to trim it. You're going to have to use something like thermite because you don't want to be near it when it falls. So either it was thermite from pre-collapse or thermite used in clean-up.
The thing to keep in mind however, is that clean-up thermite would not cause an abundance of molten steel. They would use it efficiently and precisely in the clean-up. If it was used to bring the WTC down, then it would be used excessively and redundantly to ensure collapse, resulting in the 'pools' of molten metal found in the rubble. Clean-up thermite would not yield such pools.
"You're going to have to use
"You're going to have to use something like thermite because you don't want to be near it when it falls."
I have never heard of any accounts of workmen using thermite during the cleaning process. If you have anything could you please cite it.
kthxbai
Neither have I. I'm just
Neither have I. I'm just saying it's possible.
I see your point. It is
I see your point. It is possible, but probable?
Some more pics...
Found these on the old loose change forum.
You can find a bit more analysis on the thread HERE
LC forum analysis
I checked out the LC forum thread, and there doesn't seem to be a clear consensus there. One person remarked that in the uncropped version, the firefighters in the foreground don't appear to be casting shadows on the ground. That's interesting.
At the beginning of the thread, a poster named "Endgame" wrote a parody of the typical troll post that is very funny:
Looks like damage from burning jet fuel, IMO.
The elevators were filled with burning jet fuel and as they plummeted down the shafts, some of the burning jet fuel leaked out and was spread all around the lower core. The burning jet fuel had 100 times greater kinetic energy due to the free-fall down the shaft, and upon contact with the steel it acted like a knife-through-butter, resulting in what is pictured above.
Folks, you've had ample time to examine the evidence.
Look at the steel. Old and rusty, spot-welded and without a sliver of fire protection coating left after the plane impact knocked it all off.
119 floors above fell and landed right on top of it. How it wasn't instantly pulverised is the only rational question here.
Have any thermite experts seen the "obvious" and made their findings public?
Can 6,988 jet fuel experts all be wrong?
I know a guy who knows a guy in the scrap metal trade. He heard from a guy who knows a guy who works for the company that bought all of the WTC scrap steel. A few months after 9/11, the warehouse used to store 80% of the load caught fire and burned to the ground. Guess what morons? Most of the sections melted and a pool of molten steel formed 27 feet below ground level. The EPA had to close the site for 4 weeks because the heat was intense and they feared that the neighboring jet fuel refinery would melt and explode, creating a jet fuel fireball with the destructive power of 10 nuclear bombs.
You guys should get a life!!
Agreed... there doesn't seem to be a clear consensus
Thanks Casseia, some interesting bits in there though.
This pic shows a 45% cut in progress.
and this bit about military grade thermate appears to MATCH what Professor Jones found in his dust samples, especially the Barium content.
Thermate-TH3, a mixture of thermite and pyrotechnic additives, was found to be superior to thermites and was adapted for use in incendiary hand grenades. Its composition by weight is generally thermite 68.7%, barium nitrate 29.0%, sulfur 2.0% and binder 0.3%
that photo is far from from
that photo is far from from doctored.
Steven Jones' Research Has Been Proven Faulty Time & Time Again.
Why are so many content with thermite proving controlled demolition? Especially after it's been proven that Jones used faulty research to discredit cold fusion in 1989. And is doing the same thing with 9/11. His research is extremely faulty:
Jones Alters Colors of Ground Zero Photograph to Deceive People
Youtube Video: Steven Jones Sabotaged The Development Of Free Energy (Segment from Heavy Watergate film below)
Google Video: "Phenomenon Archives: Heavy Watergate, the War Against Cold Fusion" (Fast forward to 11:00 for segment on Jones.)
Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Disintegrate? A peer-review of Steven E. Jones' 9/11 Research
Infinite Energy Magazine: Breaking Through Editorial: Ethics in the Cold Fusion Controversy
The Dark Side Of Professor Steven E. Jones
Professor Steven Jones Trashes The Demolition Evidence
Scholars For 9/11 Plagiarism And Disinformation
Cold Fusion's CIA Mole (Analysis MP3 of Jones' work)
9/11 'hard science' group linked to archaeology hoax
Judy Wood was the ONLY 9/11 Researcher INVITED to Present Her...
9/11 Research at an Engineering Conference...
which was excepted by PEER REVIEW
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/PPT_Presentations.html#JudyWood
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam1.html
Hey CB, is it true Woods was
Hey CB, is it true Woods was in a coma for approx. 6 years? And if so what was it due to trauma, illness, etc.? Have any information at all in that regard?
6 Years is a long time, and remarkable to be able to recover and then attain a PhD...
anyone who "needs" a scientist instead of looking at and
understanding the information themselves, is in a coma
So I guess that means you
So I guess that means you won't answer a simple and direct question... oh well...