The buildings exploded!

They turned to dust

___________________________________________________________
Please watch my movie: The Third Tower

I recommend:

Solving The Great Steel Caper: DEW-Demolition Contrary Evidence
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2007/Fe-DustStudies44.pdf

"We know from bulk dust sample studies that most of the dust which was collected on the ground was of the very coarse variety."

"The steel simply fell to the ground in large pieces during the collapse. More than 50% of the debris generated from the collapse of the towers was located in the 6 sublevels directly beneath the towers as revealed by photographs of debris removal and corroborated by damage assessment schematics produced by the Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers. The expected amount of steel removed from GZ is affirmed by the reported minimum of 350,000 tons of steel removed from GZ to landfills and recycle centers as well as the total number of truck loads (over 100,000) and barges (over 1900) which transported 1.6 million tons of material, from GZ."

I didn't mean that literally, take it easy.

___________________________________________________________
Please watch my movie: The Third Tower

sounded like a derailed freight train, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom!

The noise associated with an implosion

Gunfire and three big explosions

___________________________________________________________
Please watch my movie: The Third Tower

are accurate. The words "pancake" and "collapse" are deliberately misleading disinformation; terms repeated by the media puppets and the criminals.

MrEguy

I agree with pulverized, etc. The other problem with how the public or media view the WTC disintegration is that the blue prints released right after 9/11 were intentionally inaccurate. I just had a discussion with two very intelligent people, one who worked at the WTC, but was not there at the event. They both were under the impression that the building was unlike any other skyscraper - were not aware of the core columns hidden from view in the elevator shafts. The public is still in the dark about the building structure and what is or is not possible to cause the crumbling. They still think it's possible a plane could cause damage. To my knowledge no newspaper printed the corrected blue prints. Truthers forget there's no real information before the public.

yes, true, TruthNow, the building structures and their contents were pulverized...

Pulverized insinuates being hammered to bits and dust. Hammering is too closely associated with the pancake collapse, each floor hammering the one below. No to "pulverized." The colossal and fortified buildings exploded and were reduced to dust.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Pulverized

pul·ver·ize /ˈpʌlvəˌraɪz/ Pronunciation Key - [puhl-vuh-rahyz]
1. to reduce to dust or powder, as by pounding or grinding.
2. to demolish or crush completely.

MrEguy

"The World Trace Center Demolition"

Jumbo Jets Can Not Demolish Skyscrapers.

I agree.
That's a great vid - does seem a bit weird it's still under 1000 clicks. I saw it long ago.
Should be called ' NIST Snake Oil Salesman'
(At least he looked a bit stressed out. Reality's a bitch.)

--
Truth Revolution: The Eleventh of Every Month

NIST Engineer, John Gross, Denies Reports About Molten Steel at the WTC
http://www.911blogger.com/node/6104

Not sure if the count has been messed with, though.

NIST: "We are Unable to Provide a Full Explanation of the Total Collapse"

20 million in taxpayer dollars for THAT?!?!

I want my money back!!

____________________
"If I had just paid $20 million for the NIST report, I'd be asking for a refund!... The trouble with the NIST Report is that it isn’t even science because it's not capable of being verified or negated!" -Dr. Frank Greening

I can't tell from here (and from the location on YouTube) when John Gross gave this talk. (Though it's mentioned that it was in Texas.)

Does anybody know when? I ask because I wonder if it was before so much contradicting evidence had been collected and disseminated. For him to make such public remarks in the last year or two makes him look patently mendacious.

Long after "contradicting evidence had been collected and disseminated".

More info here: http://ut-pnac.blogspot.com/2007/02/upcoming-meeting-john-gross-of-nist-...

And for posterity's sake: below is a list of some of the numerous reports concerning the molten steel/metal at Ground Zero:

The head of a team of scientists studying the potential health effects of 9/11, reported, "Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel."
http://www.jhsph.edu/Publications/Special/Welch.htm

As late as five months after the attacks, in February 2002, firefighter Joe O'Toole saw a steel beam being lifted from deep underground at Ground Zero, which, he says, "was dripping from the molten steel."
http://www.fallenbrothers.com/community/showthread.php?p=2948#post2948

The structural engineer responsible for the design of the WTC, described fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 days after the attacks.
http://www.seau.org/SEAUNews-2001-10.pdf

"These reports came from two men involved in the removal of the rubble: Peter Tully of Tully Construction of Flushing, N.Y., and Mark Loizeaux of Controlled Demolition, Inc. of Phoenix, Md.
Tully told AFP that he had seen pools of “literally molten steel” in the rubble.
Loizeaux confirmed this: “Yes, hot spots of molten steel in the basements,” he said, “at the bottom of the elevator shafts of the main towers, down seven levels.”
The molten steel was found “three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed,” he said. He confirmed that molten steel was also found at WTC 7 [...]"
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/cutter_charges_brought_down_wt.htm...

A public health advisor who arrived at Ground Zero on September 12, said that "feeling the heat" and "seeing the molten steel" there reminded him of a volcano.
http://www.neha.org/9-11%20report/index-The.html

New York firefighters recalled in a documentary film, "heat so intense they encountered rivers of molten steel."
http://www.nypost.com/movies/19574.htm

According to a worker involved with the organizing of demolition, excavation and debris removal operations at ground zero, "Underground it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from Building 6."
http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/congress/9-11_commission/

An expert stated about World Trade Center building 7, "A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been PARTLY EVAPORATED in extraordinarily high temperatures" (pay-per-view).
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10812FF3F590C7A8EDDA809...

Note that evaporation means conversion from a liquid to a gas; so the steel beams in building 7 were subjected to temperatures high enough to melt and evaporate them.
http://www.answers.com/evaporation&r=67

An employee of New Jersey's Task Force One Urban Search and Rescue witnessed "Fires burning and molten steel flowing in the pile of ruins still settling beneath her feet."
http://www.sas.upenn.edu/sasalum/newsltr/summer2002/k911.html

A reporter with rare access to the debris at ground zero "descended deep below street level to areas where underground fires still burned and steel flowed in molten streams."
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/07/77nwash.htm

The same journalist also refers to "the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole." (pages 31-32)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0002E5QKI/qid=1133995198/sr=1-5/ref=sr...

An engineer stated in the September 3, 2002 issue of The Structural Engineer, "They showed us many fascinating slides ranging from molten metal, which was still red hot weeks after the event."
LINK (pdf)
http://web.archive.org/web/20030422113455/http://www.istructe.org.uk/abo...

An Occupational Safety and Health Administration Officer at the Trade Center reported a fire truck 10 feet below the ground that was still burning two weeks after the Tower collapsed, "its metal so hot that it looked like a vat of molten steel."
http://www.thenewliberator.com/wethepeople.htm

According to a member of New York Air National Guard's 109th Air Wing, who was at Ground Zero from September 22 to October 6, "One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots."
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3731/is_200112/ai_n9015802

A fireman stated that there were "oven" like conditions at the trade centers six weeks after 9/11.
http://plaguepuppy.net/public_html/video%20archive/red_hot_ground_zero_l...

Firemen and hazardous materials experts also stated that, six weeks after 9/11, "There are pieces of steel being pulled out [from as far as six stories underground] that are still cherry red" and "the blaze is so 'far beyond a normal fire' that it is nearly impossible to draw conclusions about it based on other fires." (pay-per-view)
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nydailynews/87451160.html?did=87451160&FMT=A...

A NY Department of Sanitation spokeswoman said "for about two and a half months after the attacks, in addition to its regular duties, NYDS played a major role in debris removal - everything from molten steel beams to human remains...."
http://wasteage.com/mag/waste_dday_ny_sanitation/

Indeed, the trade center fire was "the longest-burning structural fire in history",
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1634

even though it rained heavily on September 14, 2001
http://www.courttv.com/assault_on_america/0914_rain_ap.html

and again on September 21, 2001,
http://www.wnbc.com/news/962722/detail.html

and the fires were sprayed with high tech fire-retardands,
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1634

and "firetrucks [sprayed] a nearly constant jet of water on" ground zero."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/12/19/archive/main321907.shtml

Indeed, "You couldn't even begin to imagine how much water was pumped in there," said Tom Manley of the Uniformed Firefighters Association, the largest fire department union. "It was like you were creating a giant lake."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/12/19/archive/main321907.shtml

Most all 9/11 researchers have no funding whatsoever, and could easily find the numerous reports of molten steel reported at Ground Zero using their computer and a search engine. The NIST was funded 20 million for their investigation and couldn't find ONE report about the molten steel (according to John Gross)???

Once again, here are the words of John Gross, one of the NIST's lead engineers, denying there were reports of molten steel...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7180303712325092501

Dr. Frank Greening, a scientist who has recently become very critical of the NIST report, has gone on record several times to say that he believes molten steel was present at Ground Zero:

"There is some crucial scientific evidence for the presence of molten iron or steel in the pulverized remains of WTC 1 & 2"
"I am referring to the observation of micron-sized iron spherules that have been seen in many WTC dust samples. These spherical particles are direct physical evidence that the iron within the particle was molten at the time the particle formed."
"The formation of spherical iron particles has been well documented and researched for steel making processes... Iron spheres in the 30 micron to 1 micron range are typically seen in the dust-laden off-gases produced by molten steel and are believed to be formed by the ejection of metal droplets when the liquid metal degasses."
"...some steel appears to have melted in the WTC prior to the collapse of the buildings."
"Iron spherules and elevated levels of airborne ZINC prove there was molten iron/steel in the WTC."
"This implies that some iron or steel in the twin towers was exposed to temperatures ABOVE 1539 deg C. Such temperatures are much too high for hydrocarbon fires in the twin towers according to NIST's own studies."
"I would say that the presence of molten iron in the WTC is inconsistent with the NIST Report’s conclusion that temperatures in the towers during 9/11 were well below the melting point of iron or steel."
"NIST, in its fire simulations, tried very hard to get steel (>95 % iron) to temperatures above 1000 deg C but failed!"
"How did the fires in the rubble pile melt steel?"

-Dr. Frank Greening, originally posted at Physorg.com March/April 2007 as forum member "NEU-FONZE", and as "Apollo20" at Forums.Randi.org, April 2007

Frank Greening's Bio:
http://www.911myths.com/html/dr_frank_greening_bio.html

Here are just some of Dr. Greening's remarks and criticisms concerning the NIST investigation into why the WTC fell down on 9/11/01:

"I have a personal e-mail FROM A VERY RESPECTED PROFFESOR OF ENGINEERING at an AMERICAN UNIVERSITY in which he notes that his attempts to publish his research into the collapse of WTC 1 & 2 in US and British journals has been blocked.
This means work disputing NIST's findings is nowhere to be found because it is simply being censored by over-cautious editors!"
-Dr. Frank Greeing, posted at Physorg.com as forum member "NEU-FONZE", Mar 20 2007 - 9/11 Events - part 3, pg. 91

"NIST has no PROOF that fire insulation was stripped by the aircraft impacts in the critical areas ABOVE the impact zones. In fact it is highly UNLIKELY that this happened, and without the loss of thermal insulation, NIST's collapse theory falls apart.
The loss of thermal insulation idea is obviously an ad hoc hypothesis added by NIST to salvage a failed collapse theory"
-Dr. Frank Greening, posted at Physorg.com as forum member "NEU-FONZE", Mar 20 2007 - 9/11 Events - part 3, pg. 92

"The truth about 9/11 is too important to declare the matter closed just because NIST have written a book or two on it.
NIST themselves call their version of the truth an HYPOTHESIS. Does that preclude the consideration of other hypotheses?
Is it the NIST apologists' plan to keep up the nay-saying until they silence any dissenting voices and declare: "CASE CLOSED!"
Well, sorry to tell you, it won't work!"
-Dr. Frank Greening, posted at Physorg.com as forum member "NEU-FONZE", Mar 20 2007 - 9/11 Events - part 3, pg.102

____________________
"If I had just paid $20 million for the NIST report, I'd be asking for a refund!... The trouble with the NIST Report is that it isn’t even science because it's not capable of being verified or negated!" -Dr. Frank Greening