See other 9/11 Articles
Title: Was the NIST Proof of Structural Damage to WTC 7 Photoshopped?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/June2004WT ... Fire&CollapseAnalysisPrint.pdf
Published: Sep 15, 2006
Author: honway
Post Date: 2006-09-15 22:23:46 by honway
Ping List: *9-11* Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: None
Views: 7768
Comments: 30
The FEMA Performance Study Group was the first formal investigation of the collapse of the World Trade Center Buildings. From the FEMA Report, Chapter 5: Years later, after independent investigators were focusing on the WTC 7 collapse, the NIST released the photo below as photographic proof there was significant structural damage to WTC 7. Since there was only one photo released, I thought that was odd. Please note that the damage to the southwest corner in the NIST released photo above is not consistent with the damage in the photo below. Note the two floors with smoke damage on the southwest corner, floors 29 and 30, in the photo above. Count down 15 floors below foor 29. That corner is missing in the NIST photo submitted as the proof there was significant structural damage to WTC 7 as a result of the collapse of the North Tower.
"According to the account of a firefighter who walked the 9th floor along the south side following the collapse of WTC 1, the only damage to the 9th floor facade occurred at the southwest corner."(emphasis added)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
Here is a larger version of the bottom photograph.
For a larger version of the NIST photograph of damage to the southwest corner, see the link below,page 16. http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/June2004WTC7StructuralFire&CollapseAnalysisPrint.pdf
Is that bottom photograph of the SW corner of WTC7? If so then this proves something is indeed amiss here. Either the investigators didn't look at this photo or they wrongly assumed that the top photo showed significant structural damage when maybe all it really showed was a lot of smoke covering up the SW corner of the building. I would highly doubt they would Photoshop a photo like this; there are too many digital photographic experts out there that would more than likely be able to tell a fake from the real thing. If the photo was altered (which I don't think it was) it certainly wouldn't have been done with Adobe Photoshop, but something much more cutting edge.
God is always good! Note in NIST photo,page 16, there is a substantial portion of the 9th floor missing from the SW corner.I think a firefighter may have noticed that.That is not facade damage, a substantial part of the building is gone. http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/June2004WTC7StructuralFire&CollapseAnalysisPrint.pdf
Yes. If the photo was altered (which I don't think it was) it certainly wouldn't have been done with Adobe Photoshop, but something much more cutting edge. I was using the expression photoshop in a generic fashion to describe image manipulation.I should have been more specific, but I was trying to write a title that was concise.
No doubt they would have used something more cutting edge and have taken in to consideration the analysis angle. None the less, it is a high stakes game to either forge that way, or accuse of forgery by that method.
I am just posting the evidence. The NIST maintains the collapse of the North Tower caused the damage to the southwest corner of WTC 7. Both photos are after the collapse of the North Tower. One photo shows the 15th and adjacent floors on the southwest corner as still part of the structure. The NIST photo shows a substantial portion of the 15th and adjacent floors at the southwest corner missing,gone, not in the picture.
Looking down this street, the southwest corner of WTC 7 is on the left side of the street. Based on the NIST photo, I am not sure the corner we are looking at is supposed to be there.
In the photo above, above the three large windows on the west face of WTC 7, there is a horizontal row of 14 windows. That means the southwest corner of the bottom row of 14 windows were intact. You can count them. Does anyone think that is consistent with the damage to the southwest corner shown in the photo below?
I honestly don't see how NIST or anybody else could say that this photo shows significant structural damage. What it does show is a lot of smoke covering up the southwest corner of the buliding.
God is always good! http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf Two relevant photos from the NIST Appendix on pages 24 and 25.
I see exactly what you are saying and seeing. It is more than odd that only one picture of WTC7 would be used in the official report. This brings to mind the JFK autopsy photos, the ones that were doctored.
One example. In the photo below, there is a window visible on the 15th floor on the west face exactly where it should be. If you were standing in front of the west face of the building, it would be the window furtherest to your right on the 15th floor. http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc106.JPG In the NIST photo on page 24 below, there is no window in that location.It is gone.Along with a big chunk of the building. http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf
If they were caught forging a picture and passing it off as evidence then people would be laughing their heads off about them. They would lose all respect and would never likely be taken serious again about anything. I'm not saying a government agency is above this, but this photo has been out for a long time and not one expert has yet called it a forgery. I think the photo is genuine, but the interpretations of it aren't. IMO there is clearly thick smoke covering the SW corner of this building. No one can say definitely how much damage this corner sustained by looking at this picture alone. The whole point about it being a forgery is pretty much meaningless anyway because even if the entire SW corner of WTC7 was gone the building still wouldn’t have fallen like it did. If they were going to forge something they at least would have made sure it would explain why the building fell as it did, but they didn’t do that with this picture.
God is always good! Far fugging out, man! You uncovered a bombshell! :)
Do I hear a fat lady singing?
I agree, not photoshoped but definitely smoke obscuring the view, and optically illuding one to think the corner is indeed missing. It had me going up til now. Maybe that's why the rumor now is that a 25 floor high section was gouged out of the south face? There are absolutely no photos of that section available anywhere.
Do I hear a fat lady singing?
Can I steal your discovery and post it on my blog and at LP? I'll make sure and credit you here. :)
Do I hear a fat lady singing?
I stole your story and posted it on my blog and at LP. I gave you and 4um all the credit: http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=158966&Disp=0#C0 And: Do I hear a fat lady singing?
http://www.mediumrecords.com/wtc/blg7.c omp1.jpg http://www.mediumrecords.com/wtc/blg7. comp1a.jpg Here are some after photos of girders of wtc 7. I been saying this all along. If there was this GIANT scoop out of the south face that was 20 stories high, there would be credible pictures and credible witnesses. In the NIST rerort On pg 18: "Damage to the south face was described by a number or individuals. While the accounts are mostly consistent, there are some conflicting descriptions: middle 1/4 to 1/3 width of the south face was gouged out from floor 10 to the ground At 12:10 to 12:15 p.m.: Firefighters found individuals on floors 7 & 8 and led them out of the building No heavy debris was observed in the lobby area as the building was exited, primairly white dust coating and black wires hanging from celing areas were observed" Chief Frank Fellini: ".....building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the tower. When it fell it ripped steel out from between the third and the sixth floors accross the facade on Vesy street." Boyle's statement about "a hole 20 storys tall in the building" is in conflict with "No heavy debris was observed in the lobby" and Chief Fellinis' statement and a 10 story gouge, he must have been refering to the south west corner. Who stated that there was a 10 story gouge in WTC7 ? This shows that there was no severe damage to the lobby and therefore no damage to support columns 69, 72 and 75. at page 50-51: Quote: "From an analysis of the observed collapse sequence, the following general sequence of events appears possible: 1. Debris damaged the south face of the perimeter moment frame and some interior core framing on the south side. The debris impact severed approximately a quarter to a third of the south face perimeter columns. The damaged floors are less certain, but reports indicate they occurred between the ground and up to Floors 15 or 20. The extent of damage, both structural and to fireproofing, of core framing is not known, but damage to elevator cars and shafts was reported to have occurred around columns 69 to 78 at Floors 8 or 9. page 43: Quote: I3.6 Columns, Transfer Girders or Transfer Trusses Fail: The fires could have failed interior columns, transfer girders, transfer trusses, or their framing connections. o I4.4 Lateral Displacements: Fire effects may have caused column instability failure by lateral displacements from asymmetric thermal expansion of the floor system. Such thermally- induced displacements must overcome the restraining effect of the remaining floor system against further lateral deflection of the column." - - - - - - I see nothing here that states that the damage necesserally had to have been to the lobby, or that damage from the debris of the WTC1 collapse had to be the only cause for these columns to fail. This says that fire could have caused the damage to the columns, at any floor where there were fires. There's no evidence to suggest that falling debris damaged any interior core framing. Chief Fellini stated that the damage was between the third and sixth floors (no mention of the 14th floor) and could not have effected the elevators on the 8th floor. Pg 18 12:10 pm "No fires, heavy dust or smoke were reported as they left Floor 8" There was no 20 story hole that would have taken out the lobby and damaged columns 69, 72 and 75. REMINDER: Any info here quoting the NIST report is dealing with the NIST report on WTC 1 and 2, which is not the final report on WTC 7. That report is still pending and I'm sure they are trying real hard to come up with something.
Mark If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
The whole point about it being a forgery is pretty much meaningless anyway because even if the entire SW corner of WTC7 was gone the building still wouldn’t have fallen like it did. You're probably right about the smoke covering the corner making it look like that corner is missing... And there is NO DOUBT that even if it was, it STILL wouldn't have caused it to collapse the way it did!!
"Give me liberty, or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote" - Ben Franklin
Why isn't anything ever mentioned about the damage to WTC 3, 4, 5, and 6 when NONE of them had total collapse - yet ALL of them sustained HUGE damage compared to 7???? So much for fires and pancaking!!! BULLSHIT, and we all know it!!!!
"Give me liberty, or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote" - Ben Franklin
What say you Tommy re photoshop?
Anytime.My only goal here is to make a small contribution in an effort to get reliable information out to as many people as possible and then let individuals that place confidence in their God given ability to apply reason to a set of facts decide for themselves. I appreciate your efforts.
Thanks for adding those photos to this thread. It is the facts such as the ones clearly demonstrated in the images you posted I was referring to in my previous post.
Great thread. It reminds me why it was worth the time to endure the personal attacks and the namecalling for many years over there.I appreciate the generous credit you gave me despite the fact you did all the heavy lifting to make the point crystal clear. I also appreciate the fact mentioning my screen name did not get the thread deleted.
You're welcome! Like you, I only want to get the facts out - and anyone is welcome to use anything I may uncover if it will only help allow the believers of the "official story" to use common sense in discerning that there is something other than the "official story" going on. Simply amazes me that it's possible that 100% of the people of this nation can't see that we have been lied to about the whole thing.
"Give me liberty, or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote" - Ben Franklin
Mark "I was real close to Building 7 when it fell down... That didn't sound like just a building falling down to me while I was running away from it. There's a lot of eyewitness testimony down there of hearing explosions. [..] and the whole time you're hearing "boom, boom, boom, boom, boom." I think I know an explosion when I hear it... — Former NYC Police Officer and 9/11 Rescue Worker Craig Bartmer
Thanks - I'd never seen these pics. pancake, my ass, bump
wow, i missed those first time around. excellent post.
All our hard work finding and posting in our 911 section at 4UM. You better brush up and go through our archives. There is some good stuff there. I'm very disappointed in you. WINK-WINK.
Mark "I was real close to Building 7 when it fell down... That didn't sound like just a building falling down to me while I was running away from it. There's a lot of eyewitness testimony down there of hearing explosions. [..] and the whole time you're hearing "boom, boom, boom, boom, boom." I think I know an explosion when I hear it... — Former NYC Police Officer and 9/11 Rescue Worker Craig Bartmer
#2. To: All (#1)
#3. To: honway (#1)
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#4. To: All (#2)
"According to the account of a firefighter who walked the 9th floor along the south side following the collapse of WTC 1, the only damage to the 9th floor facade occurred at the southwest corner."
#5. To: RickyJ (#3)
Is that bottom photograph of the SW corner of WTC7?
#6. To: RickyJ (#3)
"If the photo was altered (which I don't think it was) it certainly wouldn't have been done with Adobe Photoshop, but something much more cutting edge."
#7. To: Ferret Mike (#6)
(Edited)
None the less, it is a high stakes game to either forge that way, or accuse of forgery by that method.
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc106.JPG
#8. To: All (#7)
#9. To: All, *9-11* (#8)
(Edited)
#10. To: honway (#9)
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#11. To: all (#10)
(Edited)
#12. To: honway (#9)
#13. To: All (#11)
(Edited)
#14. To: Ferret Mike (#6)
None the less, it is a high stakes game to either forge that way, or accuse of forgery by that method.
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#15. To: honway (#13)
#16. To: honway, Ricky J (#5)
#17. To: honway (#0)
#18. To: honway (#0)
#19. To: honway (#0)
(Edited)
http ://www.danielsnews.com/modules/coppermine/albu m s/userpics/10026/b7_debris2.jpg
http://www.mediumrecords.com/wtc/blg7.00 9b.jpg
#20. To: RickyJ (#14)
I think the photo is genuine, but the interpretations of it aren't. IMO there is clearly thick smoke covering the SW corner of this building.
#21. To: honway (#0)
WTC 3 after damage from collapse of Towers 1 and 2 
WTC 4. The fires in 4 were apparently HUGE compared to 1, 2, or 7 
Fires in WTC 5. Obviously much more intense than 1, 2, or 7 
Overhead view of buildings 5 and 6 showing huge holes caused by falling debris from 1 and 2 
Buildings 5 and 6 after collapses of 1 and 2
#22. To: honway, TommytheMadArtist (#0)
#23. To: Critter (#17)
Can I steal your discovery and post it on my blog and at LP? I'll make sure and credit you here. :)
#24. To: innieway (#21)
Why isn't anything ever mentioned about the damage to WTC 3, 4, 5, and 6 when NONE of them had total collapse - yet ALL of them sustained HUGE damage compared to 7????
#25. To: Critter (#18)
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=158966&Disp=All&#C137
#26. To: honway, ALL (#24)
Thanks for adding those photos to this thread. It is the facts such as the ones clearly demonstrated in the images you posted I was referring to in my previous post.
#27. To: honway, *9-11* (#0)
PING-BUMP!!!
#28. To: innieway (#21)
So much for fires and pancaking!!! BULLSHIT, and we all know it!!!!
#29. To: innieway, Kamala (#21)
#30. To: christine (#29)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
