Pitanja u vezi famoznog 9-11 napada

Re: Pitanja u vezi famoznog 9-11 napada

Postby tomy on 22 Jun 2014, 10:22

pročačajte malo bolje po netu a i prilikom posjete tamo od pred 2 godine razgovaral sam igrom slučaja s ljudima koji su bili dio tog dogadjaja.
do rušenja tornjeva je došlo zbog taljenja aluminija i u kombinaciji sa vodom iz prskalica namjenjenih za gašenje požara ( namontitranih 2 ili 4 godine prije 9/11) na određenoj temperaturi dolazi do nevjerovatne explozije. to su potvrdili vodeći svjetski fizičari i kemičari... nemem vremena tražiti ali imam skinuti cjeli članak o tome.... [pusac.gif] [smly_s030smly.gif]
User avatar
tomy
Elitni forumaš
Elitni forumaš
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: 23 Nov 2009, 13:32
Location: kilometrima ispod planina...

Re: Pitanja u vezi famoznog 9-11 napada

Postby FirewireHR on 22 Jun 2014, 11:01

Do sada nisam čuo za tu teoriju.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 074747.htm
According to a theory advanced by a SINTEF materials scientist, a mixture of water from sprinkler systems and molten aluminium from melted aircraft hulls created explosions that led to the collapse of the Twin Towers in Manhattan.

Just before the two New York skyscrapers collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001, powerful explosions within the building could be heard, leading many people to believe that overheated steel beams in the building were not the cause of the collapse.

The explosions fed the conspiracy theories that someone had placed explosives inside the towers.

At an international materials technology conference in San Diego, the audience heard senior scientist Christian Simensen of SINTEF Materials and Chemistry present an alternative theory based on the physics of materials of what happened in the towers when they were attacked by the aircraft. The SINTEF researcher believes that his theory is much more likely to reflect the actual situation than the official explanation of the collapse.

In the wake of the conference Simensen had an article published in the journal Aluminium International Today, describing his theory.

Explosive meeting of molten aluminium and water

Simensen believes that it is overwhelmingly likely that the two aircraft were trapped inside an insulating layer of building debris within the skyscrapers. This leads him to believe that it was the aircraft hulls rather than the buildings themselves that absorbed most of the heat from the burning aircraft fuel.

The SINTEF scientist believes that the heat melted the aluminium of the aircraft hulls, and the core of his theory is that molten aluminium then found its way downwards within the buildings through staircases and gaps in the floor -- and that the flowing aluminium underwent a chemical reaction with water from the sprinklers in the floors below.

"Both scientific experiments and 250 reported disasters suffered by the aluminium industry have shown that the combination of molten aluminium and water releases enormous explosions," says Simensen.

"Explosions demolished the towers"

Simensen continues: "I regard it as extremely likely that it was these explosions that made the skyscrapers collapse by tearing out part of the internal structure, and that this caused the uppermost floors of the buildings to fall and crush the lower parts. In other words, I believe that these were the explosions that were heard by people in the vicinity and that have since given life to the conspiracy theories that explosives had been placed in the skyscrapers."

Practical use

"Could your theory be used to protect human life and material values if other skyscrapers are ever hit by large aircraft?"

"Yes, as a matter of fact it could. One lesson is that we could develop means of rapidly emptying sprinkler systems in the floors under the point of impact. Another possibility would be to fire in a rocket carrying a fire-retardant that would overlie the aircraft body and prevent the metal alloy from becoming overheated."

Day of unreality

It was in the morning New York time on September 11, 2001, when two Boeing 767 passenger planes flew into the World Trade Center's "Twin Towers" in Manhattan in New York. One hour later, WTC2 collapsed, followed after half an hour by WTC1.

Neighbouring buildings were bombarded by flying debris when the towers collapsed. The 47-storey skyscraper called 7 World Trade Center also caught fire and collapsed several hours later at 17.20.

30 tonnes of aluminium

The official report on the causes of the collapse of the three buildings was drawn up by a commission appointed by the federal government and has since been supported by other publications. The report came to the conclusion that the collapse was caused by heating and failure of structural steel beams in the centre of the buildings.

"I believe that it is overwhelmingly probable that the theories regarding the cause of the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2 are wrong, but that the report very likely came to the correct conclusion as regards WTC7," says Simensen.

"Why should we believe your alternative theory rather than the official explanation?"

"To put it as succinctly as possible: because the federal government commission did not take sufficiently into account the fact that the aircraft brought 30 tonnes of aluminium into each of the two towers."

The collision

"What sort of evidence do you have for the theory that you are putting forward?"

"I base my theory on comparisons I have made with parallel observable phenomena in the world of physics. Let us start with what I think must have happened when the planes struck the two towers. They came in at high speed and at a low angle. The only similar phenomenon that we have any knowledge of is meteors that hit the Earth. What we know is that these drag material with them on their way through the soil layer. The whole surface, including all its pores, is covered by the material that they carry along. The innermost layer melts and turns into a glass coating on the surface of the meteor."

"I believe that similarly, the aircraft must have been covered by fragments of internal walls, ceilings and floors that collapsed around them and that the planes carried along with them as they penetrated the buildings. Much of this material was plaster, a material with extremely poor heat conduction capacity. All this debris probably formed a shield that kept the heat close to the aircraft and protected the rest of the building."

The fire

"So you believe that it was the aircraft themselves that became superheated, rather than the buildings?

"Yes I do. The disintegrated aircraft probably came to a stop near the centre of the buildings. The materials along the track of the collision must also have burned. But the really hot zone was where the aircraft came to a stop. I believe that some of the aircraft's fuel tanks must have suffered major damage, but that most of them would have been cut in two when they met the steel beams in the buildings, and that the development of the fire was therefore fairly constant."

"I believe that the planes must have been lying in a sort of basin of material debris, with the floor of the basin two or three storeys below the one that they ploughed into. The entire internal basin must have been heated by the burning fuel. Outside of the basin, the temperature would have been much lower."

"The aluminium alloy of the aircraft hulls, which also contains magnesium, melts at a temperature of 660o C. Experience gained from the aluminium industry suggests that it may have taken between half and three-quarters of an hour to reach such a temperature. If molten aluminium is heated further to a temperature of 750o C, it becomes just as liquid as water. I presume that this is what happened within the Twin Towers, and that the molten aluminium then began to run down into the floors below."

The explosions

"What happened then?"

"All the floors in the Twin Towers were equipped with sprinkler systems. All the water above the hot aircraft bodies must have turned to steam. If my theory is correct, tonnes of aluminium ran down through the towers, where the smelt came into contact with a few hundred litres of water. From other disasters and experiments carried out by the aluminium industry, we know that reactions of this sort lead to violent explosions."

"The aluminium would immediately react with the water, with the result of a local rise on temperature of several hundred degrees, in addition to the explosions that were due to the fact that these reactions release hydrogen. Such reactions are particularly powerful when rust or other catalysts are present, which can raise the temperature to more than 1500o C."

"The aluminium industry has reported more than 250 aluminium-water explosions since 1980. Alcoa Aluminium carried out an experiment under controlled conditions, in which 20 kilos of aluminium smelt were allowed to react with 20 kilos of water, to which some rust was added. The explosion destroyed the entire laboratory and left a crater 30 metres in diameter."

"Many people in New York reported that they had heard explosions just before the buildings collapsed. Film taken of the buildings also showed explosions in the floor below the impacts. Given that the amount of aluminium involved was large in comparison with the quantity of water, and since rust was probably also present, I believe that it is highly likely that the building collapsed as a result of a series of extremely energy-rich aluminium-water explosions."

The collapse

"How could explosions in the centre of a building cause a whole tower to collapse?"

"Aluminium-water explosions are like dynamite explosions. They were probably powerful enough to blow out an entire section of each building. The top section would than fall down on top of the sections that remained below, and the sheer weight of the top floors would be enough to crush the lower part of the building."

The neighbouring building

"What happened in the case of the neighbouring WTC7 building?"

"WTC1 and WTC2 took huge amounts of aviation fuel, fragments of steel and, if my theory is correct, large quantities of molten aluminium when they collapsed. When these materials and everything else fell some three or four hundred metres to the ground, they were squeezed between the upper and lower sections of the towers. This led to the neighbouring buildings being bombarded by hot particles, fuel and probably also aluminium droplets. Both large and small clumps of particles have since been found embedded in the walls of these buildings."

"WTC7 may have taken more of these impacts than the other buildings. At any rate, the building caught fire, which got out of control. In this case, the structural steel may have reached a temperature of more than 1000o C, over seven hours, and the 13th floor collapsed in the course of a minute. In this case I do agree with the findings of the federal commission. Overheating of steel beams was probably the cause of the collapse."

The way ahead

"Would it be possible to perform scientific experiments that can support your theory?"

"It would certainly be possible to look specifically for solidified droplets of aluminium and aluminium oxide in the walls of the neighbouring buildings. Experiments could also be carried out to find out whether fuel tanks are cut cleanly when they plough through a network of steel beams at a speed of 800 kilometres an hour. We could also test on model scale whether an object that ploughs through a room at extremely high speed becomes covered in debris from collapsed walls, ceilings and floors."
[smly_c040smly.gif]
User avatar
FirewireHR
Veteran foruma
Veteran foruma
 
Posts: 5785
Joined: 29 Mar 2008, 15:43

Re: Pitanja u vezi famoznog 9-11 napada

Postby Riker on 19 Sep 2014, 17:01

to nije bio putnički avion! :D

ima brdo videa sa ekipom taman nakon prvog sudara, gdje masu ljudi kaže da je crn avion i kažu military i kažu da nije putnički, da nije imao prozore.

http://i4.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article ... towers.jpg

Image

Image

Image

Image

[smly_mudri_djed.gif]
Od izvora 2 putića
User avatar
Riker
Elitni forumaš
Elitni forumaš
 
Posts: 754
Joined: 27 Jun 2008, 14:40
Location: Istria

Re: Pitanja u vezi famoznog 9-11 napada

Postby tomy on 21 Sep 2014, 12:02

to su gluposti i namještaljke... ako nije bio putnički i nije imao prozore kako onda su mogli pronači djelove avionskog trupa sa prozorima i negdje sam pročital da je čak ostalo i par prozora cijelih ( nevjerovatno ali slike koje sam videl dokazuju da je tako) - u ostacima oba dva tornja su to pronašli... a i pronađeno je dosta izgorijelih sjedala i svega...

po meni ima previše teorije zavjere koje se do sada ni jedna nisu uspijele dokazati nekim pravim dokazom... [smly_s030smly.gif]
User avatar
tomy
Elitni forumaš
Elitni forumaš
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: 23 Nov 2009, 13:32
Location: kilometrima ispod planina...

Project Hermit

Postby FirewireHR on 25 Nov 2015, 11:28

Evo jedan očito friško deklasificirani materijal koji će doliti ulje na vatru teoretičarima zavjere glede rušenja blizanaca i ostalih 9/11 događanja u smislu demostracije tehnologije koja je bila dostupna prije 70 godina, a neobično podsjeća na 9/11 događanja. :modo [plaza] [luda2]
Video je od jučer na YTube-u, a pokazuje korištenje stvarnih aviona (prekrcanih kerozinom) za uništavanje teško fortificiranih objekata kakve su Japanci koristili na Pacifiku tokom WW2.
Kvaka je u detalju da su avioni bez posade i upravljani su daljinskom radiokontrolom.

[smly_c040smly.gif]
User avatar
FirewireHR
Veteran foruma
Veteran foruma
 
Posts: 5785
Joined: 29 Mar 2008, 15:43

Re: Pitanja u vezi famoznog 9-11 napada

Postby blake on 25 Nov 2015, 15:22

Moj engleski nije baš tako sjajan...
Koliki je efekt ovakvog zalijetanja u teško utvrdjeni i ukopani objekt, obzirom da je avionska konstrukcija relativno lagana, i da se eksplozija goriva odvija uglavnom na površini i u kratkom vremenu? Da ih dim potuši u rupi?
Inače, upravljanje pomoću optičkog nadzora i radio-komandiranja letom je superkoordiniran!
I jel se to avion starta s motorima na punom gasu?
User avatar
blake
Aktivni forumaš
Aktivni forumaš
 
Posts: 547
Joined: 19 Apr 2008, 16:54

Re: Pitanja u vezi famoznog 9-11 napada

Postby FirewireHR on 26 Nov 2015, 10:22

blake wrote:Moj engleski nije baš tako sjajan...
Koliki je efekt ovakvog zalijetanja u teško utvrdjeni i ukopani objekt, obzirom da je avionska konstrukcija relativno lagana, i da se eksplozija goriva odvija uglavnom na površini i u kratkom vremenu? Da ih dim potuši u rupi?
Inače, upravljanje pomoću optičkog nadzora i radio-komandiranja letom je superkoordiniran!
I jel se to avion starta s motorima na punom gasu?

Kažu da je napunjen gorivom za ovaj test zbog manjeg rizika. Inače su valjda za stvarne situacije planirali koristiti eksploziv.
Glede gasa u snimci se vidi da u avionu postoji cijeli komplet hardvera koji manipulira komandama + radio veza...mada vidi se u snimci da pilot blokira ručicu kasa do maksimuma.
Tu pak mi je malo vjerovatno da bi onda morao odtrčati do kraja trupa i izaći van prije nego ovaj krene(?)

Djadjo wrote:ima jedna činjenica....a koja kaze da ni jedan židov nije poginuo tada.

Takav zaključak možeš izvesti ako nekritički prihvaćaš tvrdnje teoretičara zavjere kojih za ovaj slučaj ima masa + masa mockumentary video uradaka.
Mada istina za ova događanja ima mnogo detalja koji dovode u sumnje službenu verziju događanja i da su neboderi srušeni kontroliranom eksplozijom...dovoljno je pogledati snimke rušenja i već kao laiku ispada da nešto ne štima.
Glede Židova kao žrtava brojke kažu da ih je 18%.
https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comme ... er_on_911/
“Through today’s issue, The Times has published more than 1,800 sketches. The official count of those dead and missing in the trade center attacks stands at 2,937. Reporters have contacted, or tried to contact, relatives or friends of nearly every victim the paper was able to locate. Some have declined to give interviews; others said they were not ready to talk. (As more names become known and more families agree to interviews, the editors intend to publish additional profile pages from time to time.)”

The New York Times did not continue to add additional profiles to this series.
The New York Times series is searchable.
In order to determine how many Jewish victims appeared on the list of 1,800, I used the following search terms: Jew, Jewish, Temple, Synagogue, Israel and Mitzvah.
I then examined the resulting list of names and removed individuals who had been identified as Jewish in error.
I then search the list for the following terms: Catholic, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu and Muslim.
250 named victims resulted from using my search terms, i.e. 250 victims out of 1800 can be identified by religious affiliation.
18% of the named victims were Jewish.
82% of the named victims were not Jewish
.
If we multiply 1800 by .18, we find that 324 of the listed in the New York Times were probably Jewish.
This partially confirms the information provided by the United States Department of State.
“A total of 2,071 occupants of the World Trade Center died on September 11, among the 2,749 victims of the WTC attacks. According to an article in the October 11, 2001, Wall Street Journal, roughly 1,700 people had listed the religion of a person missing in the WTC attacks; approximately 10% were Jewish. A later article, in the September 5, 2002, Jewish Week, states, “based on the list of names, biographical information compiled by The New York Times, and information from records at the Medical Examiner’s Office, there were at least 400 victims either confirmed or strongly believed to be Jewish.” This would be approximately 15% of the total victims of the WTC attacks. A partial list of 390 Cantor Fitzgerald employees who died (out of 658 in the company) lists 49 Jewish memorial services, which is between 12% and 13%.”

http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2 ... 60933.html

My research indicates that it is unlikely that American Jews in general were warned beforehand.
[smly_c040smly.gif]
User avatar
FirewireHR
Veteran foruma
Veteran foruma
 
Posts: 5785
Joined: 29 Mar 2008, 15:43

Re: Pitanja u vezi famoznog 9-11 napada

Postby blake on 27 Nov 2015, 12:24

Hvala. :hi
User avatar
blake
Aktivni forumaš
Aktivni forumaš
 
Posts: 547
Joined: 19 Apr 2008, 16:54

Re: Pitanja u vezi famoznog 9-11 napada

Postby oldtimer on 27 Nov 2015, 13:52

Zanimljivo...koliko stvari sam vidio u vezi s WW 2, a ovo nikad
Nisam najbolje razumio zašto dvojica gledaju u dalekozor u isto vrijeme
oldtimer
Aktivni forumaš
Aktivni forumaš
 
Posts: 202
Joined: 30 Jul 2009, 09:06

Re: Pitanja u vezi famoznog 9-11 napada

Postby Flashback 505 on 28 Nov 2015, 09:02

The technology shown in the film ended up adopted into Project Aphrodite (also known as Operation Aphrodite), where war-weary aircraft including B-17s and B-24s were modified with radio controls, and in some cases television cameras, and then stuffed with high explosives. They were then flown into targets in Occupied France and Europe with mixed results. The U.S. Navy also developed pilotless aircraft including the TDR-1 Torpedo Drone, which used a TV camera system for visual guidance. The Navy's counterpart to Aphrodite, known as Operation Anvil, also proved unsuccessful and was cancelled after only two missions. Famously, the first mission resulted in the death of Lt. Joseph Kennedy, Jr., the brother of future President John F. Kennedy, as well as his co-pilot Bud Wiley.
Image Ako želite posjetiti aerodrom Željava i okolicu, obratite pažnju na OVE PODATKE
Flashback 505
Aktivni forumaš
Aktivni forumaš
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 17 May 2008, 09:10

Re: Pitanja u vezi famoznog 9-11 napada

Postby FirewireHR on 28 Nov 2015, 12:31

oldtimer wrote:Zanimljivo...koliko stvari sam vidio u vezi s WW 2, a ovo nikad
Nisam najbolje razumio zašto dvojica gledaju u dalekozor u isto vrijeme

Koliko sam skužio postoje 2 zemaljske stanice sa svojim setom kontrola te optikom kojom prate unaprijed definiranu putanju leta.
1. stanica se nalazi 2 milje sa lijeve ili desne strane putanje leta i kontrolira visinu leta (gore-dole) te snagu motora.
2. stanica se nalazi točno ispod putanje leta 3 milje od cilja i preko nje se kontrolira smjer lijevo-desno.
Operateri ako dobro odrade posao dobiju to da im se križić na optikama tj.avion susretne na cilju i imaju precizni pogodak.
[smly_c040smly.gif]
User avatar
FirewireHR
Veteran foruma
Veteran foruma
 
Posts: 5785
Joined: 29 Mar 2008, 15:43

Previous

Return to Zrakoplovstvo

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron