911-WTC and Kingdome

 WTC and Kingdome 
 http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam2.html

Careful data on the Kingdome demolition on March 26, 2000 are available. They allow us to estimate what the earthquake-equivalent impact of the Twin Tower destruction should have been. The Kingdome data are pre-9/11 and unlikely to be politically corrupted.

Bedrock conditions are important in affecting earthquake-equivalent (Richter) readings. If a structure is anchored directly to bedrock, its demolition will yield a higher Richter than if it were not anchored in bedrock. Why? Because if not anchored to bedrock, the energy released by demolition is dissipated via the earth "cushioning" materials. If anchored to bedrock, the released energy directly impacts bedrock, "pinging" the earth directly without any dampening, allowing the signal to carry better to recording stations. It would be like hitting your mattress with a hammer versus hitting a tuning fork. Which one carries a stronger signal to its base?

The Kingdome was not anchored in bedrock. If the Kingdome Richter value was a 2.3 reading transferred through soft material, a building with 30x the potential energy anchored directly in bedrock should have transferred a much higher signal to earthquake monitoring instruments. Amazingly, the south tower reading of 2.1 was lower than the Kingdome’s 2.3 despite the tower having 30x the potential energy and being anchored in bedrock. The difference in these Richter readings imply the Tower had only 60% of the potential energy of the Kingdome instead of the real range of 3,000%, an absurd implication. And the fact that the Towers were anchored in bedrock means that the energy release should have rung through to recording instruments loud and clear.

	WTC	Kingdome
steel (tons)	100,000	-
concrete (yd3)	-	-
windows	-	-
electric cables (miles)	6,000	-
heating ducts (miles)	198
floors	110	-
base dimensions (feet)	208 by 208	-
base (ft2)
Weight (tons)	500,000	130,000
elevators	103
Height (ft)	1362, 1368	250
Source

---

---

(See Appendix A for data and data sources.)

• WTC: 

_______________________________________

Opening - Termination dates (WTC1: Dec. 1970-Sept.2001) (WTC2: Jan. 1972-Sept.2001) World Trade Center Statistics: 200,000 tons of steel 425,000 cubic yards of concrete 43,600 windows 12,000 miles of electric cables Had its own zip code, 10048 Each Tower: Had 110 floors 208 ft by 208 ft at base Weight of 500,000 tons 1,368 ft high (north tower) 1,362 ft high (south tower) Contained 198 miles of heating ducts 97 elevators for passengers, 6 for freight

Source

Note: 425,000 yd³ x 3³ (ft³/yd³)x (110)lb/ft³ x (ton/2,000 lbs)= 631,125 tons
Assuming this value is for both towers, one tower would be 316,000 tons.

• KINGDOME: 

(March 27, 1976 - March 26, 2000)

(See Appendix A for data and data sources.)
__________________________________________________

Height of Dome: 250 ft. to apex; Height of Cylinder: 133 ft., 6 in. to top ring Diameter of dome: 660 ft., inner diameter

Source

__________________________________________________

DIMENSIONS: Site: 23.9 acres (includes building and one parking lot). Building area: 9.34 acres. Roof area: 7.85 acres. Height: 250 feet. Diameter: 660 feet (inside wall); 720 feet (encompassing outside ramps). Volume: 67 million cubic feet within outside columns. Exhibit space: 190,400 square feet (Arena & 100 level concourse).. Structural steel: 443 tons. Concrete: 52,800 cubic yards.

Source

__________________________________________________

Building area: 9.34 acres Roof area: 7.85 acres Height: 250 feet Diameter: 660 feet (inside wall) 720 feet (exterior walls) Volume: 67 million cubic feet Exhibit space: 190,400 square feet Weight: 130,000 tons Structural steel: 443 tons Concrete: 52,800 cubic yards

Source

Check:
Note: 52,800 yd³ x 3³ (ft³/yd³)x (152)lb/ft³ x (ton/2,000 lbs)= 108,346 tons
108,346 tons + 443 tons = 109,000 tons
__________________________________________________

From the Seattle Times Dust choked downtown for nearly 20 minutes, blocking out the sun and leaving a layer of film on cars, streets and storefronts. The dust cloud reached nearly as high as the top of the Bank of America Tower and drifted northwest about 8 miles an hour. ---(snip)--- Carefully placed explosives - 4,461 pounds in all - collapsed the 25,000-ton roof like a cake taken out of the oven too soon. More than 21 miles of detonating cord exploded in a flash. The Dome's roof ribs and columns looked like they had been electrified with lightning. Rapid puffs of smoke followed, and the massive roof ribs that formed the Dome's 20 arches buckled first in three pie-shaped wedges. Then came the remaining three roof wedges, followed instantly by explosions in the support columns and in the roof's tension ring, which had held the roof together by exerting 8 million pounds of force around its base. While nearly all of the Dome, which once weighed about 130,000 tons, collapsed in on its own "footprint," chunks of concrete flew onto rooftops. The force of the blasts broke windows at the Salvation Army and Turner Construction buildings on Fourth Avenue South, and at F.X. McRory's steakhouse on South King Street. Residents of the nearby Florentine Condominiums had been taken to the restaurant earlier that morning, but no one was injured. A small army of street sweepers went into action moments after the blast. Businesses around the Dome were quick to reopen, with little damage reported. Engineers will survey adjacent buildings and structures over the next few days to assess any damage. The implosion registered a magnitude 2.3 on the Richter scale - a barely detectable ground motion that naturally visits the region once or twice a month. Scientists will use ground-vibration data from the implosion to learn more about the Seattle fault, which runs a few blocks south of the Kingdome. By afternoon, the job of pulverizing and hauling away the Kingdome was under way, with hydraulic jackhammers breaking columns into chunks. A couple hundred people gathered close to the site, taking pictures and searching for bits of the building to take home. The rubble is flatter than expected, only reaching about 30 feet high near the perimeter of the 9-acre Dome site. The Dome once stood 250 feet high.

Source

---

---

If the WTC had 425,000 cubic yards of lightweight concrete (72% the weight of normal concrete), then there were 631,000 (?) tons of concrete in the complex. This is a crude cross-check on the weight of the towers and the WTC and suggests that 500,000 tons is not an exaggeration.

Note: 425,000 yd3 x 33 (ft3/yd3)x (110)lb/ft3 x (ton/2,000 lbs)= 631,125 tons Assuming this value is for both towers, one tower would be 316,000 tons.

If the Kingdome had 52,800 cubic yards of normal concrete, then there were 109,000 tons of concrete in the dome. Therefore, the 130,000 ton estimate of the Kingdome’s weight seems reasonable.

Note: 52,800 yd3 x 33 (ft3/yd3)x (152)lb/ft3 x (ton/2,000 lbs)= 108,346 tons 108,346 tons + 443 tons = 109,000 tons

The following account of the Kingdome demolition contrasts sharply with the destruction of the Twin Towers, as shown below:

1. "Dust choked downtown [Seattle] for nearly 20 minutes" yet ultra-fine dust plagued lower Manhattan weeks and months.

2. Dust "drifted northwest about 8 miles an hour," the pace of stragglers at the end of a 26-mile marathon, yet people running full speed could not outrun the pyroclastic-like dust from the Twin Tower destruction [see Figure 86 on page 6].

3. "Carefully placed explosives—4,461 pounds in all—collapsed" the Kingdome which would imply 17,158 pounds to just bring down a tower over a quarter-mile-high but would not pulverize it nor guarantee falling within its own footprint. If we adjust for the tower’s height of center of mass, potential energy…67 tons of explosives would be required in this amount imply a 3.5 Richter reading [insert chart], far above the 2.3 reported for WTC 1 and equivalent to 67 tons of required explosives. Yet this would not pulverize and would leave an enormous rubble pile to jackhammer into smaller pieces, not in evidence.

Figure xx. Adopted from this Chart Source:

4. Jackhammers?

Figure 21(a). Source:	Figure 21(b). Source:
Figure 21(c). Source:	Figure 21(d). Source:
Figure 21 (repeat from page 1). Kingdome video (courtesy of Portland Indymedia): (mpg) Source

• Extrapolation

"Dust choked downtown for nearly 20 minutes" (not days?)

The dust drifted northwest about 8 miles an hour. (8 mph is about an 8-minute mile, the speed a straggler might be running on the last leg of a 26-mile marathon. In NYC on 9/11, no one could out-run the rapidly expanding dust cloud. [reference]

The rubble height was 30 out of the original 250 feet height. 30ft/250ft = 12%
110 x 12% = 13.2 stories for the WTC


4,461 lbs x (500,000/130,000) = 17,158 lbs = (40 people) x (10 lbs each trip) x (43 trips).
But it's not pulverized, nor is it controlled into its own footprint. Explosives only get the chunks down on the ground where they can be broken up and hauled away,.


21 miles of detonating cord x (1368/250) = 115 miles of detonating cord, extrapolating from relative height

" with hydraulic jackhammers breaking columns into chunks" =>> not pulverized!

"...chunks of concrete flew onto rooftops?"
See appendix XX where only aluminum cladding landed on neighboring rooftops.

__________________________________________________

• Comparison of Potential Energy 

If each tower was made of 100,000 tons of steel and had a total weight of 500,000 tons, then the steel is only 20% of the mass. So, if they pulverize all but the steel in the lower 36 floors, then the lower 36 floors are fairly light. I went through those numbers and found it is 36 floors of only steel that is equivalent to the Kingdome's PE. I.e. The bottom 36 floors of a 110 floor-building (where the entire 110 floors weighs 100,000-tons) has the same PE as the Kingdome.
The Kingdome does not have its weight evenly distributed. There is more density lower down, so one would expect the center of gravity to be lower than the geometric center. This would produce a lower potential energy (PE) than what I used. But, also, the WTC was heavier on the lower floors than the upper floors, which would also produce a slightly lower center of gravity as well as a slightly lower PE. So, the ratio of the WTC's-PE to the Kingdome's-PE is a reasonable approximation.

We know that each WTC tower did not slam to the earth and register as a 3.8 Magnitude earthquake. We also know that a lot of the building came down as dust.
So, if we assume every floor contains 1/110^th of the building's total mass, the bottom 20 floors of WTC1, alone, have the same potential energy as the Kingdome. But, when the event was all over, we didn't see the lower floors stacked up like pancakes that had slammed to the ground. What happened to all the concrete and marble? What happened to all the glass? What happened to all the desks? But, what we did see was a bunch of steel beams. So, if we were only left with steel beams, how many floors worth of steel would have the same PE as the Kingdome?
The weight of all the structural steel in the building is 100,000-tons [REFERENCE needed], which is 20% of the weight of the entire building. If we assume every floor contains 1/110^th of the building's total mass of structural steel, just the steel in the bottom 36 floors of WTC2 has the same PE as the Kingdome.
So, as an approximation, the structural steel of WTC2 makes up 36/110^th of 1/5^th the total mass of the building, or 6.5% of the building's mass. If this mass is evenly distributed over 36 floors, it will have the same proportional potential energy relative to the Kingdome that could be expected to cause the equivalent of a 2.1 earthquake when it slammed to the ground. Is this reasonable, considering the debris remaining after the event?
30X … log of 30 yields 1.5, which must be added to 2.3 Richter for Kingdome to yield 3.8 Richter.

Figure 23(a). WTC	Figure 23(b). Kingdome
Figure 23. WTC and the Kingdome with approximate Potential Energy (PE).

Log of 1 is zero…for WTC1 lower 20 stories,…yields same earthquake.

Figure 24(a). normal WTC1 floors	Figure 24(b). Kingdome
Figure 24. Twenty floors in WTC1 footprint with PE equal to the Kingdome. (2/11th of the height and 2/11th of the mass of WTC1 would have the same PE as the Kingdome.)

Log of 0.63 is -0.2…for WTC2 lower 16 stories,…yields 2.1 earthquake.

Figure 25(a). normal WTC2 floors	Figure 25(b). Kingdome
Figure 25. Sixteen floors in WTC2 footprint with PE equal to the Kingdome. (14.5%of the height and 14.5% of the mass of WTC2 would have the same PE as the Kingdome.)

Transition from total pulverization to gravity fall of large solids.

Figure 26(a) normal WTC2 floors	Figure 26(b) only the structural steel from these floors
Figure 26(a). If 15% of the mass, evenly distributed over the lower 20 floors, (15% of the building's height). or (b) 6.5% of the mass of the entire building's mass is evenly distributed over the lower 36 floors of WTC2 (32% of the building's height), it would have the same PE as the Kingdome.

• Bankers Trust 

Figure 27. Note that solid debris appears to have hit only the lower half of this 40-story building (Bankers Trust). However, the top few floors appear to have had their windows blown out. Source	Figure 28. The tower is being peeled downward. Dark explosions shoot up, while white ones explode outward. Above the white explosions the building has vanished while the lower part awaits termination. Source

911-The Bathtub

The Bathtub
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam1.html 

II. Introduction


If we are to understand what happened to the World Trade Center (WTC) buildings, we need to start with the evidence. The best theory about what happened to the WTC should explain all the real evidence.

So what types of evidence are available?

1. Current visual evidence (are the Twin Towers gone?)

2. Eyewitness testimony (What did witnesses of diverse credibility say they thought they saw and heard, interviewed how many days after the event?)

3. Physical evidence in the form of actual physical items (carefully preserved?, chain of custody? tampering?, evaluation methods documented?, access to materials by other scientists?)

4. Photographs (validity of the object(s) in question?, how placed there?, subsequent tampering?, photographer?, chain of custody?, photo raw or manipulated?)

5. Video footage (same questions apply as with photos) and

6. Expert witness testimony (credentials?, credibility?, quality of analysis?).

The quality, credibility and validity of different pieces of evidence varies. The strongest evidence is physical evidence and the strongest physical evidence is undisputed and corroborated by other evidence. Valid physical evidence should form a consistent whole and yield an integrated picture of what happened.

A nearly limitless supply of photos and videos of the actual destruction and aftermath of the WTC event on 9/11 forms a rich database of physical evidence. These photos, for the most part, are undisputed, mutually reinforcing and consistent with other types of evidence. Only in rare cases, like alleged molten metal flowing from an upper floor of WTC 2 shortly before its complete destruction, are photos and videos disputed and uncorroborated.

Figure 1. (old Figure 01.) The WTC twin towers towering over the skyscrapers of lower Manhattan. Source

Now you see it.	Now you don't.
Figure 2. The height of the towers is compared to the height of WTC6 and the "rubble pile" shown in Figure 17. (1978) Source	Figure 3. This photo was taken was take around noon on 9/11/01, showing the height of WTC6 compared to the "rubble pile" of WTC1 which is appears in the foreground. Where did the building go? (9/11/01) Source and here	Figure 4. A view of the vacant lot where WTC1 stood just the day before. Where did the building go? (9/12/01)

The World Trade Center (WTC) towers did not "collapse" on 9/11/01; they were pulverized (blown up) before that was even a possibility. Below, we will discuss how this was done.

III. Bathtub Top
The World Trade Center was built on terra firma protected by an underground "bathtub" or foundation ring down to bedrock seven stories below the surface of lower Manhattan. This sturdy enclosure some call the "slurry wall" shielded the foundation of the Twin Towers as well as WTC buildings 3 & 6. According to Wall Street Journal architecture critic, Ada Louise Huxtable, this structure "…saved lower Manhattan from the waters of the Hudson River" (WSJ 9-28-06, p. D8). Many observers worried about whether the wall would continue to do its job to prevent flooding but "To the relief of the engineers, there is no evidence that the 70-foot-deep retaining wall around the basements has been damaged or breached, although the collapse of the towers left one section perilously unsupported."New York Times (link) In the SPIKE TV documentary about the iron workers at Ground Zero, one remarked, "You know, it was amazing, it didn't really damage [that much] ... if they had fallen over sideways, could you imagine the damage to Lower Manhattan?" (video1)(YouTube) (video2)

Figure 5. (old Figure 1.) There was no significant damage to the bathtub on 9/11. This picture looks west-northwest, from the center of the WTC 1 footprint. Source:

Figure 6. (old Figure 2.) WTC Station Platform after the event; this PATH train wasn't crushed. Source:

On September 11 the bathtub mysteriously remained without significant damage despite two quarter-mile tall towers allegedly collapsing on it. How did the bathtub avoid significant damage despite a million tons of WTC material supposedly slamming into it? Even if no material directly hit the bathtub, serious seismic impacts on bedrock would have damaged walls, wall corners and tunnels under WTC leading under the Hudson River because of motion similar to that caused by an earthquake. The bathtub was not built to withstand such colossal impact, we may be assured, because New York is not an active seismic zone (see Figure 26). Although a disputed number, each tower weighed an estimated 500,000 tons and the official story insists airplane damage and fires caused each tower to collapse symmetrically into its own footprint. No bathtub structure could remain unscathed after a mountain of quarter-mile high material was dropped on it twice. The intact bathtub appears to contradict the official theory of a gravity-driven collapse in which virtually the entire weight of the Twin Towers would crash into the bathtub.
Figure 7-11 show diagrams of the PATH (Port Authority Trans Hudson) rail lines from New Jersey under the Hudson and up into the bottom of the bathtub of the World Trade Center. The south rail lines that run from New Jersey and the north lines return to NJ. The base of the bathtub is bedrock and the Twin Towers, rail lines and tunnels were anchored to that bedrock. If the bedrock were dramatically shaken, fissures in the tunnels would allow water to back up into the bathtub.

• Design and purpose Top

Figure 7. (old Figure 3.) Slurry walls form water-tight bathtub.  PATH rail lines pass under WTC 2.  Even cracks in the bathtub would allow water inside.  adjusted from source

Figure 8 shows an overhead view of the WTC with the PATH commuter railroad lines under the Hudson, the walls of the bathtub in red and the subway line adjacent to the main WTC bathtub indicated by the dashed blue line. Figure 9 shows how stout the bathtub design was, and therefore how important this strong structure was to the WTC. For example, the tension tie-backs were embedded in 30-35 feet of bedrock. You can see many of the ends of tie-backs sticking out on the west wall of the bathtub in Figure 5.

Figure 8. (old Figure 4.) A more detailed map of the rail lines and WTC complex. adjusted from source:	Figure 9. (old Figure 5.) Typical section shows placement of tie-backs during construction. After concrete floor slabs were cured, tension on tie-backs was released. Source:

Figure 10. (old Figure 6(a).) Map of the deep foundation (big bathtub) and shallow foundation (little bathtub). Source:	Figure 11. (old Figure 6(b).) Detail of the PATH WTC terminal and tracks. Source:

Figure 10 shows the two bathtubs under the WTC complex, with the Twin Towers within the deep bathtub and buildings 4 and 5 mostly within the shallow foundation. The subway went north-south through the shallow bathtub. The figure also identifies neighboring buildings like the WFC complex, the Verizon building, US Post Office, Bankers Trust and others. Note WTC 7 was not in either bathtub. Figure 11 shows the loop that PATH trains take within the big bathtub. Figure 12 shows a cross section of the WTC lower levels. The PATH trains turn beneath WTC 2 and the station platforms run parallel to the bathtub east wall, with the subway on a higher level on the other side of the big bathtub.

Figure 12. (old Figure 7(a).) Cross section of the WTC complex, highlighting buildings 2 and 3 and the seven subbasements. Note the shopping mall at the ground level, on the right, below WTC4 and above the PATH and subway rail lines. adjusted from source	Figure 13. (old Figure 7(b).) An overview shows the PATH rail lines and terminal on bedrock in the big bathtub. The subway line and platform are to the right of the big bathtub wall, August 2005, no tracks or terminals were relocated. adjusted from source:

Figure 14. (old Figure 8.) The Ground Zero site as of August 2006, showing the location of the buildings relative to the bathtub walls. Adjusted from here:

  Figure 14 shows an overhead view of the new PATH complex as of August 2006 at Ground Zero, with the west wall at the top of the photo. This gives a graphic look at how large the PATH layout is within the big bathtub. The rail lines and platforms remain in their original locations, suggesting that the underground damage to PATH was not devastating (see Figure 6).

Figure 15. (old Figure 9.)  The nearly cleaned-out bathtub. (March 15, 2002) Source:

Figure 15 shows Ground Zero and the big bathtub with the shallow bathtub in the foreground, lending another perspective. Some superficial damage to the top of the bathtub is visible in the foreground along the eastern wall, beneath where WTC 4, a 9-story building, once existed.

• Evidence of Little Damage Top

The big bathtub suffered only minimal damage. There was no functional damage, only superficial: (source) PATH trains resumed operation November 2003, only two years after 9/11. Water is visible in Figure 6, for example, but there was no flooding from the Hudson River, the water came from fire hoses cooling down molten metal for 99 days [reference] and the water had to go somewhere.

Figure 16. (old Figure 10.) No damage to bathtub. Source:	Figure 17. (old Figure 11. WTC Station Platform before 9/11.) Source:

Figure 18. (old Figure 12.) WTC Station Platform after the event; this PATH train wasn't crushed. Source:	Figure 19. (old Figure 13.) WTC Station Platform November 23, 2003. Source:

Figure 17 shows a PATH train in the big bathtub before 9/11, Figure 18 after 9/11 shows minor non-structural platform damage, probably water damage, and figure 19 shows the updated platform and cars which look rather similar.

Figure 20. (old Figure 14.) PATH train tunnel shortly after 9/11. Source:	Figure 21. (old Figure 15.) A clean bathtub. Source:

Figure 20 shows a PATH train tunnel with no structural damage, probably outside the bathtub. Figures 21 and 22 show a clean bathtub.

Figure 22. (old Figure 16.) Overhead view of clean bathtub. Source:

Figure 23. (old Figure 17.)  Four of the seven PATH train cars under WTC were not damaged. Source:

Figure 23 shows a New York Times sketch of alleged damage to the underground portion of the WTC within the bathtub. It seems odd that the center of the PATH platforms were "not inspected or undetermined." Why? Figure 6 above, for example, shows no structural damage at that section of the platform, only water damage. We are not entirely confident that the NYT sketch is an accurate picture of the damage pattern in the bathtub. Interestingly, the west or Hudson side of each tower is damage-free, according to the NYT. Also, the PATH tunnel entrances, rigidly connected to the bathtub and bedrock, are "intact or mostly intact." Only three of seven PATH cars were damaged. While NYT uses the term "crushed," it seems unlikely that three cars could be totally crushed yet leave train four cars intact (see Figure 6).


Outside the bathtub east wall and in the shallow bathtub, even the subway suffered surprisingly little: -"Considering the devastation near the trade center, and the fact that the tunnels were only five feet below the road surface in some places, complete tunnel collapses were not as extensive as some engineers had feared." Subway:

Figure 24. (old Figure 18(a).) Warner Bros. store contents from WTC mall.  Source:	Figure 25. (old Figure 18(b).) Warner Bros. figures from WTC mall. (Source)

Figure 24 shows store contents from the Warner Bros. store in the WTC shopping mall at the concourse level (first subbasement). Figure 25 shows figures recovered from the Warner Bros. store at the World Trade Center mall kept at hangar 17 at JFK international airport. Roadrunner does not have a scratch on him despite surviving destruction of WTC 2 above him. As shown in the cross section Figure 12 above, the shopping mall is the first floor to be impacted at the base of WTC 2.



  IV. Earthquakes Top
New York is not located in a major earthquake zone (see Figure 26 below), so designers would not anticipate designing and building with the likelihood of surviving major earthquakes.

Figure 26. (old Figure 19.) Earthquakes by location and magnitude, indicated by circles; locations of seismographic stations shown by triangles. Source: and here

• Results of January quake in NYC and the 9/11 signal comparison Top
  
  Figure 27 shows the amount of ground movement from a 2.4 Richter scale earthquake that hit NYC in January, 2001. The data appear to be "raw," that is, unsmoothed and unmanipulated. For example, the amplitude of the earth’s movement is nearly double the 8 micrometers of the diagram. Figure 28 shows a similar diagram for the destruction of WTC 1 on 9/11. The data appear very different from those in Figure 27, smoother, fewer spikes, less complex, and with no distinctive S and P waves…should also have a delay between the two waves. (See Figure 29.)

Figure 27. (old Figure 20(a).) Earthquake in Manhattan (S & P waves), Jan. 17, 2001, Magnitude = 2.4. Source:
Figure 28. (old Figure 20(b).) The destruction of WTC1, Sept. 11, 2001, Magnitude = 2.3. Does this diagram look similar to 20(a)? Source:

Figure 29. (old Figure 20aa.) about P-waves and S-waves adjusted from Source:

Most importantly, the amplitude of the 9/11 disturbance is less than half that of the January earthquake, despite a similar peak Richter reading. It is almost as if the data from 9/11 have attenuated, that peak movements have been reduced by some kind of filtering process. Does this difference reflect real data, that is, differences in real phenomena accurately recorded? Or have the data been filtered asymmetrically or differently? Or have the data been completely manufactured? We do not know, but for the sake of the analysis we use the Richter values reported. Could they have been lower than reported? Yes.


 

• Kingdome vs. Twin Towers Top

The Seattle Kingdome was demolished on March 26, 2000. Built of reinforced concrete, it had a 720-foot outer diameter, a footprint of 407,000 square feet, stood 250 feet tall and weighed an estimated 130,000 tons. The implosion "created the equivalent of a magnitude 2.3 earthquake, with no vibration damage to adjacent structures" (Liss, p. 108).
  

Figure 30. (old Figure 21(a).) Finishing the interior of the Kingdome. Source:	Figure 31. (old Figure 21(b).) Kingdome with the Olympic Mountains across Puget Sound. Source:
Figure 32. (old Figure 21(c).) Demolition of the Kingdome. Source:	Figure 33. (old Figure 21(d).) The Kingdome left a debris pile 30 feet high, 12% of its former height. Source:
Video 1. Here is a video of the Kingdome demolition. (mpg) (courtesy of Portland Indymedia)

Each twin tower, by contrast, had 43,000 square feet, just over a tenth of the Kingdome footprint, and weighed an estimated 500,000 tons, or nearly 4x the Kingdome. Both the footprint and the weight of the twin towers were an order of magnitude different from the Kingdome, yet the Lamont-Dougherty station at Columbia University only reported a peak of 2.3 Richter scale reading for WTC 1 and 2.1 for WTC 2, about the same as the Kingdome.

Figure 34. (old Figure 22.) Seismic record at Palisades, NY. The vertical axis is the east-west ground speed in nm/s . The horizontal scale is time, showing a thiry-minute interval. The top red line starts at 8:40 AM EDT and records a siesmic disturbance at 8:46:26 EDT. At 9:02:54 EDT, there is a smaller and shorter disturbance. The second line is a continuation of the first line and begins at 9:10 AM EDT and shows no disturbance. The third line begins at 9:40 AM and shows a major seismic event at 9:59:04 EDT. The fourth line is a continuation and begins at 10:10 AM and shows a major seismic event at 10:28:31 EDT. UTC = Coordinated Universal Time, also known as Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) where 8:40 AM EDT = 12:40 UTC. Source:

Although these data seem to be corrupted by unknown filters and a complicit Lamont-Doherty will not release the raw data, a reading similar to the Kingdome would be impossible if the twin towers were destroyed by conventional means (bottom up) because much greater weight would have slammed into a much smaller chunk of land and therefore would have shaken the ground far more than the Kingdome did. Each tower’s collapse should have registered at least four on the Richter scale given two orders of magnitude difference between the twin towers and Kingdome dimensions. The apparent fact that the Richter reading peaked at 2.3 and the disturbance lasted only 8 seconds indicates an extraordinary high-energy weapon was used top-down to preserve the bathtub and surrounding structures. And where are the data from the other recording stations shown in Figure 35? Are they being withheld?

Figure 35. (old Figure 23.) Location of seismic recording stations in the New York City area.