New Letter at the Journal of 911 Studies
Kevin Ryan Tue, 11/27/2007 - 8:29pm
We've published a new letter at the Journal of 9/11 Studies. This is an evaluation of the amount of jet fuel available to feed the fires in the WTC towers, with comparisons to more easily understood volumes.
The paper is entitled –
The author wishes to remain anonymous to the public.
Although it is understood that the jet fuel was consumed in only a few minutes, this letter puts the initial quantities involved in perspective.
- Kevin Ryan's blog
- Login to post comments
NB !!
That is a direct link to a PDF-file..
Don't researchers know that PDF is a crappy proprietary file-format ?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Listen carefully now : DO NOT DESTROY OIL-WELLS" Dubya
Some more info on jet fuel
http://nasathermalimages.com/index.php?#%5B%5BJet%20Fuel%5D%5D
Jumbo Jets Can Not Demolish Skyscrapers.
important, not mentioned
20%?
NIST claims that only 20% of the plane's fuel went up in this fireball.
That is absurd on its face.
Secondly, they claim that both towers had a 20% loss of fuel from the explosions, not allowing for any differences in the impacts.
This shows they weren't being serious from the start.
I have a question
I have long wanted to know how the momentum of the impacts affected the flow of the jet fuel. The government says 50% of the remaining jet fuel flowed down the building. This sounds absurd, but I would like someone with expertise to explain this.
When the planes hit, I imagine they had incredible momentum. Wouldn't most of the jet fuel not burned up in the fireball be carried away from the building? Why would 50% of the remaining jet fuel seemingly stop and flow down the building? I realize some of the jet fuel would flow down, but wouldn't the majority of it be carried by the momentum of the plane in the direction of the plane?
Simple and to the point
Thank you Anon.
This is the kind of direct visual aid that can be used by us to illustrate the complex issues of the physics. I understand we must keep science in mind at all times, but I find it uncomfortable to talk physics without understanding the total picture.
I also realize the power of symbols and this paper is one of the first to nail it on the head.
To get the truth out we might have to think out side the box.( or the cubicle or swimming pool)
Not to make light of the situation we face but as an exercise I challenge everyone to submit thier own interpretations of this paper. photos,drawings(origami!). lets see what we can come up with.
Bill Polonsky
http://yukon911truth.com/
"The evidence is there no matter how much you don't want it to be."
That's a Gallon Every 100 Square Feet
Let's grant the writer's point that roughly 3,500 gallons remained on the affected floors of the North Tower. Those eight floors amounted to about 350,000 gross square feet of area. To put it differently, imagine that you poured a gallon of kerosene into every one of those cubicles you see in that picture and lit all of them on fire. You think you might have a pretty good blaze going? And as pointed out by another commenter, in actuality it's worse than that, because a large part of everything on those floors of the North tower including the cubicles and the jet fuel is packed towards the south end of the building.
since when
do office fires make steel buildings explode from top down?
http://nasathermalimages.com/#%5B%5BBuilding%20Fires%5D%5D
http://nasathermalimages.com/#%5B%5BWorld%20Trade%20Center%20Demolition%...
Jumbo Jets Can Not Demolish Skyscrapers.