Recycled Steel

From 911myths
Revision as of 14:31, 3 March 2011 by Mike (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

We've often read that investigators were prevented from examining structural steel from the World Trade Centre site, with it being shipped off to be melted down before such analysis could be done. Often cited are the following sources:


In these cases first one must examine the sources themselves. The article by Bill Manning doesn’t infer no one examined the steel. The second quote by Dr. Astenah-Asl seems pretty compelling, but it’s not the entire truth. His testimony provides much more detail with regard to his examination of the debris as well as the activities of others:


As we can see, Dr. Astenah-Asl notes his examination started in a little over a week, and the others had done so much sooner. In fact, The Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEAoNY) was on the scene the following day:


The 3rd quote is very misleading. According to Astenah-Asl, SEAoNY was on the scene investigating & collecting evidence. As we saw they were there since the day after the attacks. There is no evidence recycling or debris removal began before their arrival; and even if it had, it's hard to believe that all the evidence of what would be the largest controlled demolition in history could have been removed before their arrival.

What the larger context of the quote says is:


What is apparent then is that there were investigators there already, just not BPAT at the time. In fact, earlier in the hearings it is noted that, “Among the first [to arrive] were National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded social scientists and engineers[…]at the WTC site within 48 to 72 hours after the tragedy to begin collecting data.” So within the first few days SEAoNY & the NSF were present during clean-up inspecting debris and the site.

But what can conclusions can be drawn? 1. Investigators within a relative short period of time arrived and none have come forward saying they saw signs of controlled demolition or exotic incendiaries. 2. That yes recycling began probably prematurely, but given that debris was still being removed into Spring of 2002 there is no reason to believe all the signs of an “inside job” could have been purged under their noses.

http://www.glasssteelandstone.com/BuildingDetail/442.php

Let’s leave this subject with the words of Dr. Gene Corley, speaking on behalf of the American Society of Civil Engineers: