WTC buildings’ destruction unlike what we’ve ever seen before

By Jeff Besant

----

Sept. 11, 2001, changed the world, our country and the City of New York forever. The most important event of this century also changed our understanding of science.

Judy Wood, a highly trained engineer and scientist, has written the most important, honest, compassionate and brave account of these events. Her book, “Where Did the Towers Go,” sets a new standard for courage, thoroughness and intelligence.

This article is based on my understanding of her work. However, I encourage everyone to do their own research. Let the evidence lead to the conclusions and not let the conclusions color the evidence. It is a long-standing scientific principal that we sometimes forget.

It is important that I say this because using models based on Newtonian Mechanics will limit how much we can make use of the information received that day.

Let's start by comparing the official narrative with evidence.

For one, the towers didn't collapse, they turned to dust. The evidence that supports this claim is photographic, seismic and auditory and is contained in the air samples and eyewitness accounts.

Try clapping your hands 110 times in 10 seconds. That is the speed that the towers turned to dust. The official narrative would have us believe that the 110-story towers failed because of the force of gravity in a pancake manner resulting from thermal stresses and mechanical damage to the main structural elements. But in 10 seconds, 500,000 tons of concrete and steel and contents (the mass of one tower) disappeared from New York City's skyline.

Alternative theories have suggested that controlled demolition accelerated the catastrophic failure through use of strategically placed charges.

The problem is that neither model matches the evidence.

The “tell” for me was the dissociation of molecules in building elements as they descended to the ground. Quite literally, and Wood has many examples on her website (drjudywood.com), the concrete floors, steel columns and the aluminum cladding turned to dust as they were falling. Further, it is obvious from the photos that there weren't 110 floors and 500,000 tons of debris on the ground after the dust settled.

I challenge anyone to explain these data using Newtonian Mechanics.

The seismic data supports the photographic evidence. Wood used data from the 2000 destruction of the much lighter, smaller Kingdome in Seattle to compare with the seismic data of 9/11. The comparison reveals something very odd about the destruction of the two 500,000-ton towers and 200,000-ton tower 7 at the World Trade Center: The amplitude of the seismic traces from these three events was much less than would be expected based on the Kingdome data. Where did all that mass go, if it didn't hit the ground?

The air sampling data, taken by the University of California at Davis and the Lawrence Berkeley Labs, revealed very small particles in the aerosol plumes from the WTC debris field. These buildings were turned into micro-particles, much smaller than red blood cells.

Anyone who has worked around gravel quarries or cement plants knows that the dust from crushed rock is not a fine powder that is carried miles into the air. It is coarse and settles very quickly.

It is impossible for me to envision some kind of mechanical device or process that would yield particles of this size.

Readers can find for themselves that Wood's book will change the world. The 500 pages of evidence show that nothing about that day matches our limited understanding of the laws of physics. It means that a technology exists and has been used in a very destructive way, one which is different from anything we have seen before.

Imagine if we used this knowledge in a constructive way.

Jeff Besant, of Vancouver, British Columbia, is a mechanical and electrical engineer with 20 years' consulting experience, as well as author of several published technical articles. Comments: jrbesant@besanteng.ca