|
Scientists: "Unusual Magnetic Forces" Caused
Twin Towers Collapse
On seven year anniversay of 9/11 ludicrous theory is disseminated
|
|
|
One article consisting of five short paragraphs in the London
Independent informs us that on this seventh anniversary of 9/11
all the remaining unanswered questions about the collapse of the
World Trade Center towers can be "explained away".
Yes, that's correct, structural
engineers, scientists, professors, congress members, victims'
families, first responders, intelligence officials and all the
other researchers out there who have poured over
the collapse of the twin towers for the last 2 556.69539 days,
you may all stop reading, put down your pens and turn off your
computers because Sergei Dudarev, of the UK Atomic Energy Agency
has all the answers.
Mr Dudarev can explain why jet fuel fires burning
in isolated pockets for minutes caused two of the world's tallest
steel buildings to completely collapse into their own footprints
at freefall speed, pulverizing concrete and leaving flowing underground
rivers of molten metal lasting for weeks.
And the answer is...
"Unusual magnetic forces"... IDIOTS, how
could you not have worked it out?
Yes, that's correct "Unusual magnetic forces"
or "Umf" for short caused the towers to fall down.
Here is the article
in full:
Scientists can finally explain why the Twin Towers
collapsed on September 11, despite the temperature of the fires
being well below the 1,500C melting point of the steel girders
holding up the buildings.
The discovery that unusual magnetic forces within the girders
made them weak at temperatures of about 500C explains away the
conspiracy theories that have spread like wildfire since the
disaster.
Sergei Dudarev, of the UK Atomic Energy Agency, found that
steel loses its strength above 500C because its molecules undergo
a physical transition from one state to another due to magnetic
fluctuations. "The steel didn't melt, it just became soft.
It is an unusual state and the temperatures in the Twin Towers
were high enough to cause it because the thermal insulation
was knocked off the girders through the impact with the aircraft,"
he said.
"Understanding how materials behave means we can find
the right 'medicine' to make steel stronger at high temperatures...
and if our work can be used for other applications, such as
safeguarding tall buildings against disasters, so much the better,"
he said.
Ahhhhhhhh...
(Article continues below)
If this dismissive excuse for an article were not
so deeply offensive it would be utterly hilarious.
We have previously pointed to the
innumerable number of buildings that have suffered
roaring fires across the majority of their floors for hours and
remained standing. Seemingly the steel beams in these buildings
were not subjected to the same "unusual magnetic forces".
Furthermore, a far more extensive fire occurred
in WTC 1 itself, prior to enhanced fireproofing of the building,
on February
13, 1975. The fire burned at much higher temperatures
for three hours and spread over six
floors, including 65% of the 11th floor and the building
core, yet it caused no significant damage to the steel structure
and no trusses had to be replaced. There were no "unusual
magnetic forces" present on that day.
Early tests conducted on recovered steel beams from
the WTC showed that they generally met or were stronger than design
requirements, ruling them out as a contributing cause of the collapse
of the towers.
Kevin Ryan of Underwriters Laboratories, the company
that certified the steel components used in the construction of
the WTC towers, sent a
letter to Frank Gayle of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) about this.
Ryan wrote:
"As I'm sure you know, the company I work
for certified the steel components used in the construction
of the WTC buildings. In requesting information from both our
CEO and Fire Protection business manager last year, I learned
that they did not agree on the essential aspects of the story,
except for one thing - that the samples we certified met all
requirements. They suggested we all be patient and understand
that UL was working with your team, and that tests would continue
through this year.
I'm aware of UL's attempts to help, including
performing tests on models of the floor assemblies. But the
results of these tests appear to indicate that the buildings
should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools
of burning jet fuel.
Ryan was later fired
for continually questioning the official story of the World Trade
Center collapse.
Furthermore, referring to the collpases, the original
NIST report concluded that "the existing condition of the
fireproofing prior to aircraft impact and the fireproofing thickness
on the WTC floor system did not play a significant role".
Mr Dudarev's declaration that "The steel didn't
melt" is in direct contradiction to the voluminous amounts
of evidence concerning the presence of molten
steel underneath both towers and building seven which
fell later in the day. Steel doesn't begin to melt until it reaches
temperatures of between 1500 and 2000C, and it does not literally
flow like lava until it gets towards 3000C, much hotter than the
temperature jet fuel, or in the case of building seven, office
material fires burn at.
Building Seven itself, which was not hit by a plane,
fell totally into its own footprint in around six seconds after
localized fires burned on a select few floors. Was the building
subject to "unusual magnetic forces"? Not according
to NIST, which states in its latest report that it was the first
steel structure in history to suffer total collapse as a result
of the never before observed "new phenomenon" of "thermal
expansion".
However, the problem many researchers have with
this "new phenomenon", also described by NIST as an
"extraordinary event" that had never happened before
in the history of building collapses, is that it seemed to have
been
roundly predicted by news stations and ground zero
workers a hour or more in advance of it actually occurring.
Proclaiming "unusual magnetic forces",
"extraordinary events" and "new phenomenons"
smacks of a desperate attempt to ventilate the authority of the
official story, when in reality these ludicrous claims, the latest
in a long line of changing explanations and contradictory accounts,
only make the government sanctioned 9/11 account look more
untrustworthy than ever before.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alex
Jones LIVE, A Fourth Hour Now Added To The Infowars Radio Show
For Members
Click here to get your subscription today!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
INFOWARS:
BECAUSE THERE'S A WAR ON FOR YOUR MIND
|
|
